Klahr David, Nigam Milena
Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890, USA.
Psychol Sci. 2004 Oct;15(10):661-7. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00737.x.
In a study with 112 third- and fourth-grade children, we measured the relative effectiveness of discovery learning and direct instruction at two points in the learning process: (a) during the initial acquisition of the basic cognitive objective (a procedure for designing and interpreting simple, unconfounded experiments) and (b) during the subsequent transfer and application of this basic skill to more diffuse and authentic reasoning associated with the evaluation of science-fair posters. We found not only that many more children learned from direct instruction than from discovery learning, but also that when asked to make broader, richer scientific judgments, the many children who learned about experimental design from direct instruction performed as well as those few children who discovered the method on their own. These results challenge predictions derived from the presumed superiority of discovery approaches in teaching young children basic procedures for early scientific investigations.
在一项针对112名三、四年级儿童的研究中,我们在学习过程的两个阶段测量了发现式学习和直接教学的相对有效性:(a) 在初步掌握基本认知目标(设计和解释简单、无混淆实验的程序)期间;(b) 在随后将这项基本技能转移并应用于与评估科学展览海报相关的更广泛、更真实的推理过程中。我们发现,不仅从直接教学中学习的儿童比从发现式学习中学习的儿童多得多,而且当被要求做出更广泛、更丰富的科学判断时,那些通过直接教学学习实验设计的许多儿童的表现与那些自己发现方法的少数儿童一样好。这些结果挑战了基于发现式方法在教授幼儿早期科学探究基本程序方面的假定优越性而得出的预测。