Worked examples confer a larger advantage over unassisted discovery than direct teaching does¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2011 · checked against its sources 2026-10-19 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Participants learning with worked examples (d = -0.63) outperformed unassisted discovery to a greater extent than participants learning from direct teaching (d = -0.29), Q(1) = 18.98, p < .001. → Alfieri 2011

Evidence¶

Alfieri 2011¶

Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021017

q3 · i2 · medium effect, d = -0.63 for unassisted discovery vs worked examples (negative favours worked examples) · quant-synthesis · r2

Comparison-condition moderator analysis in the unassisted-discovery meta-analysis, Q(5) = 32.31, p < .001. Unassisted discovery fared worse against direct teaching (d = -0.29), feedback (d = -0.46), worked examples (d = -0.63), and explanations provided (d = -0.28); the quote shows worked examples beat direct teaching in magnitude.

"Post hoc comparisons revealed that effect sizes for direct teaching and worked examples were significantly different from one another, Q(1) = 18.98, p < .001, and indicated that participants learning with worked examples outperformed participants learning through unassisted discovery to a greater extent than did participants learning from direct teaching outperformed participants learning from unassisted discovery."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Example-based sequences outperform problem-only practice for novices, and fading support is argued to aid transfer — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Explicit instruction produces greater learning than unassisted discovery learning under most conditions — a broader claim this one bears on