# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find a few of the resources we have developed in our years of working with educators here.

# data[].attributes.headline
Teach Fast: Focused Adaptable Structured Teaching

# data[].attributes.subject
Teach Fast: Focused Adaptable Structured Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Amazon.com: Teach Fast: Focused Adaptable Structured Teaching: 9781915261557: Tavernetti, Gene: Books

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Amazon.com: Teach Fast: Focused Adaptable Structured Teaching: 9781915261557: Tavernetti, Gene: Books

# data[].attributes.headline
SLD Backward Design EL Lesson Plan Template

# data[].attributes.subject
SLD Backward Design EL Lesson Plan Template

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EI Lesson Planning with Backward Design (8)

# data[].attributes.headline
Teach Fast: Focused Adaptable Structured Teaching

# data[].attributes.subject
Teach Fast: Focused Adaptable Structured Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Amazon.com: Teach Fast: Focused Adaptable Structured Teaching: 9781915261557: Tavernetti, Gene: Books

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Amazon.com: Teach Fast: Focused Adaptable Structured Teaching: 9781915261557: Tavernetti, Gene: Books

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top takeaways from Anita Archer on explicit instruction (abridged version of Ep 57)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The power of explicit instruction with Anita Archer (Ep 57)

# data[].attributes.headline
Backward Design for Explicit Instruction: Simple Worksheet

# data[].attributes.subject
Backward Design for Explicit Instruction: Simple Worksheet

# data[].attributes.body
ThreThis resource comes from LD @school. Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario (LDAO), supporting educators, school leaders, and system leaders across Ontario with a comprehensive and multi-faceted collection of materials, tools, strategies, and knowledge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
1 Hour Blueprint for Explicit Instruction; Observation, Reflection and Growth

# data[].attributes.headline
RPS Maximizing Learning with Explicir Instruction 8/13/25

# data[].attributes.subject
RPS Maximizing Learning with Explicir Instruction 8/13/25

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teaching vocabulary is complex. What words are important for a child to know and in what context? In this excerpt from Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction, the authors consider what principles might be used for selecting which words to explicitly teach.

# data[].attributes.headline
Just Tell Them: The Power of Explanations and Explicit Teaching

# data[].attributes.subject
Just Tell Them: The Power of Explanations and Explicit Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Just Tell Them: The Power of Explanations and Explicit Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Just Tell Them: The Power of Explanations and Explicit Teaching [Groshell, Zach] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Just Tell Them: The Power of Explanations and Explicit Teaching

# data[].attributes.headline
Explicit Vocabulary Instruction Procedure Planning Sheet

# data[].attributes.subject
Explicit Vocabulary Instruction Procedure Planning Sheet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Explicit Vocabulary Instruction Procedure Planning Template (2)

# data[].attributes.headline
Explicit Vocabulary Instruction Procedure 

# data[].attributes.subject
Explicit Vocabulary Instruction Procedure 

# data[].attributes.body
Vocabulary Map Template on Canva - Use Template to type your own vocabulary terms here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Amazingly Simple Graphic Design Software - Canva

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This strategy actively engages students and encourages participation by all. Students write down responses to a question or prompt given to them by the teacher and quickly share their responses with the class. Students have to pay attention and listen closely to their classmates' responses to compare them to their own.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
“Explicit Direct Instruction (EDI), an approach based on the premise that all children can learn, helps teachers deliver effective lessons that can significantly improve achievement for all learners, including English language learners and students with special needs. In this teacher-friendly book, the authors combine educational theory, brain research, and data analysis to present a step-by-step guide for implementing the EDI method in diverse classrooms. Written in an entertaining, easy-to-read style, this resource provides elementary and secondary teachers with concrete strategies, detailed sample lessons, and scenarios that illustrate what EDI techniques look like in the classroom. Components of EDI include: Checking for understanding, Setting lesson objectives, Activating prior knowledge, Developing students’ skills by explaining, modeling, and demonstrating, Presenting content, Using guided practice. Ideal for all content areas and grade levels, Explicit Direct Instruction (EDI) shows teachers how to use this highly effective approach to improve instruction and achievement for every student.”--Publisher’s website.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Power_of_Explicit_Teaching_and_Direc/0cfizQEACAAJ?hl=en

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Amazingly Simple Graphic Design Software - Canva

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Canva Template Link - Click "Edit Template"

# data[].attributes.headline
Explicit Instruction Playbook: One Pager & Checklists

# data[].attributes.subject
Explicit Instruction Playbook: One Pager & Checklists

# data[].attributes.body
Instructional playbooks were born out of the work of Jim Knight as one of the seven success factors for instructional coaching.

The idea is that in order for instructional coaching to flourish it must be based in partnership between coaches who are seen as educational leaders, not evaluators, alongside teachers who connect through communication and and an effective coaching process that includes goal setting based on student data to employ instructional strategies that is supported through systems of ongoing support for teachers.

Playbooks are organizational tools for identifying and explaining high-impact teaching strategies.

The strategy is summarized in a One Pager and is translated into action through checklists.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We’re currently checking your connection. This shouldn’t take long.If you keep getting this page, check if there’s a problem with Canva.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Providing more explicit instruction, captured within the comprehensiveness domain of the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity, is critical within intensive intervention. The Recognizing Effective Special Education Teachers (RESET) project, funded by U.S. Department of Education Institute for Education Sciences (IES) and led by Evelyn Johnson at Boise State University, developed a series of rubrics based on evidence-based practices for students with high incidence disabilities. One set of rubrics focuses on explicit instruction. Based on the main ideas of Explicit Instruction, the Explicit Instruction Rubric was designed for use by supervisors and administrators to reliably evaluate explicit instructional practice, to provide specific, accurate, and actionable feedback to special education teachers about the quality of their explicit instruction, and ultimately, improve the outcomes for students with disabilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Providing more explicit instruction, captured within the comprehensiveness domain of the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity, is critical within intensive intervention. The Recognizing Effective Special Education Teachers (RESET) project, funded by U.S. Department of Education Institute for Education Sciences (IES) and led by Evelyn Johnson at Boise State University, developed a series of rubrics based on evidence-based practices for students with high incidence disabilities.

# data[].attributes.headline
[Demo Lesson] Vocabulary Map Lesson Plan: "Explicit"

# data[].attributes.subject
[Demo Lesson] Vocabulary Map Lesson Plan: "Explicit"

# data[].attributes.body
This is an example of the demo lesson that was given during the presentation. This is a sample lesson and lesson plan format you can use. It is a combination of a lesson plan from Anita Archer & Charles Hughes from the Explicit Instruction book and the STRIVE vocabulary lesson plan.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Explicit Instruction – Vocabulary Lesson Plan

# data[].attributes.body
MAX Teaching Strategy: We used this strategy today during the presentation to activate prior knowledge and then sum up what we learned at the end. This strategy is also commonly known as "K-W-L" Charts

# data[].attributes.body
The Strategies for Reading Information and Vocabulary Effectively (STRIVE) professional development (PD) model was developed through funding from the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. As part of this research project, a cadre of upper-elementary school teachers worked closely with researchers at The University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University to design evidence-based practices for social studies instruction in grades 4 and 5. The STRIVE PD model featuring these practices was refined through researcher-practitioner collaboration, the

latest developments in reading research, and the results of pilot studies. Several efficacy trials have reported positive outcomes in teacher quality and student vocabulary and comprehension development as a result of participation in STRIVE PD.

This research brief provides in-depth descriptions of the STRIVE evidence-based vocabulary practices

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
by Elizabeth Swanson, Sharon Vaughn, and Jade Wexler

# data[].attributes.headline
Enhancing Adolescents’ Comprehension of Text by Building Vocabulary Knowledge

# data[].attributes.subject
Enhancing Adolescents’ Comprehension of Text by Building Vocabulary Knowledge

# data[].attributes.body
This article explains the vocabulary routine that was used as a demonstration during our presentation today.

# data[].attributes.body
Use this book to bolster the Opportunities to Respond (OTRs) in your classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Here are 51 easy-to-use, classroom-tested alternatives to the “stand and deliver” teaching techniques that cause so many students to tune out or drop out. Teachers report that these techniques motivate students to participate in learning, as they build confidence and are supported by compelling and safe ways to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of lessons. Refined through years of classroom experiences and supported by updated research, this 2nd edition delivers a dozen new techniques to engage K–12 students in active learning. The authors provide detailed descriptions of the Total Participation Techniques (TPTs) with step-by-step instructions--plus reproducible blackline masters for student response cards as well as posters to remind you to use the techniques. They also suggest how you can adapt and personalize the techniques to fit your context and content. Packed with examples from authentic classrooms, Total Participation Techniques is an essential toolkit for teachers who want to present lessons that are relevant, engaging, and cognitively challenging. Pérsida Himmele and William Himmele are professors who regularly work with preservice teachers and consult with educators in U.S. and international schools. They are also the authors of Total Literacy Techniques.

