Expanding on Larissa K.’s post about the direct instruction learning approach:

I like how direct instruction makes it easy to plot out a clear lesson plan across a full curriculum/longer duration of time. It seems very methodical and systematic. The categorization of skill rather than age seems like it would be a very strategic way to organize instruction for different individuals to ensure a full understanding of curriculum materials and so that there are no gaps in their knowledge.

Two aspects of direct instruction that I think could be developed are “(3): lower achieving students must perform at a faster rate in order to keep up with higher achieving students, (4): all teachers can succeed with this model if provided proper training and materials.”

I think that it would be beneficial to find alternative ways of filling knowledge gaps and assessing understanding in “lower achieving students”. This could build towards a more equitable instruction design rather than having those students scramble to keep up with “higher achieving students”.

I also think that a good development to direct instruction design would be to guide designs towards methods that do not rely on specific training opportunities and materials that may not be available to all teachers, or that may not be suitable/accommodating for learners with diverse learning and accessibility needs.

I wonder how modifications/alternative methods and supports could be incorporated into direct instruction styles for students who may be struggling with the curriculum?

– SC