Direct instruction and discovery are complementary rather than opposite, linked by repetitive yet explorative practice¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Direct instruction and discovery are not opposites but complementary, linked by repetitive yet explorative practice. → Trninic 2018

Evidence¶

Trninic 2018¶

Trninic, D. (2018). Instruction, repetition, discovery: restoring the historical educational role of practice. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9443-z

q1 · i? · theoretical · r2

Theoretical argument of a conceptual paper, elaborated through an empirical case of martial arts instruction and Bernstein's notion of repetition-without-repetition. The article states the two are “not opposite but complementary, linked by repetitive yet explorative practice.”

"The general claim being made is that “direct instruction” and “discovery” are not opposite but complementary, linked by repetitive yet explorative practice."

Discussion¶

In practice this means structuring varied exercises so that repetitive practice supports sense-making.

Related Claims¶

• Parallels between explorative practice and canonical mathematics practice are recognized among mathematicians
• Empirical case of martial arts instruction grounds the argument that practice can support discovery — related
• Strong guidance and repetition may be needed to discover what cannot be told (Trninic's martial arts case) — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Productive Failure Improves Conceptual Learning — related
• Minimal guidance is less effective for novices than explicit instruction — related