The DOI matches its Crossref record; 127 of the 140 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 6 of the 86 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
34 Own interpretation · 32 No full text of the sources · 16 Sources not found · 12 No basis given · 8 Not checked yet · 4 Partly supported · 2 Supported · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Direct instruction involving considerable guidance, including examples, resulted in vastly more learning than discovery.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Klahr & Nigam, 2004 source
The Method passage says direct instruction included examples and explanations, while discovery learning included neither. The Day 1 assessment reports that 77% of children receiving direct instruction mastered the experimental-design skill, compared with 23% receiving discovery learning. The finding concerns this skill in third- and fourth-grade children, not learning in general. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Those relatively few students who learned via discovery showed no signs of superior quality of learning.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Klahr & Nigam, 2004 source
The Discussion reports that the few children who mastered the skill through discovery were as proficient at evaluating science-fair posters as those who mastered it through direct instruction. The Day 2: Poster Evaluations section likewise reports no difference in poster scores between the two groups. This supports the claim about the quality of learning among the relatively few discovery learners who achieved mastery. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Working memory has two well-known characteristics: When processing novel information, it is very limited in duration and in capacity.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Working Memory Characteristics and Functions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Peterson & Peterson, 1959 source
- Partly supportedcites Miller, 1956 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the discussion of immediate memory (pp. 92–93), Miller says its span is limited by the number of chunks, supporting the capacity part of the claim. The paper does not establish a limit on duration, and it does not specifically frame the finding as applying when processing novel information. (LLM, conf=0.87)
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The work of Klahr and Nigam (2004), discussed earlier, unambiguously demonstrated the advantages of direct instruction in science.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Empirical Evidence About Science Learning From Unguided Instruction
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Klahr & Nigam, 2004 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract and Discussion report a clear advantage for direct instruction over discovery learning in teaching third- and fourth-grade children to design simple, unconfounded experiments. But the claim broadens that finding to science instruction generally: among children who mastered the skill, the two groups performed equally well on broader scientific judgments, and the Discussion calls for matching instructional approaches to topic and student. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Much of this work provides a clear antecedent to the expertise reversal effect, discussed earlier, according to which instructional methods that are effective for novices become less effective as expertise increases.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Individual Differences in Learning From Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cronbach & Snow, 1977
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Kyllonen & Lajoie, 2003 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Woltz Article section reports that stronger treatments benefited less able learners, whereas weaker treatments benefited more able learners—an ATI pattern that could be viewed as an antecedent. It does not specifically discuss novices becoming experts or identify an expertise reversal effect, and it describes the ATI findings as somewhat inconsistent. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Snow, Corno, & Jackson, 1996
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Constructivist approaches to instruction are based, in part, on a concern that individual differences moderate the impact of instruction.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Individual Differences in Learning From Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cronbach & Snow, 1977
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Kyllonen & Lajoie, 2003 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The THEMES section describes aptitude–treatment interactions and says instruction should accommodate individual learners’ aptitudes. That supports the concern that individual differences affect how instruction works, but the paper does not connect that concern specifically to constructivist approaches. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Snow, Corno, & Jackson, 1996
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For novices, studying worked examples seems invariably superior to discovering or constructing a solution to a problem.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The result is a set of differently named but similar instructional approaches requiring minimal guidance that are disconnected from much that we know of human cognition.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Implications of Human Cognitive Architecture for Constructivist Instruction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We are skillful in an area because our long-term memory contains huge amounts of information concerning the area.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Human Cognitive Architecture
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Controlled experiments almost uniformly indicate that when dealing with novel information, learners should be explicitly shown what to do and how to do it.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > RESEARCH COMPARING GUIDED AND UNGUIDED INSTRUCTION
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Moreno (2004) concluded that there is a growing body of research showing that students learn more deeply from strongly guided learning than from discovery.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Moreno, 2004 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A number of reviews of empirical studies have established a solid research-based case against the use of instruction with minimal guidance.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > RESEARCH COMPARING GUIDED AND UNGUIDED INSTRUCTION
