Assignment 2: Engagement with an Educational Issue

Research, Teaching and Learning 1.

Alicia Sukkar

18363441

Introduction

One of the primary goals of teachers is to constantly improve and better their pedagogical

practices for the benefits of their students. In order to do so, teachers should apply empirical

findings and associated recommendations from research to their lesson plans. This action may

validate the research made, possibly improve the teaching practices, and benefit the learning of

the students. However this method could also disprove an academic recommendation as a result

of negative outcomes in students learning. Incorporating education research as teachers is

integral for success in education through the discoveries and potential errors that are made

(Ullman, 2015). In the article “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An

Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and

Inquiry-Based Teaching” (2010), Kirschner, Sweller and Clark argue that instruction using

minimal guidance is less effective for learners, in comparison to guided instructions which is

more effective and efficient on learners. This argument is based on the context of human

cognitive architecture, expert-novice differences, and cognitive load (Kirschner, et, al., 2010).

This paper will demonstrate how the recommendations from the article for teaching practice can
be implemented in a NESA-approved Stage 4 History syllabus outcome, ultimately reflecting on

the essence and significance of research findings in improving teacher pedagogy.

Guided instructions in the History Key Learning Area

Direct, explicit instructions are a more effective and efficient method when teaching

(Kirschner, et, al., 2010). It is relevant both broadly and specifically within teaching History

across the three stages in Australian high schools. The history classroom distincts largely from

the other common classes such as science or geography. Teaching and learning history requires

the basic understanding of names and dates associated with events, while looking at the primary

and secondary sources that provide evidence for the events, such as diaries, photographs, pots,

etc. Achieving knowledge in history is not a process that should go unguided by learner, as

student’s may not be able to identify reliable and authentic sources. Student’s need continued

guided instructions in order for them to develop historical knowledge and have a key

understanding and development on critiquing, thinking, presenting, analysing and interpreting

skills (Quanchi, & So’o, 2003). Teachers using their expertise in the history field are able to give

their students crucial basic understandings of the past, and their place within their own personal

history. Through assistance, can students strongly comprehend key concepts behind historical

inquiry.

The argument for human cognitive architecture presented in the article (Kirschner, et, al.,

2010) largely reflects learning behaviours that are necessary for success in learning history.
History learning requires man problem-based investigations, which places a load on the working

memory, however through explicit guidance learning material can be cognitively manipulated

and stored into long-term memory for the continued learning of events in history. Cognitive load

theory suggests that inquiry into high complex environments, such as a history lesson, may

produce a heavy working memory load that becomes detrimental (Sweller, 1999). This theory

also argues that effective “instructional material facilitates learning by directing cognitive

resources towards activities that are relevant to learning rather than towards preliminaries to

learning” (Chandler & Sweller, 1991, p.293). Instructional guidance is needed for the cognitive

benefit of history learners. History becomes extremely complex and mind numbing and can

easily fall short into a learner’s short-term memory. However, through utilising worked examples

which is advocated by the Cognitive Load theory, it directs the student’s to what needs to be

learnt.

Critical summary of the article and the author’s recommendations

The focused article in this paper, “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not

Work” (Kirschner, et, al., 2010) debunks the notion that minimal guidance is most effective for

learning. This is achieved through referencing qualitative research that supports the argument of

explicit instruction in learning. The authors conclusion/ recommendation for practices explains

that no body of research supports the minimal guidance technique, and for teaching practices, it

recommends “strong instructional guidance rather than constructivist-based minimal guidance”

(Kirschner, et, al., 2010, 83) as most effective for learners. However, in order for the authors to
obtain this conclusion/ recommendation, their cited research had to strongly support their

arguments.

The article (Kirschner, et, al.,2010) first addresses the consequences of human cognitive

architecture for minimal guidance during instruction, which explores the characteristics of

human cognitive architecture, such as the short-term and the long-term memory. This section

also refers to literature and the basic functioning of memory to justify instructions in the

classroom, as well as an explanation on the effect of unguided instructions on the working

memory. The authors also justify the argument in favour of minimal guidance due to the

limitations of research when Bruner (1961) proposed unguided instructions, gaining popularity in

the classroom. The article indicates that Burner did not have an understanding of the functioning

of memory. The article strengthens their key argument by further discussing the origins of

constructivism and citing current academic views on minimal guided instructions. The article

identifies,that minimal guidance attempts to practice a discipline, rather than learn a discipline,

which results in a series of consequences. The article also has a comparison on guided and

unguided instructions, citing research, however the argument that supposed unguided instruction

is limited and vague. The argument for guided instruction is broad and refers to various

conducted qualitative research. The argument for guided instructions uses research to justify its

efficiency in accordance with the cognitive load, the worked example effect, and process

worksheets. Krischner, Sweller and Clark (2010) also makes a case in referring to the use of

minimal guidance, however as an approach to learning and instructions, through examining

various alternative educational models. The evidence from research indicates that minimal
guidance should not be the sole method of teaching, as a stronger form of guidance is necessary

for effective learning. The authors use the research to distinguish the epistemology of a

discipline, to the pedagogy for teaching it.

