Anthony Lucre

17124573
Researching Teaching and Learning 1
Assignment 2
Page 1

For this assignment I will be applying the article Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not
Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem Based, Experiential and Inquiry
Based Teaching” (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006)

Constructivism and its derivative pedagogical approaches have enjoyed significant popularity in
recent decades particularly in the teaching of Science and related disciplines. These pedagogical
approaches include: discovery learning, inquiry based learning, experiential learning and problem
based learning (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). Inquiry based learning in particular underpins the
new stage 6 NSW physics, chemistry and biology syllabuses for the Australian Curriculum (NSW
Education Standards Authority, 2018) and has significant influence over the stage 4 and stage 5
Science curriculum ( NSW Education Standards Authority, 2012). Given the wide ranging use of
constructivism in the teaching of science the articles claim that such methods are incompatible with
the modern understanding of human cognitive architecture (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006) has
significant implications for student learning outcomes.

For some time a debate has existed between advocates of constructivist (or minimally and non-
guided) pedagogy and those who favour guided instruction based pedagogical approaches. The
debate over which pedagogical approach results in the best learning outcomes for students is
founded in the conflicting beliefs about the way in which human beings learn.

Constructivism is the philosophical belief that new knowledge is built on previous understanding
using an active process by a thinking person (Haider & Yasmin, 2015). In other words that for
learning to be effective it must be experienced and made relevant rather than simply received
through communication (Cakir, 2008). Proponents of constructivist pedagogy suggest that the
modern theory of constructivism is a development on the previous work of (among others) Piaget,
Ausubel and Vygotsky (Cakir, 2008).
According to Piaget’s theories on cognition Knowledge and understanding are stored in long term
memory as metal patterns or schemes. For new material to be assimilated it must first be processed
and connected to pre-existing schemes (Cakir, 2008). Similarly Ausubel conceived knowledge as
being stored as a network of interconnected concepts. Novel information is more easily understood
and retained if it can be related to existing concepts (Cakir, 2008). Most significant of all to
constructivist pedagogy is Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory in particular the Zone of Proximal
development (Haider & Yasmin, 2015).
The zone of proximal development is defined as the difference between a student’s current level of
understanding (or the developmental threshold necessary for learning) and their potential level of
understanding for the subject under consideration (Bruner, 1985). On this basis proponents of
constructivism argue that pedagogical approaches that do not take into account the learners pre-
existing schemas or fail to link the new material with previous learnings will result in disconnected or
weakly associated knowledge and consequently poorer educational outcomes (Cakir, 2008).

Under the constructivist view of learning on encountering situations or information that cannot be
interpreted or understood by existing schemas the student enters a state of disequilibrium (Cakir,
2008). This state will force the learner to develop new schemas or modify existing understandings in
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Researching Teaching and Learning 1
Assignment 2
Page 2

order to restore balance to the cognitive system in a process Piaget termed accommodation (Cakir,
2008). This repeated process of disequilibration and accommodation formed the basis of minimal or
unguided teaching techniques.

In their article (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006) argue that rather than resulting in forced
accommodation the encountering of unfamiliar situations or information without guidance from the
teacher will result in a state of working memory overload.

Under the Atkinson and Shiffrin model of human cognition learning is controlled by the interaction
of working (or short term) memory and long term memory (Sweller, 2012). Long term memory forms
the central store of knowledge for human cognition and the basis for the processing of most
situations. It is thought to be limitless on scope and is largely unconscious in that the person is not
aware of the vast majority of knowledge stored (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). Working memory
in contrast is extremely limited in both scope and duration. When applied simply to store
information working memory is believed to be limited to between 4 and 7 novel pieces of
information. When processing information however this is reduced to between 2 and 3 items
depending on complexity (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). In addition most knowledge in working
memory that has not been transferred to long term memory is lost after approximately thirty
seconds (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). In the absence of Guidance or prior knowledge in long
term memory a student on encountering a novel situation is likely to attempt to find a solution
through either a process of logical deduction or random trial and error. In either case the number or
complexity of possible solutions is likely to exceed the capacity of working memory (Sweller, 2012)
resulting in a high cognitive load and reducing the capacity for long term retention (Kirschner,
Sweller, & Clark, 2006).

