Feedback because you asked.

This article took so long to say much of anything about Direct Instruction I wondered if it might be a sales pitch. My eyes glazed over halfway through. I can see from your participation in the comments thread that you are sincere, and having trouble articulating what DI is in an accessible way.

So I hopped on Wikipedia and looked up "Direct Instruction." The first paragraph told me everything I need to know:

"Direct instruction is a general term for the explicit teaching of a skill-set using lectures or demonstrations of the material, rather than exploratory models such as inquiry-based learning.

"This method is often contrasted with tutorials, participatory laboratory classes, discussion, recitation, seminars, workshops, observation, case study, active learning, practica or internships. Usually it involves some explication of the skill or subject matter to be taught and may or may not include an opportunity for student participation or individual practice. Some direct instruction is usually part of other methodologies, such as athletic coaching."

Okay, that does sound pretty cool. As someone with teaching experience, I've made use of it without knowing it was a thing, many times. And apparently, studies suggest it's exceptionally great at getting the point across -- awesome! My perception that the most notable incidences of using that method were especially effective with my students may not be off the mark!

I suggest you try to find a way to state, in your own words, what the bit I quoted is saying -- or, failing that, just explicitly quote Wikipedia within the first or second paragraph, and keep your whole essay to about 500 words or so pending the community's reaction and desire to learn more.