# data[].attributes.headline
Providing Reading Interventions
for Students in Grades 4–9

# data[].attributes.subject
Providing Reading Interventions
for Students in Grades 4–9

# data[].attributes.body
Recent research has demonstrated success in improving the reading level of students in grades 4–9 with reading difficulties. This practice guide, developed by the What Works Clearinghouse™ (WWC) in conjunction with an expert panel, distills this contemporary research into easily comprehensible and practical recommendations for educators to use when providing reading interventions. The recommendations outline evidence-based practices that can help teachers meet the needs of their students with reading difficulties.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
IES Practice Guide, What Works Clearing House

# data[].attributes.headline
IES Practice Guide: Assisting Students Struggling with Reading: Response to Intervention (RtI) and Multi-TierIntervention in the Primary Grades

# data[].attributes.subject
IES Practice Guide: Assisting Students Struggling with Reading: Response to Intervention (RtI) and Multi-TierIntervention in the Primary Grades

# data[].attributes.body
In the primary grades students with reading difficulties may need intervention to prevent future reading failure. This guide offers specific recommendations to help educators identify students in need of intervention and implement evidence-based interventions to promote their reading achievement. It also describes how to carry out each recommendation, including how to address potential roadblocks in implementing them.

# data[].attributes.headline
IES Practice Guide: Improving Reading Comprehension in Kindergarten Through 3rd
Grade (2010)

# data[].attributes.subject
IES Practice Guide: Improving Reading Comprehension in Kindergarten Through 3rd
Grade (2010)

# data[].attributes.body
The goal of this practice guide is to offer educators specific evidence-based recommendations that address the challenge of teaching reading comprehension to students in kindergarten through 3rd grade. The guide provides practical, clear information on critical topics related to teaching reading comprehension and is based on the best available evidence as judged by the authors.

# data[].attributes.headline
 Explicit Instruction for Specific Words

# data[].attributes.subject
 Explicit Instruction for Specific Words

# data[].attributes.body
Modeling Explicit Vocabulary Instruction in Early Elementary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Video 5: Explicit Instruction for Specific Words (REL Southeast) (REL Southeast)

# data[].attributes.body
In this video demonstration from our High-Quality Mathematics Instruction: What Teachers Should Know Module, an elementary school teacher implements explicit, systematic instruction during mathematics instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
10 Key Policies and Practices for
Explicit Instruction
—with strong evidence of effectiveness from high-quality research—

# data[].attributes.headline
10 Key Policies and Practices for
Explicit Instruction

# data[].attributes.subject
10 Key Policies and Practices for
Explicit Instruction

# data[].attributes.headline
Generating Examples and Nonexamples of Words

# data[].attributes.subject
Generating Examples and Nonexamples of Words

# data[].attributes.body
In Explicit Instruction, it is important that we teach students examples and NON examples of the important concepts. One way to do this is through teaching students how to make their own examples. This is a lesson plan to walk students through how to use a Frayer Model for Vocabulary Instruction.

# data[].attributes.headline
Increasing the Academic Vocabulary of Elementary Students by Dr. Anita Archer

# data[].attributes.subject
Increasing the Academic Vocabulary of Elementary Students by Dr. Anita Archer

# data[].attributes.body
1.5 hour video of Dr. Anita Archer teaching how to teach vocabulary to elementary students, using principles of Explicit Instruciton

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anita Archer - Vocabulary Pt. 1  10/20/2021

# data[].attributes.headline
Opportunities to Respond (OTR) Tip Sheet

# data[].attributes.subject
Opportunities to Respond (OTR) Tip Sheet

# data[].attributes.headline
Instructional Play Book: Opportunities to Respond

# data[].attributes.subject
Instructional Play Book: Opportunities to Respond

# data[].attributes.body
This is a playbook created by Jordan School District in Salt Lake County, Utah.

# data[].attributes.headline
Instructional Playbook One Pager: Feedback 

# data[].attributes.subject
Instructional Playbook One Pager: Feedback 

# data[].attributes.body
This is a playbook created by Jordan School District in Salt Lake County, Utah.

# data[].attributes.headline
Focus Instruction on Critical Content & Sequence Skills Logically

# data[].attributes.subject
Focus Instruction on Critical Content & Sequence Skills Logically

# data[].attributes.body
This video helps explain the CONTENT category of Explicit Instruction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Science of Reading: Strategies for Reading Multisyllabic Words

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Are you ready to simplify decoding multisyllabic words for your students? I have a five-step process you can teach your students to help them read big words. I am confident you can implement this process with your students this week.

The 5 Steps to Decoding Multisyllabic Words:

Circle the prefixes.

Put a box around the suffixes.

Look at what is left - underline vowels.

Say the word parts slowly.

Say the entire word.

Now, I did say this was a simple process. . . and it is! And it looks easy, right? Even with a simplified process, it will take your students time to learn how to apply and benefit from it properly.

In order for this strategy to work in your classroom, students will need to:

Understand prefixes and suffixes and have consistent practice with them

Have ongoing, meaningful practice with syllable types

Familiarity with common roots

Have a baseline understanding of phonics rules (letter patterns)

BUT I still believe you can implement this routine in your classroom now! If you aren't doing the above, you can start, and in hand, with the 5 Steps to Decoding Multisyllabic Words, your students will be on their way to being stronger readers.

It can also serve as a diagnostic. If students aren't successful with reading big words when they use this routine, it can help you pinpoint where students need more support.

Do they need a better understanding of prefixes and suffixes?

Do they need explicit syllabication instruction?

Do they need help with blending and putting word parts together?

How do I set my students up for success with decoding multisyllabic words?

With any routine you implement in the classroom, you'll want to do a few things to make it as successful as possible:

Introduce and model it.

Practice it with your students.

Encourage them to practice on their own.

Be consistent and repetitive!

Provide visuals for your students.

Breaking Down the 5 Steps to Decoding Multisyllabic Words

With practice and persistence, decoding multisyllabic words can become a more automatic and natural process, leading to greater reading fluency and understanding. Intentionally teaching your students the following five steps will help set them up for success.

Step One: Circle the prefixes.

The first step to decoding multisyllabic words starts with circling the prefixes.

If students identify a prefix and know how to pronounce it, it will give them the confidence to go through the steps and read the entire word.

Additionationally, if they know the meaning of the prefix they've identified, they instantly have a clue as to what the word means.

When students circle a prefix, a second step could be to write the meaning of the prefix as well.

Step Two: Put a box around the suffixes.

This step will be similar to step one but focuses on suffixes. Drawing a box around the suffix will help students create a visual separation in the word.

This step aims to help them see the parts of the words more easily. Putting a box around the suffix of a word will help them figure out how to read the end of the word.

Suffixes often dictate the part of speech of a word, so if students can identify the suffix, they are one step closer to reading and knowing the meaning of the word.

Step Three: Look at what is left and underline vowels.

After students have identified any prefixes or suffixes, some leftover letters may be in the middle of the word.

At this point, students still need to figure out how to read the entire word. There are two things students can do to help they do this:

Look for recognizable roots/bases that are familiar. If students see the word nonadjustable and have circled the prefix non- and circled the suffix -able, and they recognize adjust as being the word left... they don't need to break that word down into syllables. At this point, they should be able to put all three parts together to read the word.

Break down bases or roots into syllables. If they don't recognize the parts of the words that are left after identifying prefixes and suffixes, breaking down anything left into syllables is the next step. Since we know all syllables have to have a vowel sound, if students can figure out the vowels in the base or root, that can help them get started with correctly reading the word.

This step requires students to be familiar with a variety of syllable types. If you want to read more about what syllable types students should know for decoding multisyllabic words, check out my blog post, 7 Syllable Types to Teach in Upper Elementary.

Step Four: Slowly say the individual word parts.

Now is the time for students to attempt pronouncing all parts of the word. It can be helpful to have students rewrite the parts of the word they've circled, boxed, and underlined spaced out, so they can see the individual components.
non adjust able
Encourage your students to say the word parts 2-3 times slowly. It is also helpful if students point to each part with their pencil or finger.

After saying the parts slowly, students should speed up and move their pencils in a swooping motion to help them combine all the parts.

Step Five: Say the whole word.

Finally, students have done all the work to say the entire word! To help them reflect on their process and check their understanding, you can encourage students to ask a few questions:

Is this a real word?

Do I recognize this word?

Does the word make sense in the sentence?

Keep in mind these questions won't always be helpful, especially if a student doesn't recognize a word they are reading. But it is still important to help your students get into a habit of reflecting on the process of decoding multisyllabic words.

In addition to reading the steps in this blog, it will be beneficial to hear an example! Check out my podcast episode Decoding Big Words to walk through this five-step process of decoding multisyllabic words and hear an example in greater detail.

I love this process because it doesn't contain hidden tricks; you give students logical tools to help them read big words. Of course, it is most helpful if your students are familiar with and understand a variety of prefixes, suffixes, roots, and syllables.

If you want to help your students build a solid foundation of prefixes, suffixes, roots, and syllables to apply this process in their reading better, check out my Vocabulary Resources on TpT.

Put It Into Practice:

Download my How to Read Big Words Strategy anchor chart freebie!

Check out podcast Episode #122 to hear me chat more about this 5-step process and give more examples to help you feel confident when you start using the routine in your classroom.

Join us inside The Stellar Literacy Collective, where you will get access to a resource library filled with reading resources, including resources to help you make sure your students have a solid understanding of affixes and syllables so they can start decoding multisyllabic words confidently.

Happy Teaching!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Step Process for Decoding Multisyllabic Words - Stellar Teaching Co.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Are you ready to simplify decoding multisyllabic words for your students? I have a five-step process you can teach your students to help them read big words.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
EDI Activates 18 of the Top 30 Influences on Student Achievement, As Measured by Hattie

John Hattie, a professor of education from Australia and New Zealand, published Visible Learning in 2009 (with additional books in 2012 and 2015). The purpose of his research was to identify what works and what doesn't in education in statistical terms. It was a groundbreaking analysis because, for the first time, educational methods could be compared in terms of effectiveness. The Times Educational Supplement called Hattie's research "the holy grail of education."