In summarising the article “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of
the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem Based, Experiential and Inquiry Based Teaching”
(Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006) the authors make a number of recommendations for teaching.
They begin by describing constructivist based pedagogies as unguided or minimally guided and show
how these pedagogies fail to take into account the limitations of human cognitive architecture
particularly working memory. In demonstrating how constructivist pedagogy results in high cognitive
loads for students and consequently reduced capacity for long term retention their first
recommendation is that teachers need to take into account human cognitive architecture when
designing learning activities (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). Advocates of constructivist pedagogy
argue that cognitive load can be reduced through the use of scaffolding and social learning
constructs (Haider & Yasmin, 2015) however the authors go on to state the guided instruction forms
the ultimate scaffold and as such results in superior knowledge retention (Kirschner, Sweller, &
Clark, 2006). The author’s second criticism of constructivist pedagogy is that is makes little or no
distinction between novice and expert learners (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). Many
constructivist teaching methods aim to teach by mimicking the process of experienced professionals
in their field e.g. the teaching of science through scientific procedure. They argue that since
professional researchers have accrued a broad general knowledge of the subject over many years
novice learners will require significantly more guidance in the form of direct teaching and that the
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Researching Teaching and Learning 1
Assignment 2
Page 3

lack of such guidance will leave students feeling lost or confused (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006).
In concluding this section the authors back up their arguments by stating that in controlled studies
comparing guided instruction with discovery and enquiry based teaching pedagogies guided
instruction results in more efficient teaching and better student retention for novice learners and
equal benefit for more experienced learners (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). They show that
similar findings have been found for experiential learning and medical problem based learning
approaches as well as for science education in schools particularly with lower ability students. They
conclude the article by recommending constructivist teaching activities be replaced with strong
instructional guidance particularly for novice to intermediate level learners (Kirschner, Sweller, &
Clark, 2006). To this end two examples of strong instruction are given in the article. The first method
worked examples works by using paired problems (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). The first
problem is solved either by the instructor or as a group while the second problem in each pair allows
the students to practice the method for themselves. Each pair of problems becomes progressively
more complex. The second example of strong instruction is process worksheets. This approach
scaffolds the process for solving a particular problem by allowing the student to break it down into a
number of steps and record the results of intermediate steps (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006).
Both of these examples seek to reduce the cognitive load on working memory experienced by
learners.

In applying the recommendations of this article I have chosen to examine a practical activity forming
part of the light, sound, Action Lesson plan 1.5 from the Science by doing website (Australian
Academy of Science, 2013). The activity takes place as part of the stage 5 physical world module of
NSW science syllabus for the Australian curriculum ( NSW Education Standards Authority, 2012). The
activity aims for students to conduct a practical experiment in order to identify the relationship
between the frequency, wavelength and speed of waves and from this relationship to derive the
wave equation

𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑤𝑎𝑣𝑒 = 𝐹𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 𝑋 𝑊𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ

The activity provides minimal instruction beyond the physical process required to carry out the
experiment and a brief description of the terms amplitude frequency and wavelength. In breaking
down this learning activity students are required to identify a number of concepts while conducting
the experiment. These include understanding the terms frequency, wavelength and velocity as they
relate to waves. In additions students are required through observation of waves on a string and
spring to link each of these concepts and to what they are observing and to understand the
relationship between them. This high degree of complexity and element interactivity is likely to
result in a high cognitive load (Sweller, 2012) leading to either a sense of frustration or simply a
failure to learn from the activity (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). The lesson plan and student
handout are included as appendix 1.