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Since those early demonstrations of the effect, it has been replicated on numerous occasions using a large variety of learners studying an equally large variety of materials”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Problem-solving search is an inefficient way of altering long-term memory because its function is to find a problem solution, not alter long-term memory.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Indeed, it is possible to search for extended periods of time with quite minimal alterations to long-term memory (e.g., see Sweller, Mawer, & Howe, 1982).”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Implications of Human Cognitive Architecture for Constructivist Instruction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sweller, Mawer, & Howe, 1982 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“cognitive load theory suggests that the free exploration of a highly complex environment may generate a heavy working memory load that is detrimental to learning.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Rather, long-term memory is now viewed as the central, dominant structure of human cognition.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Human Cognitive Architecture
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites De Groot, 1945/1965
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chase & Simon, 1973 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Inquiry-based instruction requires the learner to search a problem space for problem-relevant information.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Implications of Human Cognitive Architecture for Constructivist Instruction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results suggest that expert problem solvers derive their skill by drawing on the extensive experience stored in their long-term memory and then quickly select and apply the best procedures for solving problems.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Human Cognitive Architecture
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Constructivism is based therefore, on an observation that, although descriptively accurate, does not lead to a prescriptive instructional design theory or to effective pedagogical techniques”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > THE ORIGINS OF CONSTRUCTIVISM AND THE CURRENT VIEW OF MINIMALLY GUIDED INSTRUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Clark & Estes, 1998
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Clark & Estes, 1999
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Estes & Clark, 1999
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The worked-example effect was first demonstrated by Sweller and Cooper (1985) and Cooper and Sweller (1987), who found that algebra students learned more studying algebra worked examples than solving the equivalent problems.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“We have known at least since Peterson and Peterson (1959) that almost all information stored in working memory and not rehearsed is lost within 30 sec”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Working Memory Characteristics and Functions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Peterson & Peterson, 1959 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, when dealing with previously learned information stored in long-term memory, these limitations disappear.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Working Memory Characteristics and Functions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · boosted
“The past half-century of empirical research on this issue has provided overwhelming and unambiguous evidence that minimal guidance during instruction is significantly less effective and efficient than guidance specifically designed to support the cognitive processing necessary for learning.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · boosted
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This suggestion is particularly important in the case of novice learners, who lack proper schemas to integrate the new information with their prior knowledge.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Accordingly, the worked-example effect, which has been replicated a number of times, provides some of the strongest evidence for the superiority of directly guided instruction over minimal guidance.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because students learn so little from a constructivist approach, most teachers who attempt to implement classroom-based constructivist instruction end up providing students with considerable guidance.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All problem-based searching makes heavy demands on working memory.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Implications of Human Cognitive Architecture for Constructivist Instruction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The limitations of working memory only apply to new, yet to be learned information that has not been stored in long-term memory.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Working Memory Characteristics and Functions
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Everything we see, hear, and think about is critically dependent on and influenced by our long-term memory.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Human Cognitive Architecture
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The worked-example effect, which is based on cognitive load theory, occurs when learners required to solve problems perform worse on subsequent test problems than learners who study the equivalent worked examples.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“We know that problem solving, which is central to one instructional procedure advocating minimal guidance, called inquiry-based instruction, places a huge burden on working memory (Sweller, 1988).”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Working Memory Characteristics and Functions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sweller, 1988 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recommendations advocating minimal guidance during instruction proceed as though working memory does not exist or, if it does exist, that it has no relevant limitations when dealing with novel information, the very information of interest to constructivist teaching procedures.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Working Memory Characteristics and Functions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Any instructional procedure that ignores the structures that constitute human cognitive architecture is not likely to be effective.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > THE CONSEQUENCES OF HUMAN COGNITIVE ARCHITECTURE FOR MINIMAL GUIDANCE DURING INSTRUCTION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, there are no known limits to the amount of such information that can be brought into working memory from long-term memory.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Working Memory Characteristics and Functions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“He reviewed approximately 70 ATI studies and described a number of experiments in which lower aptitude students who choose or were assigned to unguided, weaker instructional treatments receive significantly lower scores on posttests than on pretest measures.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Knowing Less After Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Clark, 1989