In reviewing Hattie's descriptions of educational influences, Dataworks has found that Explicit Direct Instruction (EDI), which was developed by Hollingsworth and Ybarra as a collection of research-based teaching strategies for design and delivery of lessons, actually activates 18 of top 30 effects (out of 195 total). That means the EDI approach to education is a useful system for making learning visible, according to Hattie's research.
Effect Size
Hattie analyzed 900+ meta-studies of educational programs and procedures, and came up with an "effect size" for each of 195 "influences" on learning (138 in 2009 and 150 in 2012). The range is from 0 to 1.62, with the larger effect being more valuable. Hattie found that .40 was the "hinge point" of usefulness.

Hattie said, "There is no fixed recipe for ensuring that teaching has the maximum possible effect on student learning, and no set of principles apply to all learning for all students. But there are practices that we know are effective and many practices that we know are not." He concluded that if teachers are using practices that have a less than .40 effect, then it "may mean that teachers need to modify or dramatically change their theories of action."

Visible Learning and Teaching
Hattie says "visible teaching and learning occurs when there is deliberate practice aimed at attaining mastery of the goal, when there is feedback given and sought, and when there are active, passionate, and engaging people (teacher, students, peers) participating in the act of learning." Mansell (2008) describes this "holy grail" of education as "improvement in the level of interaction between pupils and teachers."
Implications for Schools
Furthermore, Sebastian Waack from Edkimo, who writes the Visible Learning blog, says Hattie's research has two main implications for teachers and schools. " First, teachers are the central aspect of successful learning in schools. Second, Hattie's results suggest that school reform should concentrate on what is going on in the classroom and not on structural reforms." This supports the EDI mission of focusing on instructional excellence in the classroom.

Following are the specific ways that EDI correlates with Hattie's top influences on learning. The effect size and year of publication are noted in the text for each influence .

Summary of How EDI Uses Top Effects of Hattie Research

Details of How EDI Uses Top Effects of Hattie Research

Collective Teacher Efficacy (1.57 in 2015)

Conceptual Change Programs (1.16 in 2015)

Teacher Credibility (.90 in 2015 and 2012)

The Influence: Students' views of a teacher as credible depend on three things. First is building trusting relationships with students so they know you care about them personally and about how they learn. Second is being competent with the subject matter and managing class behavior. Third is being passionate about the subject, about teaching, and about helping students succeed .

Micro Teaching (.88 in 2015 and 2009)

Cognitive Task Analysis (.87 in 2015)

Classroom Discussion (.82 in 2015 and 2012)

Interventions for Learning Disabled (.77 in 2015)

Teacher Clarity (.75 in 2015 and 2009)

Feedback (.73 in 2015 and 2009)

Providing formative evaluation (.68 in 2015) (.90 in 2009)

Concept Mapping (.64 in 2015) (.57 in 2009)

Problem-Solving Teaching (.63 in 2015) (.61 in 2009)

Classroom Behavioral (.63 in 2015) (.80 in 2009)

Vocabulary Programs (.62 in 2015) (.67 in 2009)

Spaced vs Massed Practice (.60 in 2015) (.71 in 2009)

Teaching Strategies (.60 in 2009 and 2015)

Direct Instruction (.60 in 2015) (.59 in 2009)

Repeated Reading Programs (.60 in 2015, .67 in 2009)

Author: Mike Neer

Mike has served as editor and curriculum researcher for DataWORKS since 2010. Previously, he taught English in middle school, high schools, and colleges in Illinois, Puerto Rico, and California. He has edited national trade magazines and presented seminars nationwide for businesses and non-profit organizations. He believes words are a powerful educational tool for reporting, reflecting, and revealing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
EDI Activates 18 of the Top 30 Influences on Student Achievement, As Measured by Hattie John Hattie, a professor of education from Australia and New Zealand, published Visible Learning in 2009 (with additional books in 2012 and 2015).

# data[].attributes.body
The Explicit Instruction Rubric was designed for use by supervisors and administrators to reliably evaluate explicit instructional practice, to provide specific, accurate, and actionable feedback to special education teachers about the quality of their explicit instruction, and ultimately, improve the outcomes for students with disabilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Providing more explicit instruction, captured within the comprehensiveness domain of the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity, is critical within intensive intervention. The Recognizing Effective Special Education Teachers (RESET) project, funded by U.S. Department of Education Institute for Education Sciences (IES) and led by Evelyn Johnson at Boise State University, developed a series of rubrics based on evidence-based practices for students with high incidence disabilities. One set of rubrics focuses on explicit instruction. Based on the main ideas of Explicit Instruction, the Explicit Instruction Rubric was designed for use by supervisors and administrators to reliably evaluate explicit instructional practice, to provide specific, accurate, and actionable feedback to special education teachers about the quality of their explicit instruction, and ultimately, improve the outcomes for students with disabilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Providing more explicit instruction, captured within the comprehensiveness domain of the Taxonomy of Intervention Intensity, is critical within intensive intervention. The Recognizing Effective Special Education Teachers (RESET) project, funded by U.S. Department of Education Institute for Education Sciences (IES) and led by Evelyn Johnson at Boise State University, developed a series of rubrics based on evidence-based practices for students with high incidence disabilities.

# data[].attributes.headline
A comparison of Marzano & Hattie's work on Explicit Instruction

# data[].attributes.subject
A comparison of Marzano & Hattie's work on Explicit Instruction

# data[].attributes.headline
This ‘Schitt’s Creek’-Inspired Enchiladas Recipe Will Finally Teach You What ‘Fold In The Cheese’ Means

# data[].attributes.subject
This ‘Schitt’s Creek’-Inspired Enchiladas Recipe Will Finally Teach You What ‘Fold In The Cheese’ Means

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This Cooking Video Will Finally Explain To ‘Schitt’s Creek’ Fans What ‘Fold In The Cheese’ Means

# data[].attributes.body
18 minute video explaining why Explicit instruction is a High Leverage Practice

Kennedy, M. J., Peeples, K. N., Romig, J. E., Mathews, H. M., Rodgers, W. J.  (2018). High-leverage practice #16: Use explicit instruction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction and definition of each HLP

Brief review of the research

Several brief videos of general education and special education teachers implementing the practice

What the videos are:

A resource to augment training/professional learning

A demonstration of HLP practice across degrees of intensity

A portrayal of teachers' implementation of an HLP

A demonstration of practices that can be used with all students, not only those with disabilities

What the videos are not:

A complete resource for training/professional learning

A demonstration of each tier across various settings

A depiction of all features of quality instruction/student engagement

Promoting the use of practices that would replace the need for intense, data-driven decisions and interventions provided by special educators or other specialists

This content was produced under U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H325A170003 & S283B120021-12A . David Guardino serves as the project officer. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any project, commodity, service, or enterprise mentioned in this website is intended or should be inferred.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This video introduces and defines high-leverage practice (HLP) 16 and demonstrates four key components of this HLP through video exemplars from in-service practitioners. The four key components highlighted in this video are the importance of using a logical sequence with lessons, providing clear models and explanations of content, providing multiple opportunities to respond and give appropriate feedback, and providing a range of examples and nonexamples to highlight the content being taught.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Instructional Playbook by Jim Knight et. al

# data[].attributes.subject
The Instructional Playbook by Jim Knight et. al

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jim Knight, senior partner at ICG, has spent more than two decades studying professional learning, effective teaching, and instructional coaching. He is a founding senior partner of the Instructional Coaching Group and a senior research associate at the University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning. Ann Hoffman, senior consultant at ICG, is a professional development leader for the University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning (KUCRL) with more than 30 years of experience. As one of the first professional developers for KUCRL and one of the first consultants with ICG, Ann has worked with thousands of teachers, coaches, and administrators in the United States and internationally. Ann is a recipient of the Gordon R. Alley Partnership Award and the Strategic Instruction Model Leadership Award, both from KUCRL. She is also the 2017 recipient of the Don Deshler Leadership Award from the Instructional Coaching Group. In addition, Ann serves as a founding member of the advisory board for the Belin-Blank Center for Gifted and Talented Education at the University of Iowa. Ann lives in Iowa and California with her family. Michelle Harris, senior consultant at ICG, began teaching in El Cajon, California. She taught middle school English and social studies before serving as an instructional coach, Title I coordinator, student manager, and assistant principal at three middle schools, a K-8 school, and a 6-12 IBO school, all in Beaverton, Oregon. A seasoned staff developer, Michelle has presented and keynoted all over the United States and in Europe and Africa. She lives in Portland, Oregon, with her husband and two sons. When not working, she enjoys reading, traveling, attending her sons' numerous sporting events, entertaining friends and family, and sitting in a chair on a sunny beach. Sharon Thomas, senior consultant at ICG, is a National Board-certified English teacher, instructional coach, student advocate, and writer. Along with her work in ICG workshops, Sharon coordinates the ICG Coaching Certification process. She is also a consultant for the Touchstones Discussion Project and a Certified SIM Professional Developer in the area of writing. She is the founder of the Cecil County [Maryland] Teacher Leadership Network and has presented at conferences across North America on the issues of secondary school literacy and teacher leadership. Her experience with teacher leadership in school reform was published in Principal Leadership. Sharon lives in Maryland with her family.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In schools, every day is "game day." Every day, teachers need the best resources and forms of support because students deserve the best we as educators can offer.

