Peer instruction is less effective than explicit teacher creativity teaching for lower-level students¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Peer- and teacher-instruction were equally effective on average, but for lower-level students explicit creativity teaching by the teacher was more effective than peer instruction. → van der Zanden 2020

Evidence¶

van der Zanden 2020¶

van der Zanden, P. J. A. C.; Meijer, P. C.; Beghetto, R. A. (2020). A review study about creativity in adolescence: Where is the social context? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 38, article 100702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100702

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review reports, citing a quasi-experimental pre-post study (N = 127, China) by Wang and Murota (2016) on technical creativity, that "explicit creativity teaching by the teacher was more effective in increasing their creativity than peer instruction" for lower-level students; the two were equally effective on average.

"However, for lower-level students explicit creativity teaching by the teacher was more effective in increasing their creativity than peer instruction."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Review synthesis: explicit teaching matters, but its advantage over other approaches varies by context and structure — a broader claim this one bears on
• Cognitive modeling raised division skill more than didactic instruction while both raised self-efficacy equally, with self-efficacy mediating treatment effects — reports the opposite
• Inquiry Based Teaching Improves Science Achievement — related
• Explicit grammar teaching outperforms implicit teaching; one review found the advantage only for complex rules, but a meta-analysis found it for simple rules too — related
• Self-explanation beats unguided studying for equal time, but instructional explanations, problem solving and retrieval practice can be equally or more effective — related