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Students learn to recognize which moves are required for particular problems, the basis for the acquisition of problem-solving schemas (Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982).”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A series of reviews by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences has recently described the results of experiments that provide evidence for the negative consequences of unguided science instruction at all age levels and across a variety of science and math content.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Empirical Evidence About Science Learning From Unguided Instruction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites McCray, DeHaan, and Schuck (2003)
- Not matchedcites Gollub, Berthanthal, Labov, and Curtis (2003)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Kilpatrick, Swafford, and Findell (2001)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Roblyer, Edwards, and Havriluk (1997) reported that teachers have found that discovery learning is successful only when students have prerequisite knowledge and undergo some prior structured experiences.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Empirical Evidence About Science Learning From Unguided Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Roblyer, Edwards, and Havriluk (1997)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“First, it is not obtainable when the worked examples are themselves structured in a manner that imposes a heavy cognitive load.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Nadolski, Kirschner, and van Merriënboer (2005), for example, studied the effects of process worksheets with law students and found that the availability of a process worksheet had positive effects on learning task performance, indicated by a higher coherence and more accurate content of the legal case being developed.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nadolski, Kirschner, & van Merriënboer, 2005 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Indeed, problem-solving search can function perfectly with no learning whatsoever (Sweller, 1988).”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sweller, 1988 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Second, the worked-example effect first disappears and then reverses as the learners' expertise increases.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kalyuga, Chandler, Tuovinen, & Sweller, 2001 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Even more distressing is the evidence Clark (1982) presented that when learners are asked to select between a more or a less unguided version of the same course, less able learners who choose less guided approaches tend to like the experience even though they learn less from it.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Knowing Less After Instruction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Clark, 1982 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Problem solving only becomes relatively effective when learners are sufficiently experienced so that studying a worked example is, for them, a redundant activity that increases working memory load compared to generating a known solution”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kalyuga, Chandler, Tuovinen, & Sweller, 2001 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“He argued that the failure to provide strong learning support for less experienced or less able students could actually produce a measurable loss of learning.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Knowing Less After Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Clark, 1989
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“As a consequence, learners can engage in problem-solving activities for extended periods and learn almost nothing (Sweller et al., 1982).”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sweller et al., 1982 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That guidance can be relaxed only with increased expertise as knowledge in long-term memory can take over from external guidance.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Learners receiving guidance through process worksheets outperformed learners left to discover the appropriate procedures themselves.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nadolski, Kirschner, & van Merriënboer, 2005 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even for students with considerable prior knowledge, strong guidance while learning is most often found to be equally effective as unguided approaches.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > CONCLUSIONS
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Schemata accomplish this by guiding the selection of relevant information and the screening out of irrelevant information.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites cognitive research
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“According to Elstein (1994) knowledge organization and schema acquisition are more important for the development of expertise than the use of particular methods of problem solving.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Elstein (1994) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After a half-century of advocacy associated with instruction using minimal guidance, it appears that there is no body of research supporting the technique.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > CONCLUSIONS
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In solving clinical problems, subjects must attend to the current diagnostic hypothesis, the data in the problem presented to them, and any intermediate hypothesis between the diagnosis and the patient data (e.g., a pathophysiological process underlying the signs and symptoms).”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This finding means that something in PBL may hinder the development of the forward reasoning pattern.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“They showed that students trained in a PBL curriculum failed to separate basic science knowledge from the specific clinical knowledge associated with particular patients.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Patel, Groen, and Norman (1993) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In the medical domain, Patel, Groen, and Norman (1993) showed that teaching basic science within a clinical context may have the disadvantage that once basic science knowledge is contextualized, it is difficult to separate it from the particular clinical problems into which it has been integrated.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Patel, Groen, and Norman (1993) source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Experts use schema-based pattern recognition to determine the cause of a patient's illness.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Elstein (1994) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In so far as there is any evidence from controlled studies, it almost uniformly supports direct, strong instructional guidance rather than constructivist-based minimal guidance during the instruction of novice to intermediate learners.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > CONCLUSIONS
