Direct instruction vs. discovery: The long view

D. Klahr and M. Nigam (2004) make a case for the superiority of direct instruction over discovery learning in students' mastery of the control-of-variables strategy central to the scientific method. In the present work, we examine acquisition of this strategy among students of the same age as those studied by Klahr and Nigam, as well as follow central features of their design in directly comparing the two methods. In contrast to their design, however, we follow progress over an extended time period and a range of equivalent tasks. Three groups of 15 fourth-grade students, of diverse socioeconomic background, were compared. One group engaged in 12 sessions over 10 weeks working on problems that required the control-of-variables strategy for effective solution. Another group engaged in the same activity, preceded by a session involving direct instruction on the control-of-variables strategy. A third group received only the initial direct instruction, without subsequent engagement and practice. In this longer term framework, direct instruction appears to be neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for robust acquisition or for maintenance over time. The patterns of attainment observed here point instead to a gradual and extended process of acquisition and consolidation. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed91:384–397, 2007

[1]  I. Sigel,et al.  HANDBOOK OF CHILD PSYCHOLOGY , 2006 .

[2]  K. Crowley,et al.  The microgenetic method. A direct means for studying cognitive development. , 1991, The American psychologist.

[3]  D. Kuhn Microgenetic Study of Change: What Has It Told Us? , 1995 .

[4]  J. Lagowski National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[5]  D. Kuhn,et al.  Cognition, Perception, and Language , 1997 .

[6]  D. Klahr,et al.  All other things being equal: acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. , 1999, Child development.

[7]  Audrey B. Champagne,et al.  The National Science Education Standards. , 2000 .

[8]  Corinne Zimmerman The development of scientific reasoning skills. , 2000 .

[9]  D. Kuhn Why development does (and does not) occur : Evidence from the domain of inductive reasoning , 2001 .

[10]  R. Mayer Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. , 2004, The American psychologist.

[11]  Milena K. Nigam,et al.  The Equivalence of Learning Paths in Early Science Instruction: Effects of Direct Instruction and Discovery Learning , 2022 .

[12]  Brian J. Reiser,et al.  Scaffolding Complex Learning: The Mechanisms of Structuring and Problematizing Student Work , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[13]  Kathleen E. Metz Children's Understanding of Scientific Inquiry: Their Conceptualization of Uncertainty in Investigations of Their Own Design , 2004 .

[14]  D. Kuhn,et al.  Is Developing Scientific Thinking All About Learning to Control Variables? , 2005, Psychological science.

[15]  J. Frederiksen,et al.  A Theoretical Framework and Approach for Fostering Metacognitive Development , 2005 .

[16]  W. Sandoval Understanding Students' Practical Epistemologies and Their Influence on Learning Through Inquiry , 2005 .

[17]  B. Rittle-Johnson,et al.  Promoting transfer: effects of self-explanation and direct instruction. , 2006, Child development.

[18]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching , 2006 .

[19]  D. Kuhn,et al.  The Second Decade: What Develops (and How) , 2007 .

[20]  Richard A. Duschl,et al.  Reconsidering the Character and Role of Inquiry in School Science: Framing the Debates , 2008 .