In modifying this activity I have aimed to decrease the cognitive load experienced by students
through increased use of guided instruction and by decreasing the extraneous cognitive load
inherent in the learning materials provided.
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Researching Teaching and Learning 1
Assignment 2
Page 4

Under my modified lesson plan students would first be introduced to the parts of a wave including
the frequency, wavelength and wave velocity. Students would be provided with a redesigned
handout. In the original handout the definitions provided were physically separated from the
diagrams of the wave. This separation risks students encountering the split attention effect in which
students are forced to integrate knowledge from multiple physical locations. The resulting high
extraneous cognitive load results in students being less able to fully understand the concept being
taught (Sweller, 2012). For my revised lesson the handout would be redesigned such that the
diagram of the wave is enlarged and the parts of wave with their definitions are clearly marked. In
addition students would be provided with a second different wave diagram and asked to mark and
measure each of the three concepts. This addition provides a worked example covering the
background knowledge required for practical activity (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006).

The second addition would be direct guidance introducing the wave equation. This would be
followed by a number of worked example pairs first demonstrating the solution and then allowing
the students to practice. These worked examples cover each of the applications of this equation to
allow students to understand the relationships between the concepts of velocity, frequency and
wavelength and how they can be applied (Sweller, 2012).

Only after completing these two guided instruction session would students carry out the experiment
themselves. In the original lesson activity students were expected to undertake this activity as a
discovery learning task. In my modified activity students will now undertake this task following a
period of direct instruction covering the concepts and relationships that they would previously have
been expected to discover for themselves. As a result students are now able to use the activity to
apply and consolidate this knowledge rather than being required to derive it for themselves.

In addition to the handouts demonstrated for the original task in my modified lesson students are
provided with a process handout with both the procedure and the wave equation given. Additionally
for both the string and spring activities students are provided with a table in the form of the wave
equation for them to record their measurements and calculate their results. This further reduces the
cognitive load by providing a visual reference for the students when carrying out the experiment and
recording results.

From examining and applying this article it is clear that student learning can be improved through
careful management of cognitive load through direct instruction teaching.
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Researching Teaching and Learning 1
Assignment 2
Page 5

Works Cited
NSW Education Standards Authority. (2012). Science K-10 Syllabus. Retrieved 03 12, 2018, from NSW
Education Standards Authority:
http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/assets/sciencek10/downloads/sciencek10_s5.pdf

Australian Academy of Science. (2013). Light, Sound, Action Lesson Plan. Retrieved from Science by
Doing: Engaging students with science:
https://www.sciencebydoing.edu.au/curriculum/teacher/light-sound-action/lesson-
plan/part1/activity5

Bruner, J. (1985). Vygotsky: An historical and conceptual perspective. In J. V. Wertsch, Culture,

communication, and cognition : Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 21-33). New York: Cambridge
University Press.

Cakir, M. (2008). Constructivist Approaches to Learning in Science and Their Implications for Science
Pedagogy: A Literature Review. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education,
193-206.

Haider , M., & Yasmin, A. (2015). Significance of Scaffolding and Peer Tutoring in the Light of
Vygotsky's Theory of Zone of Proximal Development. International Journal of Languages,
Literature and Linguistics, pp. 170-173.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not
Work: An analysis of the Failure of Construcivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experimental,
and Enquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 75-86.

NSW Education Standards Authority. (2018, 01 29). Chemistry Stage 6 Syllabus. Retrieved 3 2018, 6,
from NSW Education Standards Authority:
http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/assets/chemistry/chemistry-stage-6-syllabus-2017.pdf

NSW Education Standards Authority. (2018, 1 29). Physics Stage 6 Syllabus. Retrieved 3 6, 2018, from
NSW Education Standards Authority:
http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/assets/physics_stage_6/physics-stage-6-syllabus-2017.pdf

Sweller, J. (2012). Human Cognitive architecture: Why some instructional procedures work and
others do not. In Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (pp. 295-
325). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Researching Teaching and Learning 1
Assignment 2
Page 6

Appendix 1: Lesson plan and teaching materials

https://www.sciencebydoing.edu.au/curriculum/teacher/light-sound-action/lesson-
plan/part1/activity5
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Researching Teaching and Learning 1
Assignment 2
Page 7