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In this regard, cognitive research has shown that to achieve expertise in a domain, learners must acquire the necessary schemata that allow them to meaningfully and efficiently interpret information and identify the problem structure.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites cognitive research
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If we consider that more than one hypothesis has been generated, the cognitive resources needed for maintaining this information in working memory must be such that few cognitive resources are left for acquiring the problem schema.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 24
- It may state two separate claims as one. 29
In the paper
“A similar line of reasoning was followed by Dehoney (1995), who posited that the mental models and strategies of experts have been developed through the slow process of accumulating experience in their domain areas.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > THE ORIGINS OF CONSTRUCTIVISM AND THE CURRENT VIEW OF MINIMALLY GUIDED INSTRUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dehoney, 1995
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The finding that expert chess players are far better able than novices to reproduce briefly seen board configurations taken from real games, but do not differ in reproducing random board configurations, has been replicated in a variety of other areas”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Human Cognitive Architecture
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites De Groot, 1945/1965
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chase & Simon, 1973 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The aim of all instruction is to alter long-term memory.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Human Cognitive Architecture
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Complete information will result in a more accurate representation that is also more easily acquired.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > THE ORIGINS OF CONSTRUCTIVISM AND THE CURRENT VIEW OF MINIMALLY GUIDED INSTRUCTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If nothing has changed in long-term memory, nothing has been learned.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Human Cognitive Architecture
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Hardiman, Pollatsek, and Weil (1986) and Brown and Campione (1994) noted that when students learn science in classrooms with pure-discovery methods and minimal feedback, they often become lost and frustrated, and their confusion can lead to misconceptions.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hardiman, Pollatsek, & Weil, 1986
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Brown & Campione, 1994 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The more knowledgeable learners did not experience a negative effect and benefited equally from both types of treatments.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tuovinen & Sweller, 1999 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Yet it may be a fundamental error to assume that the pedagogic content of the learning experience is identical to the methods and processes (i.e., the epistemology) of the discipline being studied and a mistake to assume that instruction should exclusively focus on methods and processes.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > THE ORIGINS OF CONSTRUCTIVISM AND THE CURRENT VIEW OF MINIMALLY GUIDED INSTRUCTION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Any instructional theory that ignores the limits of working memory when dealing with novel information or ignores the disappearance of those limits when dealing with familiar information is unlikely to be effective.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Working Memory Characteristics and Functions
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, that working memory load does not contribute to the accumulation of knowledge in long-term memory because while working memory is being used to search for problem solutions, it is not available and cannot be used to learn.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Implications of Human Cognitive Architecture for Constructivist Instruction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Tuovinen and Sweller (1999) showed that exploration practice (a discovery technique) caused a much larger cognitive load and led to poorer learning than worked-examples practice.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tuovinen & Sweller, 1999 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The constructivist description of learning is accurate, but the instructional consequences suggested by constructivists do not necessarily follow.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > THE ORIGINS OF CONSTRUCTIVISM AND THE CURRENT VIEW OF MINIMALLY GUIDED INSTRUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Any instructional recommendation that does not or cannot specify what has been changed in long-term memory, or that does not increase the efficiency with which relevant information is stored in or retrieved from long-term memory, is likely to be ineffective.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Human Cognitive Architecture
