Does Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning?
Does Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0021017
复制
发表时间：
2011-02-01
影响因子：
4.9
通讯作者：
Tenenbaum, Harriet R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Alfieri, Louis;Brooks, Patricia J.;Tenenbaum, Harriet R.
发现学习的教育方法最近受到审查（Tobias & Duffy，2009），许多研究表明发现学习实践的局限性。因此，使用164项研究的样本进行了2项荟萃分析：第一项研究检查了无辅助发现学习与明确教学的效果，第二项研究检查了增强和/或辅助发现与其他类型教学（例如，显式的、无辅助的发现）。对580项比较的随机效应分析显示，在大多数情况下，与无辅助发现相比，明确指导的结果是有利的（d =-0.38，95%CI [-0.44，-0.31]）。相比之下，360个比较的分析显示，与其他形式的教学相比，结果有利于增强发现（d = 0.30，95% CI [.23，.36]）。研究结果表明，独立的发现并不有利于学习者，而反馈，工作的例子，脚手架，并引发解释。
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.