Does Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning?.

By Louis Alfieri, Patricia J. Brooks, Naomi J. Aldrich, H. Tenenbaum. 2011

1,309 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Discovery learning approaches to education have recently come under scrutiny (Tobias & Duffy, 2009), with many studies indicating limitations to discovery learning practices. Therefore, 2 meta-analyses were conducted using a sample of 164 studies: The 1st examined the effects of unassisted discovery learning versus explicit instruction, and the 2nd examined the effects of enhanced and/or assisted discovery versus other types of instruction (e.g., explicit, unassisted discovery). Random effects analyses of 580 comparisons revealed that outcomes were favorable for explicit instruction when compared with unassisted discovery under most conditions (d – 0.38, 95% CI [–.44, .31]). In contrast, analyses of 360 comparisons revealed that outcomes were favorable for enhanced discovery when compared with other forms of instruction (d 0.30, 95% CI [.23, .36]). The findings suggest that unassisted discovery does not benefit learners, whereas feedback, worked examples, scaffolding, and elicited explanations do.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/66de567d0a1fc1a1da77d494757f81377e4b26cf

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Integrating direct and inquiry-based instruction in the teaching of critical thinking: an intervention study (2014, background): “…neither the direct nor the inquiry-based instructional approach displays an overriding advantage over the other, many have argued that it is hard to place and provide an insight into why inquiry-based instruction and direct instruction should be regarded as absolute opposites (Alfieri et al. 2011).”
Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction (2011, background): “Table 8.1 Features and Cues for Throwing (adopted from Knudson & Morrison, 1996)”
How Are The Physics Critical Thinking Skills of The Students Taught by Using Inquiry-Discovery Through Empirical and Theorethical Overview? (2017, background): “The knowledge process is observing, categorizing, making hypothesis, explaining, measuring, drawing conclusions and so on (Alfieri et al, 2011).”
Inquiry-Based Learning: Student Teachers’ Challenges and Perceptions (2019, background): “Alfieri et al. (2011) refer to the benefits of IBL in the classroom by explaining that, “allowing students to interact with materials, models, manipulate variables,”
Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics (2014, background): “In the STEM classroom, should we ask or should we tell? Addressing this question is essential if scientists are committed to teaching based on evidence rather than tradition (4).”
The Emergence of Scientific Reasoning (2012, background): “What there appears to be little evidence for is “pure discovery learning” in which students are given little or no guidance and expected to discover rules of problem solving or other skills on their own (Alfieri et al., 2011; Mayer, 2004).”