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Minimally guided instruction appears to proceed with no reference to the characteristics of working memory, long-term memory, or the intricate relations between them.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > THE CONSEQUENCES OF HUMAN COGNITIVE ARCHITECTURE FOR MINIMAL GUIDANCE DURING INSTRUCTION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most learners of all ages know how to construct knowledge when given adequate information and there is no evidence that presenting them with partial information enhances their ability to construct a representation more than giving them full information.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > THE ORIGINS OF CONSTRUCTIVISM AND THE CURRENT VIEW OF MINIMALLY GUIDED INSTRUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In all of the many studies he reported, guided instruction not only produced more immediate recall of facts than unguided approaches, but also longer term transfer and problem-solving skills.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Mayer, 2001 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Solving a problem requires problem-solving search and search must occur using our limited working memory.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Berkson (1993) also reviewed much of the literature on PBL and arrived at many of the same conclusions as Albanese and Mitchell (1993).”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Berkson, 1993 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“He provided evidence that the same learner might benefit from stronger and weaker treatments depending on the type of learning and transfer outcome desired.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Knowing Less After Instruction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Woltz, 2003 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Each of these and other publications by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences amply document the lack of evidence for unguided approaches and the benefits of more strongly guided instruction.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Empirical Evidence About Science Learning From Unguided Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites McCray, DeHaan, and Schuck (2003)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gollub, Berthanthal, Labov, and Curtis (2003)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Kilpatrick, Swafford, and Findell (2001)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, problem-solving search overburdens limited working memory and requires working memory resources to be used for activities that are unrelated to learning.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the instructional methods described by Cronbach and Snow (1977) strong treatments implied highly structured instructional presentations where explicit organization of information and learning support were provided.The weaker treatments were relatively unstructured and so provided much less learning support.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Individual Differences in Learning From Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cronbach & Snow, 1977
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Both researchers concluded that the available evidence does not support the use of minimal guidance and both suggested that some form of stronger guidance is necessary for both effective learning and transfer.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > RESEARCH ON EDUCATIONAL MODELS FAVORING MINIMAL GUIDANCE DURING INSTRUCTION IN VARIOUS SETTINGS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Roblyer, 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Perkins, 1991
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, studying a worked example both reduces working memory load because search is reduced or eliminated and directs attention (i.e., directs working memory resources) to learning the essential relations between problem-solving moves.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Their meta-analysis of the English language literature of the effectiveness of PBL produced a number of negative findings concerning its impact, including lower basic science exam scores, no differences in residency selections, and more study hours each day.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Albanese & Mitchell, 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“They reported that although PBL students receive better scores for their clinical performance, they also order significantly more unnecessary tests at a much higher cost per patient with less benefit.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Albanese & Mitchell, 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It emphasizes the importance of providing novices in an area with extensive guidance because they do not have sufficient knowledge in long-term memory to prevent unproductive problem-solving search.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Current Research Supporting Direct Guidance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“All in all, a lack of clarity about the difference between learning a discipline and research in the discipline coupled with the priority afforded to unbiased observation in the best inductivist and empiricist tradition has led many educators to advocate a problem-based method as the way to teach a discipline (Allen, Barker, & Ramsden, 1986;Anthony, 1973;Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980;Obioma, 1986).”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Clark hypothesized that the most effective components of treatments help less experienced learners by providing task-specific learning strategies embedded in instructional presentations.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Knowing Less After Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Clark, 1989
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Not matched
In the paper
“More able learners, he suggested, have acquired implicit, task-specific learning strategies that are more effective for them than those embedded in the structured versions of the course.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Knowing Less After Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Clark, 1989
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“He concluded that the magnitude of these statistics is not sufficient to meet standards of predictive validity to support the use of the measures or the experiential methods for training at work.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > RESEARCH ON EDUCATIONAL MODELS FAVORING MINIMAL GUIDANCE DURING INSTRUCTION IN VARIOUS SETTINGS
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Iliff, 1994
- Not matchedcites Kolb, Boyatzis, & Mainemelis, 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Higher aptitude students who chose highly structured approaches tended to like them but achieve at a lower level than with less structured versions but did not suffer by knowing less after than before instruction.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Knowing Less After Instruction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Clark, 1982 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Clark pointed to suggestive evidence that more able students who select the more guided versions of courses do so because they believe that they will achieve the required learning with a minimum of effort.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Knowing Less After Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Clark, 1989
