Success of a Direct Instruction Model at a Secondary Level School With High-Risk Students

Grossen, Bonnie

doi:10.1080/10573560490262091

Cited by 22 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…DI has improved reading skills in children from elementary (Carlson and Francis 2002;Humphries et al 2005) to middle school (Grossen 2004;Shippen et al 2005). Additionally, DI has been used successfully with children with a variety of abilities, including autism (Flores and Ganz 2007), epilepsy (Humphries et al 2005), learning disabilities and cognitive impairments (Carlson and Francis 2002), those with limited English proficiency (Carlson and Francis 2002), and students at risk (Carlson and Francis 2002;Grossen 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The Effectiveness of Direct Instruction for Teaching Language to Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Identifying Materials

Ganz

Flores

2008

J Autism Dev Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) frequently demonstrate language delays (American Psychiatric Association 2000). This study investigated the effects of a Direct Instruction (DI) language program implemented with elementary students with ASD. There is little research in the area of DI as a language intervention for students with ASD. This study examined the effectiveness of DI with regard to students' oral language skills, specifically the identification of materials of which objects were made. A single-subject changing criterion design was employed. A functional relation between DI and oral language skills was demonstrated through replication of skill increase over three criterion changes and across three students. The results and their implications are discussed further.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The Effectiveness of Direct Instruction for Teaching Language to Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Identifying Materials

Ganz

Flores

2008

J Autism Dev Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This research is far from definitive, but like classic accounts of instruction that emphasizes procedures and fact retention (see Gardner, 2011), it suggests that long-term retention through direct instruction methods alone can be problematic and that claims of students with learning disabilities knowing "more" than college students or high school honors students as the result of a pre-to post-test studies (see Grossen, 2004) are simply too good to be true.…”

Section: Special Education Curriculum and The Era Of High Standardsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…According to Carnine and his colleagues (Carnine, 1997;Grossen, 2004), a successful application of these principles yields a curriculum that can engineer success. Teaching becomes more efficient because learners can acquire a greater amount of information in less time.…”

Section: The Direct Instruction Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 98%

Special Education Curriculum in an Era of High Standards

Woodward

2012

Learning About Learning Disabilities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…DI has been successfully implemented with children with learning disabilities (Fitzpatrick, McLaughlin, & Weber, 2004), DD (Ganz, 2007;O'Connor, Jenkins, Cole, & Mills, 1993), and other at-risk students (Grossen, 2004). Further, DI has been successfully implemented at a range of ages, including elementary (Ganz, 2007) and secondary students (Grossen, 2004).…”

Section: Flores and Ganzmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Further, DI has been successfully implemented at a range of ages, including elementary (Ganz, 2007) and secondary students (Grossen, 2004). Research supporting the use of DI with children with ASD and DD is minimal; however, preliminary work in this area indicates positive results regarding improvements in reading decoding (Infantino & Hempenstall, 2006), reading comprehension (Ganz, 2007), and expressive language (Ganz, 2007).…”

Section: Flores and Ganzmentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparison of Direct Instruction and Discrete Trial Teaching on the Curriculum-based Assessment of Language Performance of Students with Autism

Flores

Ganz

2014

Exceptionality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is limited research demonstrating direct instruction (DI) as an effective language intervention for students with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and developmental disabilities (DD). Existing research has shown that instruction using partial implementation of DI programs resulted in student learning (Ganz, 2007) and instruction using whole lessons resulted in positive instructional effects for students with ASD and DD (Ganz, 2007). However, it is not known whether DI is more effective than other language interventions. The purpose of this study was to compare DI to an established intervention, discrete trial teaching. Thirteen students with ASD or participated in the study and data were collected using curriculum-based assessment. An independent samples t-test indicated that there was a statistically significant difference in student performance for the group who received DI. Results and their implications will be discussed.

show abstract

Success of a Direct Instruction Model at a Secondary Level School With High-Risk Students

Cited by 22 publications

References 4 publications

The Effectiveness of Direct Instruction for Teaching Language to Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Identifying Materials

The Effectiveness of Direct Instruction for Teaching Language to Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Identifying Materials

Special Education Curriculum in an Era of High Standards

Comparison of Direct Instruction and Discrete Trial Teaching on the Curriculum-based Assessment of Language Performance of Students with Autism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About