In President Lyndon Johnson’s 1967 state of the union address , he proposed 120 million dollars for the program (to serve approximately 200,000 children from disadvantaged backgrounds). However, when funding for the project was approved by Congress, a fraction of that amount—merely 15 million dollars —was authorized . This necessitated a change in strategy by the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO), the government agency charged with oversight of the program (Egbert, 1981, pp. 3-4; Stebbins, et al, 1977, p. 2; Watkins, 1997, p. 4). Instead, program administrators made the “brilliant decision… (to) convert Follow Through from a service program to a research and development program (Evans, 1981, p. 5). A “doodle” by President Johnson made during a cabinet level meeting Presented by Brent Daigle, Ph.D. (ABD)
Project Follow Through was the largest and most expensive federally funded experiment in education ever conducted . The most extensive evaluation of Follow Through data covers the years 1968-1977 ; however, the program continued to receive funding from the government until 1995 (Egbert, 1981, p. 7). Follow Through was originally intended to be an extension of the government’s Head Start program , which delivered important educational, health, and social services to typically disadvantaged preschool children and their families. The function of Follow Through, therefore, was to provide a continuation of these services to students in their early elementary years. Presented by Brent Daigle, Ph.D. (ABD)
Siegfried Engelmann Wesley C. Becker Worked collaboratively to identify teaching methods that would accelerate the performance of historically disadvantaged elementary school students. Presented by Brent Daigle, Ph.D. (ABD)
Features of DI include: Explicit, systematic instruction based on scripted lesson plans. Ability grouping. Students are grouped and re-grouped based on their rate of progress through the program. The DISTAR ( Direct Instruction System for Teaching Arithmetic and Reading ) program gained prominence during Project Follow Through (1967-1995), the largest federally funded experiment in public education . Presented by Brent Daigle, Ph.D. (ABD)
Emphasis on pace and efficiency of instruction . DI programs are meant to accelerate the performance of students; therefore, lessons are designed to bring students to mastery as quickly as possible. Frequent assessment . Curriculum-based assessments help place students in ability groups and identify students who require additional intervention. Embedded professional development/coaching. DI programs may be implemented as stand-alone interventions or as part of a school-wide reform effort. In both instances, the program developers recommend careful monitoring and coaching of the program in order to ensure a high fidelity of implementation.
Bottom Line – Is it effective …? <ul><li>A meta-analysis conducted by Adams & Engelmann (1996) finds a " mean effect size average per study...(as) more than .75 , which suggests that the overall effect is substantial ." </li></ul><ul><li>Other educators (Weaver, 2001) (Casbergue, 2006) have asserted that a balanced approach to literacy that is based on collaboration between teacher and student will foster positive and meaningful outcomes in reading and the reading process . </li></ul><ul><li>Wisconsin Policy Research Institute Report, Vol. 14, No. 2, March 2001 : "this study draws two conclusions . One, it is much more effective for children , especially poor children , to be taught with the approach called Direct Instruction . Secondly , it is much more efficient for Wisconsin taxpayers to have their money spent on reading programs that work , rather than wasting millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars, annually on trendy school of education programs that have failed in the past, are failing in the present, and will fail in the future." </li></ul>Presented by Brent Daigle, Ph.D. (ABD)
Direct Instruction – When I Say Rock! “ I was like ‘oh my goodness’, you totally have to practice at home or you’re gonna end up sitting there and trying to learn it in front of the children”. “ For the first two months, I cried every day” Presented by Brent Daigle, Ph.D. (ABD)
McGraw-Hill Building New York City The End Presented by Brent Daigle, Ph.D. (ABD)