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Cronbach and Snow's (1977) review of ATI research described a number of replicated ordinal and disordinal interactions between various instructional methods and aptitudes.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Individual Differences in Learning From Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cronbach & Snow, 1977
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“There was an indication in their review that increased clinical practice evaluation scores may have been due to the fact the PBL students are required to spend more time in clinical settings.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Albanese & Mitchell, 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“She reviewed studies where the problem-solving ability of PBL students was compared with the same ability in conventionally trained students and found no support for any differences, and so failed to replicate the clinical advantage found by Albanese and Mitchell.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Berkson, 1993 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, it may be an error to assume that the pedagogic content of the learning experience is identical to the methods and processes (i.e., the epistemology) of the discipline being studied and a mistake to assume that instruction should exclusively focus on application.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > CONCLUSIONS
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Also important for medical educators has been the constant finding in research summaries that PBL is not more effective but is more costly than traditional instruction.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites research summaries
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the reasons for the ongoing popularity of a failed approach are unclear, the origins of the support for instruction with minimal guidance in science education and medical education might be found in the post-Sputnik science curriculum reforms such as Biological Sciences Curriculum Study, Chemical Education Material Study, and Physical Science Study Committee.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > CONCLUSIONS
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Arocha and Patel (1995) found that participants trained in PBL retained the backward-directed reasoning pattern, but did not seem to acquire forward-directed reasoning, which is a hallmark of expertise.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Arocha and Patel (1995) source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The practice of a profession is not the same as learning to practice the profession.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Not only is unguided instruction normally less effective; there is also evidence that it may have negative results when students acquire misconceptions or incomplete or disorganized knowledge.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > CONCLUSIONS
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This point of view appears to have led to unguided practical or project work and the rejection of instruction based on the facts, laws, principles, and theories that make up a discipline's content.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > CONCLUSIONS
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Arocha and Patel (1995) concluded that the negative results can be accounted for by the effect of splitting of attention resources and the high working memory load on schema acquisition during problem solving.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Arocha and Patel (1995) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At that time, educators shifted away from teaching a discipline as a body of knowledge toward the assumption that knowledge can best or only be learned through experience that is based only on the procedures of the discipline.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > CONCLUSIONS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If students have difficulty separating the biomedical knowledge they have learned from the particular clinical cases associated with that knowledge, it is not surprising that when given a different problem they bring to bear on the new problem some irrelevant biomedical knowledge.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although PBL students generated more elaborate explanations, they had less coherent explanations and more errors.”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Medical Problem-Based Learning Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Patel, Groen, and Norman (1993) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“La mémoire de travail est la structure cognitive dans laquelle les processus conscients ont lieu. Elle est très limitée à la fois en durée et en quantité.”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“these results align with claims that a certain degree of instructional support is needed in the use of video games in order to achieve the desired learning outcome [81-83].”
From The Effect of Multiplayer Video Games on Incidental and Intentional L2 Vocabulary Learning: The Case of Among Us (2021) · cites this paper as [81]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“la situation de résolution de problèmes non guidée place la mémoire de travail dans une situation de surcharge cognitive, rendant impossible le transfert d'informations dans la mémoire à long terme (Kirschner et al., 2006).”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This could potentially explain how step-by-step usage of the AI code generator could potentially reduce cognitive load and allow novices to learn faster due to more availability of their mental resources, specifcally for germane cognitive load which is responsible for creating mental models and storing long-term memory [46].”
From Studying the effect of AI Code Generators on Supporting Novice Learners in Introductory Programming (2023) · cites this paper as [46]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Analysis of Kirschner et al. [16] showed that learning with DBL and related methods is highly complex, and can thus overwhelm learners.”
From Students as Designers of Augmented Reality: Impact on Learning and Motivation in Computer Science (2021) · cites this paper as [16]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“il est nécessaire de tenir compte des limitations de la mémoire de travail, chose que ne font pas toujours les approches minimalement guidées”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“le but de toute instruction est donc de modifier la mémoire à long terme.”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“To the best of our knowledge, this is the first integrative empirical counterevidence against the claim that problem solving as a sensemaking activity for novices is not an effective instructional approach (cf. Kirschner etal., 2006, and follow-up work).”