Overall, the objective of this research conducted is important for the field of teaching, as

it contributes to the ongoing understanding in the enhancing of pedagogy. The methods referred

to of other research is not described adequately, as the article draws more towards their

concluding statements. Nonetheless, the methods of qualitative research is appropriate for the

purpose of the study and does provide a quality pathway to the recommendations given by the

authors. However, qualitative research could have been more beneficial, as the statistical data

would place into perspective the strain of unguided instructions, in comparison to the data that

would evidently highlight the benefits of guided instructions. Also, the article is presented in

enough detail to enable its readers to duplicate it and conduct further research on the topic.

Overall, the authors have written a credible and comprehensive article that provides enough

evidence to justify its recommendation into guided instructions.

Lesson Activity

Within NESA’s content outline in Stage 4 History is the Depth Study option, “The

Western and Islamic World” is topic 4a “The Vikings (c. A.D. 790 - c. 1066)”, as indicated in

the appendix. The outcome that this paper will focus on is the topic expectation for students

“​using a range of sources, eg the Viking sagas, outline key social, cultural, economic and
political features of Viking society”. This learning activity indicates the need for a the use of

research and a proper understanding of the term ‘sources’, whether that is a primary or a

secondary source. In order to satisfactorily complete the task, student’s must be taught

knowledge that introduces the Vikings, which includes a basic summary of their known era,

location, how they came about, and why they are so well known today. This prior knowledge

will assist the learning in analysing sources that assist in gaining knowledge on the Vikings

social, cultural, economic and political features. Not only does this task strength student’s

knowledge on the Vikings, but it does indeed develop within them the ability to build critical

thinking skills, and keeps them engaged in the content ​(Britt & Aglinskas, 2010)​. These sources

that students will have to interpret will soon move students from their first observation of the

facts to questioning and making reasonable and logical guesses about the materials. This opens

students to many biases, perspectives and objectives that challenge their assumptions

(Whittemore & Knafi, 2005)​. This task does possess many strengths in that it will build the

students ability to use sources and apply them to various understandings. The task also

successfully provides students with first hand insight into the period, in which they may find a

connection by looking or reading through the various sources, if it were a diary or an artefact.

However, limitations, as stated could, if analysing sources unguided, students could be mislead

and misinterpret the source, which could overload the students and make them unsuccessful in

completing the task with the correct knowledge.

The role of a teach is however to guide these students through those assumptions in this

task. Teachers should be experts in the topic due to their prior training and studies ​(Beihaard et,
al., 2000).​ In order to guide students in this task, teachers should not present the task as open for

the students own research. Instead, teachers should provide the students with a range of

specifically selected primary and secondary sources related to the cultural, social, political and

economic features of the Vikings. These sources should be selected carefully, and the teacher

should use their judgement to to utilise sources that are credible, reliable and valid. The lesson

should be planned with an analysis of the sources, teachers should also place the sources into its

historical context so as to not misinterpret its true meaning. Teachers should involve student in

discussion and have them explain what they perceive of the sources. Teacher should respond to

each detail and keep the students on the right track that links directly to addressing the various

features of the Vikings.

Conclusion

The research and argument presented by ​Kirschner, Sweller and Clark significantly

shapes pedagogy in the classroom. The methods and research strategies used, successfully

vehicles to the recommendation that guided instructions are necessary for enhanced learning. By

interpreting the article and other related research materials, this paper has applied their key

findings to demonstrate how their recommendations shape teaching practices and influence the

History learning area.​ This paper has explained the main issue addressed in the research article as

relevant across history. It has also provided a brief critical summary by discussing that the

research and methods used have supported its overall findings and recommendations. By using

the research and findings of articles like​ Kirschner, Sweller and Clark​’s, a teaching lesson can be
adapted to further improve and enhance the learning of the students. In this paper the choice of

an outcome found in NESA had been deeply assessed so to incorporate the recommendations

given by the article. This assessment of the outcome mirrors the possible use of instructional

guidance, in many other outcomes. It becomes evident that the research article allows for use

across the broader history learning area.

 References

Beihaard, D., Verloop, N., &., Vermunt, J. (2000).Teachers’ perceptions of professional

identity: an exploratory study from a personal knowledge perspective. ​Teaching and Teacher

Education. ​16 (7), 749-764.​https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00023-8

Britt, A., &., Aglinskas, C. (2010) Improving Students' Ability to Identify and Use

Source Information,Cognition and Instruction, 20:4, 485-522, DOI:

10.1207/S1532690XCI2004_2

Chandler, P., &., Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction.

Cognition and Instruction,​ 8 (4) 293-332.

Quanchi, M., &., So’o, A. (2003). Teaching history: a guide for teacher teaching history

for the first time. Brisbane (Australia): HistoryCOPs.

Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: ACER

Press

Ullman, J. (2015). Applying educational research: How to read, do, and use research to

solve problems of practice (Custom ed.). Sydney, Australia: Pearson

 Whittemore, R. &., Knafl, K. (2005), The integrative review: updated methodology.

Journal of Advanced Nursing,​ 52: 546-553. doi:​10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x

Appendix