# data[].attributes.body
Visit our website, sldsupports.org, to find pre-recorded, On Demand professional development you can take and earn PDH's for. We have several that are related to explicit instruction if you are interested in learning more or digging deeper. Recommendations:

> Introduction to Explicit Instruction in Learning Strategies for Adolescents with Learning Disabilities by Dr. Chris O'Brien (1 PDH)

> Overview of Learning Strategies for Improved Academic Performance Dr. Chris O'Brien (1 PDH)

>Explicit Vocabulary Instruction Word Specific and Generative Strategies to Support Vocabulary Dr. Chris O'Brien (1 PDH)

>Explicit Instruction in Learning Strategies to Promote Paraphrasing and Summarizing Dr. Chris O'Brien (1 PDH)

>Content Enhancement: Using Explicit Instruction Principles to Teach Secondary Content Dr. Chris O'Brien (1 PDH)

> Effective Instructional Strategies: Maximizing the Probability of Student Success by Dr. Terry Scott (3 PDHs)

>High Probability Strategies for Managing Classrooms: Instructional and Environmental Considerations by Dr. Terry Scott (3 PDHs)

>SEL/Behavior Learning Pathway: In this pathway, participants will learn key principles of classroom behavior management and foundational behavior management practices that, when implemented, can increase the probability of positive students outcomes and a positive learning environment. The assigned trainings will touch on topics such as culture, feedback, engagement methods, and maximizing instructional time. (10 PDHs)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TalentLMS - Cloud based, Lean Learning Platform with an Emphasis on Usability and Easy Course Creation

# data[].attributes.headline
Just How Effective is Direct Instruction?

# data[].attributes.subject
Just How Effective is Direct Instruction?

# data[].attributes.body
"Despite overwhelming evidence in support of Direct Instruction, this research-validated curriculum has not been widely embraced by teachers or school administrators. The Direct Instruction model, developed and refined by Engelmann and colleagues over the past 50 years, has been the focus of numerous research studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Although its efficacy cannot be doubted, the significance of Direct Instruction’s impact may be misunderstood. We attempt to clarify the importance of Direct Instruction with help from the binomial effect-size display. [...] [We] attempt to answer the question: Just how effective is Direct Instruction?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Despite overwhelming evidence in support of Direct Instruction, this research-validated curriculum has not been widely embraced by teachers or school administrators. The Direct Instruction model, developed and refined by Engelmann and colleagues over the past 50 years, has been the focus of numerous research studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Although its efficacy cannot be doubted, the significance of Direct Instruction's impact may be misunderstood. We attempt to clarify the importance of Direct Instruction with help from the binomial effect-size display. Binomial effect-size displays allow for intuitive and informative data-based decision making by clearly conveying the real-world importance of treatment outcomes through a juxtaposition of the relative proportions of success. The limitations of analyzing effect sizes in absolute terms are discussed. Using the binomial effect-size display as a framework, we present a series of dichotomies in an attempt to answer the question: Just how effective is Direct Instruction?

Keywords: Direct instruction, Binomial effect size display, Effective schools, Effect size

You would be hard-pressed to find an educator who does not have an opinion on Direct Instruction (DI). Whether they tried it in their classroom and found that previously "uneducable" students were now learning or heard about it as a strawman for "drill and kill" techniques that diminish the "love of learning," everyone seems to love DI or hate DI (Pondiscio, 2018). Despite the philosophical arguments, there can be little doubt that DI works.

Direct Instruction is perhaps the most heavily researched educational model (Borman et al., 2003; Hattie, 2009). More than 500 individual research reports have been identified on DI, and an entire journal was once dedicated to its exploration (Stockard et al., 2020). This mountain of data has been analyzed, summarized, and scrutinized elsewhere, and it is not our intent to provide another systematic review. Rather, we provide some commentary on the vast amount of research on DI and offer some perspective on the interpretation of their results. The love/hate divergence is the first in a series of dichotomies that we present to help clarify some of the ambiguities that are inherent with complex statistical analyses. Because, regardless of which side of the aisle you stand, everyone should have access to the basic facts.

Direct Instruction has been lauded for its careful instructional programming to condition abstract stimulus control (i.e., teaching "big ideas"; Slocum, 2004). It has also been criticized for leading to student overdependence, the use of rigid and inflexible teaching methods, and emphasizing fact accumulation at the expense of critical thinking skills (Edwards, 1981). The polarizing qualities of DI cannot merely stem from its efficacy, because it would be difficult to refute the data demonstrating the variety of skills that can be taught through DI. Table provides a sample of the available data demonstrating the effectiveness of DI across students and academic content.

Table 1

Chronological citations

Participants

Content

Effect size (d)

Direct Instruction-as developed by Siegfried Engelmann, Carl Bereiter, Douglas Carnine, Jean Osborn, Wesley Becker, and colleagues-was initially a preschool program for children from communities of low socioeconomic status. Instructional periods for these children were only 20-30 min long and focused exclusively on math and reading. The teacher's instructions were carefully programed and sequenced, ensuring mastery of prerequisites skills to eliminate ambiguity when introducing more advanced concepts. Children in these early studies showed marked improvements, encouraging further research with this mode of instruction (Bereiter & Engelmann, 1966).

Direct Instruction was then expanded to include math, reading, and language for populations outside of preschools. This model became known as the Direct Instruction System for Teaching Arithmetic and Reading ( DISTAR; Engelmann, 2007; Wood, 2014). Early success led to DI's inclusion in Project Follow Through, a longitudinal study from 1968 to 1977 that compared 20 educational programs and school-based interventions across some 700,000 children of low socioeconomic status. Project Follow Through found that DI was the only intervention with a "significant positive impact on all of the outcome measures" (Stockard et al., 2018, p. 482). Although the benefits of DI were clear, it was (and continues to be) criticized for being dogmatic, utilitarian, and authoritarian, with opponents claiming that its tightly structured scope and sequence leave little room for teacher and student creativity (Hattie, 2009).

The academic impact of DI was largely suppressed by the reviewers of Project Follow Through who recommended every model of purported benefit to students (e.g., along measures of self-concept, attitude, mental or physical health) or teachers (e.g., instructional fidelity). Watkins ( 1997) laments that, "it does the public little good to 'identify' little-used methods" (p. 44). Nonetheless, DI programs have been developed for teaching a wider variety of curriculum content to increasingly diverse student populations.

Direct Instruction versus direct instruction

Within the literature, discriminative control is established between Direct Instruction ("big DI") and direct instruction ("little di"). Big DI, as developed by Engelmann and colleagues, is centered on a carefully crafted model of instruction focused on teaching concept formation (Cooper et al., 2020; Engelmann & Carnine, 1992). These instructions have been specifically sequenced, scripted, and programmed to minimize obfuscation, and have demonstrated tremendous success at teaching specified objectives when compared to other modes of instruction (Kennedy, 1978; Stebbins et al., 1977).

Little di, on the other hand, refers to a broader repertoire of teacher behavior that incorporates elements of systematic or explicit instruction. Little di is often exemplified by the work of Rosenshine ( 1976, 2012) who identified a set of teacher variables that yield significant academic improvements for students, including: (1) structuring materials, (2) using clear and concise instructions, (3) promoting active student responding, (4) providing immediate feedback contingent on student answers, and (5) minimizing free time. As with big DI, little di incorporates systematically sequenced instructions along with gradual increases in rigor and difficulty. Centered on direct measures of student behavior, relevant outcome data, and systematic measurement practices, the combination of these instructional technologies have produced favorable cost-benefit ratios when compared with traditional teaching practices (Binder & Watkins, 1990; Lipsey et al., 2012).

Both big DI and little di focus on explicit and systematic instruction. The primary distinction between the two is that little di refers to a set of teacher behaviors, whereas big DI (hereafter, simply "DI") refers to curricular programs in the Engelmann tradition (e.g., DISTAR, Reading Mastery, Connecting Math Concepts, Language for Learning) and the teacher-student interactions that put the programs in play (e.g., fast paced scripted lessons, choral responding, error correction; Rolf & Slocum, 2021; Slocum & Rolf, 2021).

Effect Sizes

Effect sizes, like those listed in Table , measure the magnitude of a phenomenon, and are commonly reported using the indices for standardized mean difference ( d), correlation coefficient ( r), or coefficient of determination ( r 2; Reimer & Russell, 2017). When an effect size is expressed as the difference between means in a standard score (i.e., z-value), it represents the number of standard deviations between experimental and control groups. Assuming groups of equal sample size, these various indices may be converted from one to another. For example, by coding group membership with a binary variable (e.g., "0" for the control group, and "1" for the experimental group), we can then convert d to r using the following formula:

Likewise, we could then calculate the coefficient of determination ( r 2) by squaring the correlation coefficient to measure the proportion of variance (or percentage of variance if we then multiply by 100) in the dependent variable that can be predicted by the independent variable.

The standard convention for describing d and r includes the terms "small" ( d = 0.2, r = .1), "medium" ( d = 0.5, r = .3), and "large" ( d = 0.8, r = .5). Cohen ( 1988) used the average height of women as the context for this interpretation. A "small" effect might be interpreted as the difference between the heights of 15- and 16-year-old females in the United States. A "medium" effect was visible to the naked eye, and could be interpreted as the difference between the heights of 14- and 18-year-old women. A "large" effect is grossly perceptible such as the difference between the heights of 13- and 18-year-old women.

