Louis Alfieri, Patricia J. Brooks, and
Naomi J. Aldrich
City University of New York
Harriet R. Tenenbaum
Journal of Educational Psychology 2011, Vol. 103, No. 1, 1–18, disponible ici
Discovery learning approaches to education have recently come under scrutiny (Tobias & Duffy, 2009), with many studies indicating limitations to discovery learning practices. Therefore, 2 meta-analyses were conducted using a sample of 164 studies: The 1st examined the effects of unassisted discovery learning versus explicit instruction, and the 2nd examined the effects of enhanced and/or assisted discovery versus other types of instruction (e.g., explicit, unassisted discovery). Random effects analyses of 580 comparisons revealed that outcomes were favorable for explicit instruction when compared with unassisted discovery under most conditions (d –0.38, 95% CI [–.44, .31]). In contrast, analyses of 360 comparisons revealed that outcomes were favorable for enhanced discovery when compared with other forms of instruction (d 0.30, 95% CI [.23, .36]). The findings suggest that unassisted discovery does not benefit learners, whereas feedback, worked examples, scaffolding, and elicited explanations do.
La lecture de cette méta-analyse suscite un questionnement: Pourquoi utiliser la découverte même guidée alors que l'enseignement explicite est efficace? Les approches par découverte sont efficaces seulement lorsque le guidage est fortement structurée!!!