Content deleted Content added
m Open access bot: doi added to citation with #oabot. |
Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.1 |
||
Line 40:
While proponents of constructivism argue that constructivist students perform better than their peers when tested on higher-order reasoning, the critics of constructivism argue that this teaching technique forces students to "[[Reinventing the wheel|reinvent the wheel]]". Supporters counter that "Students do not reinvent the wheel but, rather, attempt to understand how it turns, how it functions."<ref name="thirteenorg"/> Proponents argue that students—especially [[elementary school]]-aged children—are naturally curious about the world, and giving them the tools to explore it in a guided manner will serve to give them a stronger understanding of it.<ref name="thirteenorg"/>
Mayer (2004)<ref name="Mayer">[http://projects.ict.usc.edu/itw/vtt/MayerThreeStrikesAP04.pdf Should There Be a Three-Strikes Rule Against Pure Discovery Learning?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150215142158/http://projects.ict.usc.edu/itw/vtt/MayerThreeStrikesAP04.pdf |date=2015-02-15 }}, Mayer, 2004, ''American Psychologist, 59''(1), 14–19</ref> developed a literature review spanning fifty years and concluded "The research in this brief review shows that the formula constructivism = hands-on activity is a formula for educational disaster." His argument is that [[active learning]] is often suggested by those subscribing to this philosophy. In developing this instruction these educators produce materials that require learning to be behaviorally active and not be "cognitively active".<ref name="Mayer" /> That is, although they are engaged in activity, they may not be learning (Sweller, 1988). Mayer recommends using guided discovery, a mix of direct instruction and hands-on activity, rather than pure discovery: "In many ways, guided discovery appears to offer the best method for promoting constructivist learning."<ref name="Mayer" />
Kirchner et al. (2006) agree with the basic premise of constructivism, that learners construct knowledge, but are concerned with the instructional design recommendations of this theoretical framework. "The constructivist description of learning is accurate, but the instructional consequences suggested by constructivists do not necessarily follow." (Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark, 2006, p. 78). Specifically, they say instructors often design unguided instruction that relies on the learner to "discover or construct essential information for themselves" (Kirchner et al., 2006, p75).
| |||