Expository instruction versus a discovery method.

Guthrie, John T.

doi:10.1037/h0024112

Cited by 54 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Ausubel further cautions that hands-on activity without cognitive engagement would not lead to meaningful learning. What he called discovery learning, as advocated by Bruner (1961Bruner ( , 1971 and others (Guthrie, 1967), subsequently developed into today's commonly known inquiry instruction (National Research Council, 2000b). This approach advocates that learners engage with the practices of science during concept learning, that is, in activities that reflect the investigative nature of science (Guthrie, 1967).…”

Section: Science Teaching Orientation Spectrummentioning

confidence: 99%

“…What he called discovery learning, as advocated by Bruner (1961Bruner ( , 1971 and others (Guthrie, 1967), subsequently developed into today's commonly known inquiry instruction (National Research Council, 2000b). This approach advocates that learners engage with the practices of science during concept learning, that is, in activities that reflect the investigative nature of science (Guthrie, 1967). Unfortunately, Ausubel's two-dimensional framework of orthogonal constructs often tended to be collapsed to one dimension, with direct instruction implicitly equated with rote learning, and inquiry instruction with meaningful learning.…”

Section: Science Teaching Orientation Spectrummentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pedagogy of Science Teaching Tests: Formative assessments of science teaching orientations

Cobern

Schuster

Adams

et al. 2014

International Journal of Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A critical aspect of teacher education is gaining pedagogical content knowledge of how to teach science for conceptual understanding. Given the time limitations of college methods courses, it is difficult to touch on more than a fraction of the science topics potentially taught across grades K-8, particularly in the context of relevant pedagogies. This research and development work centers on constructing a formative assessment resource to help expose pre-service teachers to a greater number of science topics within teaching episodes using various modes of instruction. To this end, 100 problem-based, science pedagogy assessment items were developed via expert group discussions and pilot testing. Each item contains a classroom vignette followed by response choices carefully crafted to include four basic pedagogies (didactic direct, active direct, guided inquiry, and open inquiry). The brief but numerous items allow a substantial increase in the number of science topics that pre-service students may consider. The intention is that students and teachers will be able to share and discuss particular responses to individual items, or else record their responses to collections of items and thereby create a snapshot profile of their teaching orientations. Subsets of items were piloted with students in pre-service science methods courses, and the quantitative results of student responses were spread sufficiently to suggest that the items can be effective for their intended purpose.

show abstract

Section: Science Teaching Orientation Spectrummentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Science Teaching Orientation Spectrummentioning

confidence: 99%

Pedagogy of Science Teaching Tests: Formative assessments of science teaching orientations

Cobern

Schuster

Adams

et al. 2014

International Journal of Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, as the small effect sizes suggest, not all studies with digital procedural learning tasks found a transfer benefit for more exploration (e.g., Debowski, Wood, & Bandura, 2001;Dyer, Singh, & Clark, 2005;Yorke, 2005). And there were problem-solving studies that received more benefit from the more exploratory conditions (e.g., Guthrie, 1967;McDaniel & Schlager, 1990;Wood, Kakebeeke, Debowski, & Frese, 2000).…”

Section: Procedural Versus Problem-solving Tasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Costs and Benefits of More Learner Freedom

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Individual meta-analyses were conducted for six training methods as part of a U.S. Army basic research project. The objective was to identify evidence-based guidelines for the effectiveness of each training method, under different moderating conditions, for cognitive skill transfer in adult learning. Results and implications for two of these training methods, learner control (LC) and exploratory learning (EL), are discussed. LC provides learners with active control over training variables. EL requires learners to discover relationships and interactions between variables.Background: There is mixed evidence on the effectiveness of both LC and EL learning methods on transfer relative to more guided training methods. Cognitive load theory (CLT) provides a basis for predicting that training strategies that manage intrinsic load of a task during training and minimize extraneous load will avail more resources that can be devoted to learning.Method: Meta-analyses were conducted using a Hedges's g analysis of effect sizes. Control conditions with little to no learner freedom were contrasted with treatment conditions manipulating more learner freedom.Results: Overall more LC was no different from training with limited or no learner control, and more EL was less effective than limited or no exploration; however, each can be effective under certain conditions. Both strategies have been more effective for cognitive skill learning than for knowledge recall tasks. LC exhibited more benefit to very near transfer, whereas EL's benefit was to far transfer.Conclusion: Task type, transfer test, and transfer distance moderate the overall transfer cost of more learner freedom.Application: The findings are applicable to the development of instructional design guidelines for the use of LC and EL in adult skill training.

show abstract

“…What Ausubel called Bdiscovery^learning, as advocated by Bruner (1961Bruner ( , 1971) and others (e.g., Guthrie, 1967), subsequently developed into today's inquiry-based instruction (NRC 2000b). Unfortunately, much of the literature since the late 1980s tends to collapse Ausubel's two-dimensional framework of separate orthogonal constructs into a single dimension, with direct instruction implicitly identified with rote learning and inquiry instruction with meaningful learning.…”

Section: Ausubel's Conceptual Framework For Learning and Instructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning of Core Disciplinary Ideas: Efficacy Comparison of Two Contrasting Modes of Science Instruction

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science curricula and teaching methods vary greatly, depending in part on which facets of science are emphasized, e.g., core disciplinary ideas or science practices and process skills, and perspectives differ considerably on desirable pedagogies. Given the multi-faceted nature of science and the variety of teaching methods found in practice, it is no simple task to determine what teaching approaches might be most effective and for what purposes. Research into relative efficacy faces considerable challenges, with confounding factors, ambiguities, conflations, and lack of controls being threats to validity. We provide a conceptual framework characterizing the many teaching strategies found in practice as being variants of two fundamental contrasting epistemic modes, and we disentangle conflations of terms and confusions of constructs in both teaching practice and research. Instructional units for two science topics were developed in parallel in the alternative epistemic modes, differing in concept learning paths but otherwise equivalent. We conducted a randomized controlled study of the comparative efficacy of the two modes for learning core disciplinary ideas, using operationally defined active-direct and guided-inquiry teaching methods. Five middle school teachers taught each unit in both modes over 4 years of classroom trials in an 8-day summer program for eighth grade students. Student understanding of core ideas was assessed using pre-and post-tests, and learning gains were analyzed by mode, teacher, topic, and trial year. Although routes to concept understanding were very different in the two modes, eventual student learning gains were similar, within statistical variation. Efficacy variations between and within teachers were greater than between modes, indicating the importance of teacher effects on student achievement. Findings suggest that teachers need not be bound to one mode throughout and can flexibly decide on the pedagogical approach for each concept and situation, on several grounds other than efficacy of core content acquisition alone.

show abstract

Expository instruction versus a discovery method.

Cited by 54 publications

References 8 publications

Pedagogy of Science Teaching Tests: Formative assessments of science teaching orientations

Pedagogy of Science Teaching Tests: Formative assessments of science teaching orientations

Costs and Benefits of More Learner Freedom

Learning of Core Disciplinary Ideas: Efficacy Comparison of Two Contrasting Modes of Science Instruction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About