From When Problem Solving Followed by Instruction Works: Evidence for Productive Failure (2021) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Scaffolding in these contexts also has the potential to help problem-centered instructional models overcome criticisms that they do not lead to adequate content learning (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006).”
From Synthesizing Results From Empirical Research on Computer-Based Scaffolding in STEM Education (2017) · cites this paper as Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The former is more closely aligned with a teaching model that emphasises direct instruction (Kirschner et al., 2006).”
From Examining Science Education in ChatGPT: An Exploratory Study of Generative Artificial Intelligence (2023) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, the usage of guided discovery learning is more effective and efficient than a minimally guided instructional approach (Kirschner, Sweller & Clark, 2006) because it provides the guidance needed by students to achieve the intended learning outcome (Mayer, 2004).”
From Teaching and Learning Science Using YouTube Videos and Discovery Learning in Primary School (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner, Sweller & Clark, 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These domain-specific, biologically secondary skills need to be explicitly taught (Kirschner et al. 2006; Sweller et al. 2007) and actively learned.”
From Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later (2019) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al. 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Cette différence entre (socio)constructivisme comme démarche d'apprentissage et (socio)constructivisme comme démarche d'enseignement (dont l'efficacité est remise en doute par des recherches basées sur des données probantes décrites dans les sections 1 et 3) a également été relevée par Kirschner, Sweller et Clark (2006) : « La description constructiviste de l'apprentissage est exacte, mais les”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner, Sweller et Clark (2006)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“presque toutes les informations stockées en mémoire de travail qui ne sont pas répétées sont perdues après 30 secondes (Kirschner et al., 2006)”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“l'exploration libre d'un environnement complexe peut générer une forte charge cognitive qui est néfaste à l'apprentissage. Ceci est particulièrement vrai pour les apprenants novices (Kirschner et al., 2006).”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Tuovinen et Sweller (1999) ont montré que la « pratique d'exploration » (une approche par la découverte) causait une bien plus grande charge cognitive et menait à un apprentissage plus pauvre que les problèmes déjà résolus (« worked examples ») (Kirschner et al., 2006).”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“les « experts en résolution de problèmes » développent leurs compétences en s'appuyant sur leur grande expérience qui leur a permis de stocker nombre de schémas dans leur mémoire à long terme; ces derniers leur permettant de résoudre plus facilement les problèmes (Kirschner et al., 2006).”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Un apprenant peut donc être engagé dans des activités de résolution de problèmes pendant un temps important et ne presque rien apprendre en fin de compte (Kirschner et al., 2006).”
From Enseignement explicite et développement decompétences : antinomie ou nécessité? (2020) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Those who think they are capable of multitasking tend to overestimate their ability in the actual multitasking tasks (Sanbonmatsu et al., 2013) or assume they can do them without the loss of efficiency and productivity (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006).”
From The indirect relationship of media multitasking self-efficacy on learning performance within the personal learning environment: Implications from the mechanism of perceived attention problems and self-regulation strategies (2017) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“P. A. Kirschner et al. (2006) have shown that there exists a clear body of research using controlled experiments indicating that the relatively guided instructional procedures supported by cognitive load theorists are more effective (at least for novice students) than relatively unguided instructional procedures used by advocates of discovery or inquiry learning.”
From Cognitive Load Theory: New Conceptualizations, Specifications, and Integrated Research Perspectives (2010) · cites this paper as P. A. Kirschner et al. (2006)
In the citing paper
“Adaptive feedback (which is well-known to be essential in exploratory learning environments, Kirschner et al., 2006) is provided to students based on their interactions with the system and their affective states.”
From Affective learning: Improving engagement and enhancing learning with affect-aware feedback (2017) · cites this paper as Kirschner et al., 2006
In the citing paper
“if a learning environment is too cognitively demanding, schema construction and schema automation in LTM are not going to occur (P.A. Kirschner et al. 2006).”
