Evidence To Support Teacher-Centered Instruction

Larry Cuban writes a blog entitled “Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice”. In his most recent b;of he discusses what he calls teacher-centered instruction. He writes:

Because there is no one version of direct instruction (see herehere, and here) yet research studies and meta-analyses of Direct Instruction (note capital letters, please) have repeatedly concluded that students exposed to such a pedagogy outperform students receiving other forms of instruction, especially student-centered (e.g., project-based learning, “discovery learning”). Sounds like just another silly intellectual argument when it comes to the linkage between educational practice and research. Not so.

The research evidence that direct instruction (lower-case “d and “i”) and Direct Instruction (capital letters) have positive effects on student learning–as measured by standardized test scores–has been around for decades yet most educational researchers, policymakers, and practitioners who urge school and classroom decisions to be data-driven and evidenced-based have hardly popped champagne corks welcoming this clear direction for what teachers should incorporate in their classroom lessons (see here).

This is puzzling. 

To go to the blog: Evidence To Support Teacher-Centered Instruction (Part 2)