However, Cohen ( 1988) also acknowledged the danger of labeling a change in magnitude as "small," "medium," and "large" devoid of context, noting that we can only interpret the effectiveness of a particular intervention in relation to another intervention that seeks to produce the same effect, along with their relative costs and benefits. As a more tractable interpretation for evaluating educational interventions, Glass et al. ( 1981) proposed that an effect size of 1.00 corresponds to the difference of about a year of schooling on the standardized test scores of elementary school students. Coe ( 2002) argued that 0.60 is a more accurate estimate of this phenomenon. In other words, an average third-grade student at pretest who received an intervention with an effect size of 0.60 would perform at the average fourth-grade level at posttest.

Binomial Effect-Size Display

Statistically laden effect sizes like d and r are challenging to interpret, especially when there is no indicator of which effect-size index to use when working with multiple datasets (Randolph & Edmondson, 2005; Rosenthal, 1991). For example, in their meta-analysis of more than 500 individual studies on DI, Stockard et al. ( 2020) used mixed-model regressions to identify multiple effect sizes across various dimensions (e.g., grade level, subject matter, educational setting), along with more extensive analyses and estimates of effectiveness with different levels of exposure and fidelity. Answering the seemingly simple question of "Is DI effective?" required no less than 290 pages (with an additional 383 pages of supplemental material available online). The data provided by Stockard and colleagues are so immersive that the nonstatistician cannot see the wood for the trees. As Lipsey et al. ( 2012) note,

The situation is not unusual-the native statistical representations of the findings of studies of intervention effects often provide little insight into the practical magnitude and meaning of those effects. To communicate that important information to researchers, practitioners, and policymakers, those statistical representations must be translated into some form that makes their practical significance easier to infer. (p. 1)

Though we cannot argue with Stockard et al.'s conclusion on the use of DI, "Our students deserve no less" (p. 165), we also cannot help but wonder whether they might have taken a more direct route to reach it.

To help clarify the real-world importance of an intervention, Rosenthal and Rubin ( 1982) suggested reducing continuous measures to a simple dichotomy. For example, we may select a given measure-such as the mean or median-and classify each value that falls below that measure as a "failure" (or "0") and each value above it as a "success" (or "1"). We can then calculate r as the difference in proportions in each category (Coe, 2002). This conversion, called the binomial effect-size display (BESD) allows for more intuitive and informative data-based decision making by clearly conveying the real-world importance of treatment effects.

The BESD helps to interpret exceedingly complex data, which may be useful when evaluating DI outcomes because it is "(a) easily understood by researchers, students, and laypersons; (b) applicable in a wide variety of contexts; and (c) conveniently computed" (Rosenthal & Rubin, 1982, p. 166). In particular, the BESD may be more pragmatic than other effect-size indices, increasing the likelihood that parents and elected officials will select schools, teachers, and curriculum based on empirically supported evidence.

The BESD is premised upon three primary assumptions. Foremost, we assume that samples for both experimental and control groups follow a normal distribution. The sample that forms this normal distribution is better described as a density curve along a continuum of magnitude ranging from minimal to maximal effectiveness. The interpretation of effect sizes is sensitive to violations of this assumption, and it may be difficult to make an accurate comparison between an effect size based on a normal distribution and one derived from a nonnormal distribution (Coe, 2002).

Second, the BESD requires that we draw an imaginary line at the median value-which, in this case, is also the mean-and group our sample into one of two categories (see Fig. ). The values that fall to the right of this imaginary line are above the mean, and therefore might be labeled "good," "effective," or a "success." The values that fall to the left of this imaginary line are below the mean, and therefore might be labeled "bad," "ineffective," or a "failure."

Finally, we must assume the use of a binary dependent variable upon which we can classify an outcome as a success or failure. That is, either the response contacted reinforcement or it did not. Our concern is only that the response meets this minimal criterion, and-as before-without regard for the magnitude of any individual effect. These overlapping dichotomies of success and failure result in a Punnett square through which we can examine a given effect-size estimate.

Life vs Death

As with other applications of human behavior, selectionism may serve as an appropriate framework for demonstrating the BESD. Table shows the BESD for a hypothetical medical treatment that increases a patient's rate of survival by 1%. An r = .10 is the very definition of "small," but still considered important in the context of a life-saving intervention. Cohen ( 1988) notes that "'Death' tends to concentrate the mind" (p. 534). In absolute terms, an r 2 of .01 is undeniably "small," but when it represents a 10% increase in the rate of survival, our hypothetical patient might consider it large: " alive, mind you!" (p. 534).

Thus, a difference between success rates of .55 and .45 yields r = .10, and accounts for only 1% of the variance in the dependent variable as a function of the independent variable. However, effects that are operationally defined as "small" cannot be overlooked when it marginally increases the rate of survival. Even marginal differences have the potential to shift an entire population (Baum, 2017; Rachlin, 1991).

Rosenthal ( 1990) described two occasions on which randomized controlled trials on the use of medications to prevent heart attacks were ended prematurely. In both cases, the results from the experimental group were so favorable that the research teams for each study determined it would be unethical to continue to withhold the life-saving drugs from the patients in the control group. The rs for these two independent studies were both well below the .10 threshold, with r = .04 (propranolol) and r = .034 (aspirin). As Rosenthal explained,

Behavioral researchers are not used to thinking of rs of .04 as reflecting effect sizes of practical importance. But when we think of an r of .04 as reflecting a 4% decrease in heart attacks, the interpretation given r in a BESD, the r does not appear to be quite so small, especially if we can count ourselves among the 4 per 100 who manage to survive. (p. 775)

Table provides a conversion from Cohen's d effect sizes ranging from zero to three in intervals of 0.10, to their corresponding r and r 2 values. The differences in success rates increase systematically along with the effect sizes.

Table 3

d

r

r 2

Success rate increased

Differences in success rates

To

From

As can be seen, the difference in success rate is always identical to r. Cohen ( 1988) explains that "the fact that the difference in proportions equals the r is not a coincidence, but a necessity when the table is symmetrical (i.e., when the two values are equidistant from .50"; p. 534). Even a d as small as 0.1, accounting for less than 1% of the variance, increases the probability of selection from 48% to 53%. As a result, the chance of survival-whether species, individual, or behavior-has increased by 5%.

Effective Schools vs Ineffective Schools

"Small" effects become even more important when they are cumulative (Cohen, 1988). More than a one-time intervention, education is designed to last 12 or more years in duration. Coe ( 2002) explains that few educational interventions have effects that are anything other than "small," due to the wide variation found within the population as a whole. Barbash ( 2012) and Tallmadge ( 1977) agreed that d = 0.25 is the conventional threshold to indicate an educationally significant outcome, though Lipsey et al. ( 2012) felt that even this was too high. (In contrast, recall that the average effect size for DI in Table is d = 0.79.)

Despite the longitudinal efforts of our educational system, Coleman et al. ( 1966) found that schooling accounts for only 10% of student achievement, with the other 90% attributed to students' home environment. It would seem that Hart and Risley ( 1995) were correct! However, we can once again employ a BESD to clarify the importance of 10% variance ( r 2 = .10). Table shows the impact of a mere "moderate" effect size on the potential for student success.

Although Coleman et al.'s ( 1966) findings state that schools only account for 10% of student achievement, the BESD for this finding paints a drastically different picture. The success rate for students increases from 34.3% to 65.8% when they are placed in an effective school. In other words, effective schools benefit an additional 32 per 100 students, regardless of the background from which they step into the classroom. Almost two thirds of the students in an effective school are likely to succeed, compared to just over one third of students in an ineffective school.

In contrast to the findings by Coleman et al. ( 1966), more recent findings conclude that schools may actually account for as much as 20% of variance in student achievement, with the remaining 80% attributed to their background environment. According to a meta-analysis by Marzano ( 2003), the use of verbal acuity as Coleman et al.'s primary dependent measure underestimates the impact of schools. Table shows the revised impact of schools on the potential for student success.

Although Marzano's ( 2003) findings suggest that schools account for an adjusted 20% of student achievement, the BESD for this finding demonstrates that a student's success rate increases from 27.6% to 72.4% when placed in an effective school. In other words, effective schools benefit an additional 45 per 100 students, regardless of the background from which they step into the classroom. Almost three fourths of the students in an effective school are likely to succeed, compared to just over one quarter of students in an ineffective school.

Direct Instruction versus Other Models

The model provided by Marzano ( 2003) represents the absolute best that schools can offer to students. Effective schools can increase the academic achievement for almost half of their student population, regardless of socioeconomic status, English proficiency, and other risk factors.

Since its inception, DI has focused on teaching students from academically disadvantaged backgrounds. By providing teachers with an organized curriculum and explicit instruction, DI has been shown to effectively control for the outside variables that have traditionally prohibited academic achievement. This includes: (1) student-level factors, such as frequent tardiness or absences; (2) parent-level factors, such as little interest in child's educational outcomes; and (3) teacher-level factors, including lack of focus on basic skills (Butler, 2020).

Adams and Engelmann ( 1996) reviewed the then current literature on DI, and found an overall effect size per variable of d = 0.97, across 173 total comparisons (72 general education and 101 special education). By conventional standards, this would be considered a "large" magnitude of effect. Using the formula for converting d to r above, we can then create a BESD for DI.

