Talk:Direct instruction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is not NPOV -- it consists mainly of quotations from pro-DI websites, with no mention whatsoever of criticisms. I don't know enough about the topic to make it NPOV, but I hope someone can. Vardamana 14:08, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
- The above reservation does not list specific quotes he/she takes issue with. The user above also does not appear to exist anymore. User:Harriska2 23 Nov 2006
- The above appears to remain an issue, thus I am leaving the NPOV request on the article. Kukini 15:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Please, the assertions this author makes are in dear need of substantiation. Additionally, "direct instruction" as a term can be applied in many ways and refers to more and broader intructional theories than the "Direct Instruction" movement.
As this is the only article on direct instruction submitted thus far, I am scared it will be read by some as fact, despite the many "citation needed" tags. This is corrupt information, and though W has marked it as possibly biased, I'm scared it will be cited. Please don't use this article as though it holds any authority!! There are wonderful definitions all over the place. Just hit Google, or any number of university websites, if you are doing online research. Please do not use this article to guide any definitions of "direct instruction!"
-Marged Howley, Master's Candidate, Ohio University College of Education
- No offense but the above user is part of the education system and didn't even bother to create a wiki account to raise issues and contribute. Again, the above reservation does not point out specific issues. There is a difference between "direct instruction" (general) and "Direct Instruction" (Engelmann, University of Oregon, SRA, and others). It should really be capital "D" and capital "I". User:Harriska2 23 Nov 2006