Re: [tips] Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching?

[Joan Warmbold]

Does any other industrialized country have this ongoing debate between
direction instruction versus inquiry learning?  I believe not.  Might that
not possibly give us some insight into why our students perform below par
on achievement tests in almost every area when compared to other
countries?

Inquiry learning is a terrific idea for the advanced and highly motivated
student who have the necessary skills and knowledge base to proceed on
their own effectively.  For those teaching graduate classes and advanced
level courses for honor students, more power to you.  But for the average
student learning the basics in any area, the Vygotsky model makes far
better sense than the Piagetian model.  For those who are interested:
Plumert, J., et al. (1996) Parental scaffolding of young children's
spatial communication." Developmental Psychology, 32, 523-532; Diaz,1991.3
year olds learning to distinguish colors/shapes; Pratt et al.,
1992.Fifth-graders learning how to carry out long division; Radziszewska,
1998, Comparison of the effectiveness of peers to parents in helping
children plan and organize a shopping trip through an imaginary town.

As per Annette's comments, in this latter study, children who worked with
adults were exposed to more sophisticated planning strategies, explored a
map of the town more frequently, planned longer sequences of activities,
and verbalized more of their plans.  They also formulated integrated
sequences whereas when working with a peer, the children used more of a
step-by-step approach.  In the second part of the experiment, all the
children were observed as they planned a new errand in the town, THIS TIME
BY THEMSELVES.  Children who had initially worked with their parents
employed more efficient planning strategies than children who had worked
with peers.

Joan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




>
> *************************************************
> ABSTRACT:  Bev Ferrell in an ITFORUM post  of 17 October 2007 titled
> "Clark- constructivist?" wrote: "I ran across . . . .["Why Minimal
> Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure
> of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and
> Inquiry-Based Teaching" by Kirschner,  Sweller, &  Clark (2006)]. . .
> .  [and]. . .was wondering what your interpretation would be . . . "
> Among the eight response was one to the effect that standard
> categories such as those in the title of Kirschner et al. may
> "prevent us from seeing into the heart of design problems and their
> solutions."  I agree and regard the the article by Kirschner et al.
> as a failure to communicate because the terms used by them are not
> operationally defined.
> *************************************************
>
>


---