Table shows that d = 0.97 converts to r = .436, which falls within the "medium" range between .3 and .5. Already we note a discrepancy in the interpretation of effect size based on the different indices. However, the r 2 = .19 tells us that DI accounts for 19% of the variance in student achievement.

Adams and Engelmann's ( 1996) 19% of variance in student achievement approximates Marzano's ( 2003) 20% model of maximum school effectiveness. In other words, DI accounts for almost all of the difference in schooling. The BESD for this finding demonstrates that with the use of DI student success rates increase by 43.6%. In other words, DI benefits an additional 44 per 100 students, regardless of background. Compared to the other curricula that were examined in the meta-analysis, DI increased academic achievement from 28% to 72%.

The conventional use of effect sizes provides thresholds by which we can refer to the size of a phenomenon as "small," "medium," "large," etc. As previously stated, Cohen ( 1988) acknowledged the danger of describing effect-size estimates in such terms, stressing that the effectiveness of a particular intervention can only be interpreted within the context of another intervention that seeks to produce the same effect. The use of absolute values to define "small" and "large" stems from a perspective of realism indicative of methodological behaviorism (Baum, 2017). However, such absolute thresholds force conceptual arguments about whether to interpret the same phenomenon as "large" (i.e., d = 0.97) or "medium" (i.e., r = .436).

In contrast, BESD provides a more pragmatic view of the magnitude of an experimental effect by placing the data in context. It is one thing to say that DI has a "large" effect. It is another to say that DI increases the rate of success by 44%.

Curriculum versus Instruction

Allow us to present one last dichotomy to clarify the distinction between curriculum and instruction. Although it is superficial, we can call this the same distinction between DI, the published curricula materials, and di, the process of systematic and explicit instruction. To demonstrate the importance of this distinction, we pose the following hypothetical scenario.

Imagine that we rank ordered all of the teachers in the United States according to effectiveness. Given that there are about 3.7 million teachers in the United States (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2019), we can assume that they approximate a normal distribution. Let us also imagine that we rank ordered all of the various curricula according to effectiveness, which approximates another normal distribution. As before, we will draw an imaginary line at the mean of each distribution, and call everything to the right of this imaginary line "good," and everything to the left of this imaginary line "bad." The result is a Punnett square showing the various combinations of teachers and curricula (see Table ).

Table 7

Curriculum

Instruction

Good

Bad

Good

Good/Good

Good/Bad

Bad

Bad/Good

Bad/Bad

It is safe to assume that everyone wants their child in a classroom with a good teacher using a good curriculum, and that nobody wants their child in a classroom with a bad teacher using a bad curriculum. This leads us to the following question (visualized in Fig. ): Would you rather place your child in a classroom with a good teacher using a bad curriculum, or a bad teacher using a good curriculum?

Can effective instruction overcome the deficits of a poor curriculum? Can a systematic curriculum make up for the faults of poor instruction? To answer these questions, Marzano et al. ( 2003) conducted a meta-analysis to tease out these effects. The results of this analysis are displayed in Fig. .

According to Marzano and colleagues, the student who begins at the 50 th percentile and has an average teacher who uses an average curriculum, will still be at the 50 th percentile at the end of 2 years. This student has learned enough to keep pace with other students in the same grade.

But what happens to the student who has an ineffective teacher that uses an ineffective curriculum? After 2 years of school, this student has dropped from the 50 th percentile to the 3 rd percentile. Although this student may have acquired some basic skills, their learning is so sporadic and unorganized that they have lost considerable ground compared to other students in the same grade.

Suppose that the student who enters at the 50 th percentile is given an ineffective teacher who uses a curriculum with a strong evidence base. Despite the class-wide implementation of a research-validated program, after 2 years this student has fallen to the 37 th percentile when measured against other students in the same grade.

In contrast to the previous scenarios, which featured poor instruction from the classroom teacher, the next two highlight the benefits of effective instruction. Consider the student who begins at the 50 th percentile, and is fortunate enough to be assigned to an effective teacher who uses an evidence-based curriculum. After 2 years, this student now performs at the 96th percentile.

Finally, let us suppose the student who enters school at the 50 th percentile is given an effective teacher who uses a curriculum without empirical support. After 2 years, the student would still have gained 13 percentile points, and rank at the 63 rd percentile. The importance of effective instruction can easily be seen when we compare it against a poor curriculum. Marzano et al. ( 2003) found that even when using ineffective curricula, effective teachers can produce meaningful gains in student achievement (Table ).

By juxtaposing the effects of curriculum and instruction, we see that instruction accounts for 6.7% of variance in student success. The BESD for this finding demonstrates that a student's success rate increases from 37% to 63% when placed in a classroom with effective instruction. In other words, effective teachers benefit an additional 26 per 100 students, compared to the use of effective curricula alone.

Understanding the substantial effect schools can have on student achievement highlights the importance of evidence-based classroom practices (Slocum et al., 2014; Smith, 2013). When displayed in a BESD, Marzano et al.'s ( 2003) data force us to reconsider the idea of evidence-based practices as off-the-shelf curricula. Government mandates for the use of evidence-based practices seemingly emphasize purchasing the right curricular products. As we can see from Table , this focus on curriculum alone decreases student success rates by 26%.

The term "evidence-based" is more often explanatory rather than descriptive, as in, the curriculum is evidence-based, and therefore effective. Selecting a program because it's marketed as research based and then implementing it without ongoing progress is at best the result of good marketing, and at worst malpractice. To paraphrase the tautological reasoning described by Vargas ( 2013), "How do you know the curriculum works? Because it is evidence based. How do you know it is evidence based? Because it works." Moreover, research on fidelity of implementation tells us that maintaining treatment integrity is critical to student achievement (Mathews et al., 2018; Travers et al., 2016). What is "instruction" if not the implementation of a teaching program as designed?

Stockard et al. ( 2018) conducted a meta-regression of research on DI curricular materials that emphasized "a more precise measure of teacher preparation, including fidelity to all the various technical elements of the programs and training specific to the programs taught" (p. 501). The estimated effect size for the total sample was d = 0.60, which, by conventional standards, would be a "medium" effect. Using the formula for converting d to r above, we can then create a BESD for DI.

Table shows that d = 0.60 converts to r = .287, accounting for 8.2% of the variance in student achievement. Stockard et al.'s ( 2018) findings on DI curricula surpass Marzano et al.'s ( 2003) 6.7% of variance resulting from effective instruction. Once again, DI bridges the gap between effective and ineffective instruction. The BESD for this finding demonstrates that the use of DI curricular materials increased student success rates from 35.6% to 64.4%. Compared to the other curricula that were examined in the meta-regression, DI increased academic achievement by 28.7%.

How Effective is DI?

Chubb and Moe ( 1990) assert that,

All things being equal, a student in an effectively organized school achieves at least a half-year more than a student in an ineffectively organized school over the last two years of high school. If this difference can be extrapolated to the normal four-year high school experience, an effectively organized school may increase the achievement of its students by more than one full year. That is a substantial school effect indeed. (p. 140)

Over the past half-century, no other curriculum model has been more heavily researched than DI. Syntheses of this research tell us that by equipping teachers with DI curricular materials, and emphasizing high fidelity of implementation, the effects of schools can be substantial.

Glass et al. ( 1981) stated that an effective size of d = 1.00 equates to the difference of about a year of schooling. In their meta-analysis of DI, Adams and Engelmann ( 1996) found a similar overall effect size of d = .97. The BESD for Adams and Engelmann, which showed that DI accounted for 19% of the variance in student achievement, is consistent with Marzano's ( 2003) model showing that schools can account for as much as 20% of student success.

Coe ( 2002) argued that the difference of a year of school is closer to an effect size of d = 0.60. In their meta-regression on DI, Stockard et al. ( 2018) found an effect-size of d = 0.60. The BESD for Stockard et al., which showed that DI accounted for 8.2% of variance in student achievement, surpasses Marzano et al.'s ( 2003) finding that effective instruction can account for up to 6.7% of student success. Stockard et al.'s data also fit the model of effective schooling determined by Coleman et al. ( 1966).

Regardless of whether you want to describe the effect as "medium" ( d = 0.60) or "large" ( d = 0.97), the research shows that DI can effectively double the academic success rate of students: 2 years of gains across 1 year of instruction. Hunter and Schmidt ( 1990) describe the limitations of various effect-size indices such as d, r, and r 2, noting that,

The percent of variance accounted for is statistically correct, but substantively erroneous. It leads to severe underestimates of the practical and theoretical significance of relationships between variables. . . . The problem with all percent variance accounted for indices of effect size is that variables that account for small percentages of the variance often have very important effects on the dependent variable. (pp. 199-200)

Although there are multiple ways to talk about effect sizes, any scientific approach to educational research is premised upon the identification of small, yet meaningful, variables. More than 50 years of research on DI have illustrated that rather than immediately solving all of our education needs, research-validated instructional practices point to the ongoing and systematic development of effective teacher behavior. In explaining longitudinal results, Ferster et al. ( 1975) declared that "The successful results of [education], even though we sometimes think of them in terms of a final dramatic outcome, actually occur in small increments of behavior" (p. 89). However, the nomenclature used to describe the magnitude of change fails to describe the pragmatic difference in student achievement resulting from DI.

