为什么“少教不教”不管用——建构教学、发现教学、问题教学、体验教学与探究教学失败析因

Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work:An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist,Discovery,Problem-Based,Experiential,and Inquiry-Based Teaching

人的认知架构特点、专家和新手的区别以及认知负荷理论都充分证实了"指导性教学"的优越性。虽然眼下信奉"少教不教法"非常盛行,乍一看还挺诱人,但它忽略了人的认知架构特点和近半个世纪以来持续的实证研究结论。研究表明,重视对学习过程提供指导比一味主张少教不教效果更好、效率更高。只有当学生具备了充分的原有经验可以进行"自我指导"时,教师指导的优势才会逐渐减弱。本文简要讨论了教学理论和设计新近研究中支持开展教学指导的各种主张。

Evidence for the superiority of guided instruction is explained in the context of our knowledge of human cognitive architecture,expert- novice differences,and cognitive load. Although unguided or minimally guided instructional approaches are very popular and intuitively appealing,the point is made that these approaches ignore both the structures that constitute human cognitive architecture and evidence from empirical studies over the past half- century that consistently indicate that minimally guided instruction is less effective and less efficient than instructional approaches that place a strong emphasis on guidance of the student learning process. The advantage of guidance begins to recede only when learners have sufficiently high prior knowledge to provide ＂internal＂guidance. Recent developments in instructional research and instructional design models that support guidance during instruction are briefly described.