From Making the Black Box of Collaborative Learning Transparent: Combining Process-Oriented and Cognitive Load Approaches (2010) · cites this paper as P.A. Kirschner et al. 2006
In the citing paper
“There is a strong inclination toward exploratory teaching pedagogies involving digital resources for teaching about AI (c.f. [99,100]).”
From In search of artificial intelligence (AI) literacy in teacher education: A scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [99]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > Human Cognitive Architecture
“De Groot's (1945Groot's ( /1965) work on chess expertise”
§ Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work > References
“De Groot, A. D. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague, Nether- lands: Mouton. (Original work published 1946)”
Citations
Cites
(1983) · Cited by 33,192
Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching
SHULMAN, L. S. (1986) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x015002004 · Cited by 18,546
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0043158 · Cited by 17,812
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.101.2.343 · Cited by 17,559
DEWEY, J. M. (1986) · The Educational Forum · doi:10.1080/00131728609335764 · Cited by 13,872
Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning
Sweller, J. (1988) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7 · Cited by 11,048
Self-citation(1980) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 7,534
Human Memory: A Proposed System and its Control Processes
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60422-3 · Cited by 7,216
The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
Cowan, N. (2001) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x01003922 · Cited by 6,779
The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory
(2010) · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-62209-1 · Cited by 6,035
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Ausubel D. P., 1964, The Arithmetic Teacher, 11, 290
- Bernstein, D. A., Penner, L. A., Clarke-Stewart, A., Roy, E. J. & Wickens, C. D. (2003). Psychology (6th ed.). Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
- Clark R. E., 1998, Educational Technology, 38, 5
- Estes F., 1999, Educational Technology, 37, 5
- Glaser, R. (1987). Further notes toward a psychology of instruction. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 1-39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
- Kolb, D. A. (1971). Individual learning styles and the learning process (Working Paper No. 535-71). Cambridge, MA: Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- Kolb, D. A. & Fry, R. (1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Studies of group process (pp. 33-57). New York: Wiley.
- Roblyer M. D., 1996, Learning and Leading With Technology, 24, 12
- Trafton, J. G. & Reiser, R. J. (1993). The contribution of studying examples and solving problems to skill acquisition. In M. Polson (Ed.), Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1017-1022). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_446 · Cited by 6,172
Self-citationThe ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.965823 · Cited by 2,911
“For example, it is sometimes assumed that the “constructivist” perspective is experiencing a backlash in recent educational literature because at times learners bene-fit from instructors’ direct scaffolding (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006; Mayer, 2004).”
HMELO-SILVER, C. E., DUNCAN, R. G., & CHINN, C. A. (2007) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520701263368 · Cited by 2,641
Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5 · Cited by 2,337
Self-citationFirst principles of instruction
Merrill, M. D. (2002) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/bf02505024 · Cited by 2,092
Metadata
- Authors
- Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E.
- Affiliations
- Open University of the Netherlands (NL)
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- University of Southern California (US)
- Venue
- Educational Psychologist
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-06
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 75-86
- ISSN
- 0046-1520 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-6985
- OpenAlex
- W1976637107
- Semantic Scholar
- cb9f9f2768fbb5eeab699c9147d622fc68b9edac
- Cited by
- 7,776
- References
- 140
- Citations by year
- 2026: 705 · 2025: 534 · 2024: 429 · 2023: 407 · 2022: 394 · 2021: 458 · 2020: 519 · 2019: 457 · 2018: 431 · 2017: 387 · 2016: 446 · 2015: 428 · 2014: 388 · 2013: 399 · 2012: 376
- FWCI
- 117.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Educational Psychologist (publishedVersion)
- UNSWorks (UNSW Sydney) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion)
- DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Keywords
- guided teaching, constructivist teaching, discovery learning, problem-based learning, experiential learning, inquiry-based learning, cognitive architecture, expert-novice differences, cognitive load, prior knowledge, instructional design model
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