In contrast to other effect-size indices, the BESD provides a real-world context for interpretation. Dichotomizing the independent variable in terms of experimental or control and dichotomizing the dependent variable in terms of effective or ineffective eliminates ambiguities to allow for easier and simpler data-based decision making. To reiterate the conclusion of Stockard et al. ( 2018), "Researchers and practitioners cannot afford to ignore the effectiveness [of] research on DI" (p. 503).

The BESD is not without limitations, however. McGraw ( 1991) argues that the BESD so distorts the original data that the exercise is misleading, whereas Strahan ( 1991) calls BESD a "what if" statistical technique. In addition, the assumptions of normality on which BESDs rely have been noted as a primary limitation (Hsu, 2004; Thompson & Schumacker, 1997). However, perhaps the most important limitation is raised by Skinner ( 1968), who warns us about the Idols of the School.

The Idol of the Good Teacher is the belief that what a good teacher can do any teacher can do. Some teachers are, of course, unusually effective. . . . The Idol of the Good Student is the belief that what a good student can learn, any student can learn. Because they have superior ability or have been exposed to fortunate early environments, some students learn without being taught. (pp. 260-261)

The dichotomous nature of the BESD treats minimally effective teachers the same as maximally effective teachers, just as it treats minimally ineffective teachers the same as maximally ineffective teachers. One of Stockard et al. ( 2020) many findings was that even with limited instructional time and relatively low procedural fidelity, DI was more effective than other curricula. Student outcomes are even more dramatic with greater exposure and higher fidelity. In the classroom and other applied settings, outcomes are continuous rather than binary. Individual results may vary.

Of the many responsibilities with which the classroom teacher is charged, instructional design is not one of them (Pondiscio, 2018). Although we have posited that a good teacher can correct a bad curriculum, few teachers ever receive training in the systematic development and careful sequencing of content within the comprehensive scope of a given content area. Skinner ( 1968) noted that the central source error is the teacher's belief that their own personal experience is the primary basis of pedagogical wisdom. By teaching big ideas, scripting lessons, programming for generalization, and assessing mastery, DI shifts the teacher's focus from personal experience to student-generated data.

"There is no universal guideline or rule of thumb for judging the practical importance or substantive significance of a standardized effect size estimate for an intervention," argues Hill et al. ( 2008). "Instead one must develop empirical benchmarks of comparison that reflect the nature of the intervention being evaluated, its target population, and the outcome measure or measures being used" (p. 172). Despite having never been widely embraced or implemented, the large body of evidence supporting the effectiveness of DI has elevated it to education's empirical benchmark of comparison. Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that DI has situated itself as the Idol of the Good Curriculum.

Declarations

Conflicts of interest

We have no explicit conflicts of interest to disclose.

Footnotes

Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

Adams, G. L., & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research on direct instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Educational Achievement Systems.

Barbash, S. (2012). Clear teaching: With direct instruction, Siegfried Engelmann discovered a better way of teaching. Education Consumers Foundation.

Baum, W. M. (2017). Understanding behaviorism: Behavior, culture, and evolution (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

Bereiter, C., & Engelmann, S. (1966). Teaching disadvantaged children in the preschool. Prentice-Hall.

Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1990). Politics, markets, and America's schools. Brookings Institute.

Coe, R. (September, 2002). It's the effect size, stupid: What effect size is and why it is important. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association annual conference: Exeter, England.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity (Report No. OE-3800). National Center for Educational Statistics.

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson.

Engelmann, S. (2007). Teaching needs kids in our backwards system: 42 years of trying. ADI Press.

Engelmann, S., & Carnine, D. (1992). Theory of instructional design: Principles and applications. Irvington Press.

Ferster, C. B., Culbertson, S., & Boren, M. C. (1975). Behavior principles (2nd ed.). Prentice-Hall.

Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Sage.

Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Paul H. Brookes.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Sage Publications, Inc.

Kennedy, M. M. (1978). Findings from the Follow Through planned variation study. U.S. Office of Education.

Lipsey, M. W., Puzio, K., Yun, C., Hebert, M. A., Steinka-Fry, K., Cole, M. W., Roberts, M., Anthony, K. S., & Busick, M. D. (2012). Translating the statistical representation of the effects of education interventions into more readily interpretable forms. (NCSER 2013-3000). National Center for Special Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://ies.ed.gov/ncser/

Lloyd, J., Epstein, M. H., & Cullinan, D. (1981). Direct Instruction for learning disabilities. In J. Gottlieb & S. S. Strichart (Eds.), Developmental theory and research in learning disabilities (pp. 41-45). University Park Press.

Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Marzano, R. J., Marzano, J. S., & Pickering, D. J. (2003). Classroom management that works: Research-based strategies for every teacher. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2019). Digest of education statistics: 2018. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/

Pondiscio, R. (2018). Meta-analysis confirms effectiveness of an old school approach: Direct Instruction. Flypaper. https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/direct-instruction-rodney-dangerfield-curriculum

Rachlin, H. (1991). Introduction to modern behaviorism (3rd ed.). W. H. Freeman.

Reimer, T., & Russell, T. (2017). Binomial effect size display. In M. Allen (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of communication research methods (p. 96). Sage. 10.4135/9781483381411.n38.

Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching. Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Rolf, K. R. & Slocum, T. (2021). Features of Direct Instruction: Interactive Lessons. Behavior Analysis in Practice.

Slocum, T. & Rolf, K. R. (2021). Features of Direct Instruction: Content analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice.

Slocum, T. A. (2004). Direct instruction: The big ideas. In D. J. Moran & R. W. Malott (Eds.), Evidence-based educational methods (pp. 81-94). Academic Press. 10.1016/B978-012506041-7/50007-3.

Slocum TA, Detrich R, Wilczynski SM, Spencer TD, Lewis T, Wolfe K. The evidence-based practice of applied behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst. 2014;37(1):41-56. doi: 10.1007/s40614-014-0005-2. [[PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] Google Scholar]

Smith T. What is evidence-based behavior analysis? The Behavior Analyst. 2013;36(1):7-33. doi: 10.1007/bf03392290. [[PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] Google Scholar]

Stebbins, L. B., St Pierre, R. G., Proper, E. C., Anderson, R. B., & Cerva, T. R. (1977). Education as experimentation: A planned variation model (Vol. IV-A). ABT Associates.

Stockard, J., Wood, T. W., Coughlin, C., & Rasplica Khoury, C. (2020). All students can succeed: A half century of research on the effectiveness of Direct Instruction. Lexington Books.

Tallmadge, G. K. (1977). The Joint Dissemination Review Panel ideabook. National Institute of Education.

Vargas, J. S. (2013). Behavior analysis for effective teaching (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Watkins, C. L. (1997). Project Follow Through: A case study of contingencies influencing instructional practices of the educational establishment. Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies.

Wood, T. W. (2014). Engelmann's Direct Instruction: Selected writings from the past half century. NIFDI Press.

Articles from Perspectives on Behavior Science are provided here courtesy of Association for Behavior Analysis International

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Just How Effective is Direct Instruction?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite overwhelming evidence in support of Direct Instruction, this research-validated curriculum has not been widely embraced by teachers or school administrators. The Direct Instruction model, developed and refined by Engelmann and colleagues over ...

# data[].attributes.headline
Preview -- (Swanson & Hoskyn, 1998) Experimental Intervention Research on Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Treatment Outcomes 

# data[].attributes.subject
Preview -- (Swanson & Hoskyn, 1998) Experimental Intervention Research on Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Treatment Outcomes 

# data[].attributes.body
"This article summarizes a comprehensive synthesis of experimental intervention studies that have included students with learning disabilities. [...] The results are supportive of the pervasive influence of cognitive strategy and direct instruction models for remediating the academic difficulties for children with learning disabilities."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Experimental Intervention Research on Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Treatment Outcomes on JSTOR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
H. Lee Swanson, Maureen Hoskyn, Experimental Intervention Research on Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Treatment Outcomes, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 68, No. 3 (Autumn, 1998), pp. 277-321

# data[].attributes.headline
Clark, Kirshner, & Sweller, 2012: Putting Students on the Path to Learning

# data[].attributes.subject
Clark, Kirshner, & Sweller, 2012: Putting Students on the Path to Learning

# data[].attributes.headline
Hughes, 2011: Effective Instruction Design and Delivery for Teaching Task-Specific Learning Strategies to Students with Learning Disabilities

# data[].attributes.subject
Hughes, 2011: Effective Instruction Design and Delivery for Teaching Task-Specific Learning Strategies to Students with Learning Disabilities

# data[].attributes.body
This article proposes that how learning strategies are taught to students with learning disabilities (LD) is as important as the strategies themselves.

# data[].attributes.headline
Explicit Instruction Video Examples: Elementary & Secondary 

# data[].attributes.subject
Explicit Instruction Video Examples: Elementary & Secondary 

# data[].attributes.body
Dr. Archer has had the opportunity to demonstrate explicit instructional lessons in many general and special education classes.  These video clips illustrate many of the concepts and practices introduced in Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching. Teachers, faculty members, and teachers-in-training are invited to view these video clips, to analyze and critique the instructional procedures.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Video Clips (iPad/iPhone compatible)

Description: Dr. Archer has had the opportunity to demonstrate explicit instructional lessons in many general and special education classes. These video clips illustrate many of the concepts and practices introduced in Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching. Teachers, faculty members, and teachers-in-training are invited to view these video clips, to analyze and critique the instructional procedures.

Suggestions for use: Each video clip is accompanied by a video guide. We suggest that you download and print the guide before watching the video. Read the description of the video and the suggested video focus. As you watch the video, take notes in response to the focus questions. After viewing the video, share your observations with your colleagues and read the feedback provided by Dr. Archer.

Limits on videos use: . No individual or agency is given permission to post these videos on a for-profit website or use them in any manner in which financial gain occurs without written permission from Dr. Archer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Explicit Instructions | Effective and Efficient Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Video Clips (iPad/iPhone compatible) Description: Dr. Archer has had the opportunity to demonstrate explicit instructional lessons in many general and special education classes. These video clips illustrate many of the concepts and practices introduced in Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching.

# data[].attributes.headline
Building Equity: Policies and Practices to Empower All Learners by Smith, Frey, Pumpian & Fisher

# data[].attributes.subject
Building Equity: Policies and Practices to Empower All Learners by Smith, Frey, Pumpian & Fisher

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Imagine a school with a diverse student body where everyone feels safe and valued, and all—regardless of race, culture, home language, sexual orientation, gender identity, academic history, and individual challenges—have the opportunity to succeed with interesting classes, projects, and activities. In this school, teachers notice and meet individual instructional needs and foster a harmonious and supportive environment. All students feel empowered to learn, to grow, and to pursue their dreams. This is the school every student needs and deserves. In Building Equity, Dominique Smith, Nancy Frey, Ian Pumpian, and Douglas Fisher, colleagues at San Diego’s innovative Health Sciences High & Middle College, introduce the Building Equity Taxonomy, a new model to clarify the structural and interpersonal components of an equitable and excellent schooling experience, and the Building Equity Review and Audit, survey-based tools to help school and teacher leaders uncover equity-related issues and organize their efforts to achieve Physical integration Social-emotional engagement Opportunity to learn Instructional excellence Engaged and inspired learners Built on the authors’ own experiences and those of hundreds of educators throughout the United States, this book is filled with examples of policy initiatives and practices that support high-quality, inclusive learning experiences and deliver education that meets critical standards of equality and equity.

# data[].attributes.headline
The New Art and Science of Teaching by Robert Marzano

# data[].attributes.subject
The New Art and Science of Teaching by Robert Marzano

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Handbook for the New Art and Science of Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Part of The New Art and Science of Teaching series Rely on this comprehensive guide to help you implement the teaching methods of Dr. Robert J. Marzano’s The New Art and Science of Teaching framework, which includes over 330 specific instructional strategies, 43 instructional elements, and 10 design questions. Each chapter outlines actionable steps, tips, and examples of implementation that will set you (and your students) up to succeed with this powerful framework in your classroom. Added insight into Marzano’s research-based instructional strategies and teaching methods: Learn the history of Robert J. Marzano’s framework of teaching methods first laid out in his best-selling The Art and Science of Teaching. Thoroughly examine the updated The New Art and Science of Teaching framework for competency-based education. Explore numerous instructional strategies that correspond to each of the 43 elements of The New Art and Science of Teaching. Acquire examples that will assist in the realization of the instructional strategies discussed throughout the book. Discover strategies that will improve both the mental and physical environment of the classroom to better support student success. Reimagine how to develop relationships with students and generate student engagement.Access free reproducibles that will assist in implementing The New Art and Science of Teaching framework in classrooms. A joint publication of ASCD and Solution Tree Contents: Introduction Part I: Feedback Chapter 1: Providing and Communicating Clear Learning Goals Chapter 2: Using Assessments Part II: Content Chapter 3: Conducting Direct Instruction Lessons Chapter 4: Conducting Practicing and Deepening Lessons Chapter 5: Conducting Knowledge Application Lessons Chapter 6: Using Strategies That Appear in All Types of Lessons Part III: Context Chapter 7: Using Engagement Strategies Chapter 8: Implementing Rules and Procedures Chapter 9: Building Relationships Chapter 10: Communicating High Expectations Appendix Reproducibles References and Resources Books in The New Art and Science of Teaching series: The New Art and Science of Teaching The Handbook for the New Art and Science of Teaching The New Art and Science of Teaching Reading The New Art and Science of Teaching Writing The New Art and Science of Classroom Assessment

# data[].attributes.headline
High Leverage Practices for Inclusive Classrooms, 2nd Edition 

# data[].attributes.subject
High Leverage Practices for Inclusive Classrooms, 2nd Edition 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
James McLeskey is Professor in the School of Special Education, School Psychology, and Early Childhood Studies at the University of Florida, and project staff member for the CEEDAR Center.

Lawrence Maheady is Professor and Horace Mann Endowed Chair in the Exceptional Education Department at SUNY Buffalo State.

Bonnie Billingsley is Professor of Teaching and Learning at Virginia Tech. She teaches in both the teacher preparation and doctoral programs at Virginia Tech.

Mary T. Brownell is a Distinguished Professor of Special Education at the University of Florida and Director of the Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability and Reform (CEEDAR) Center.

Timothy J. Lewis is Curators' Distinguished Professor of Special Education, Director of the University of Missouri Center for School-wide Positive Behavior Support, and Co-director of the Center on Positive Behavioural Interventions and Supports (PBIS).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
High Leverage Practices for Inclusive Classrooms

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
High Leverage Practices for Inclusive Classrooms, Second Edition offers a set of practices that are integral to the support of student learning, and that can be systematically taught, learned, and implemented by those entering the teaching profession.

# data[].attributes.headline
Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching by Anita Archer & Charles Hughes

# data[].attributes.subject
Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching by Anita Archer & Charles Hughes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Anita L. Archer, PhD, is an educational consultant to school districts on explicit instruction, the design and delivery of instruction, behavior management, and literacy instruction. She has taught elementary and middle school students and is the recipient of 10 awards honoring her excellence in teaching and contributions to the field of education. Dr. Archer has served on the faculties of San Diego State University, the University of Washington in Seattle, and the University of Oregon in Eugene. She is nationally known for her professional development activities, having presented in every state over the course of her 40-year career. Dr. Archer is coauthor of numerous curriculum materials addressing reading, writing, and study skills (with Mary Gleason), and of the book Explicit Instruction (with Charles A. Hughes). She is also author of the professional development DVDs Golden Principles of Explicit Instruction, Active Participation: Getting Them All Engaged, Elementary Level, and Active Participation: Getting Them All Engaged, Secondary Level. Charles A. Hughes, PhD, is Professor of Special Education in the Department of Educational and School Psychology at The Pennsylvania State University and Adjunct Senior Scientist at the University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning in Lawrence. Prior to joining the Penn State faculty in 1985, Dr. Hughes worked in schools for 14 years as a general and special education teacher, a state-level consultant, and an educational diagnostician. His research interests focus on the development and validation of self-instructional strategies to help students with learning and behavior problems manage their academic and classroom behaviors. He has published over 100 articles, books, book chapters, and curriculum materials and has served as President and Executive Director of the Council for Exceptional Children's Division for Learning Disabilities and editor of the Council's journal Learning Disabilities Research and Practice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explicit instruction is systematic, direct, engaging, and success oriented--and has been shown to promote achievement for all students. This highly practical and accessible resource gives special and general education teachers the tools to implement explicit instruction in any grade level or content area.

# data[].attributes.body
Using worked examples is an important part of explicit instruction because it helps to reduce students' cognitive load as students are able to focus their attention on the most important lesson components.

This video is an example of using a worked example in a math class.

# data[].attributes.headline
How to Give Feedback to Students: A Guidebook

# data[].attributes.subject
How to Give Feedback to Students: A Guidebook

# data[].attributes.body
Feedback is a high impact teaching strategy. When done well, research shows that providing your students with feedback boosts their results by 27 percentile points. Put another way, by providing regular feedback and doing it well, you can move a child from a C to a B+. However, to achieve this, you need to know how to give feedback to your students. You can learn how to harness the potential power of effective feedback by reading our eBook How to Give Feedback to Students – the Advanced Guide.

# data[].attributes.body
Source: The collective wisdom of authors published in the September 2012 issue of Education Leadership. "Feedback for Learning." (Volume 70, Issue 1)

# data[].attributes.headline
Strategies in Seconds: Video Examples of OTRs with students from CIBRS

# data[].attributes.subject
Strategies in Seconds: Video Examples of OTRs with students from CIBRS

# data[].attributes.body
The CENTER FOR INSTRUCTIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH IN SCHOOLS (CIBRS) has created videos called Strategies in seconds. These are short videos (2 minutes or less) demonstrating evidence-based strategies. These are great examples of ways to increase the number of Opportunities to Respond (OTRs) in your classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
About Strategies in seconds are short videos (2 minutes or less) demonstrating evidence-based strategies.

# data[].attributes.headline
High Leverage Practices: Explicit Instruction

# data[].attributes.subject
High Leverage Practices: Explicit Instruction

# data[].attributes.body
A quick, 6 minute, video that gives an overview of what Explicit Instruction is and how it looks in classrooms. Explicit instruction helps students to understand the concepts being taught and uses clarity, modeling, and authentic examples.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
High Leverage Practices: Explicit Instruction

# data[].attributes.body
A short, 10 minute video, giving a quick overview on what a High Leverage Practice is and how to use them. There is a pre-assessment and guided notes to partner with the video.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Features of Explicit Instruction: Training Modules | NCII

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore four in-depth training modules focused on key components of the features of explicit instruction and supporting practices for effective implementation.