COMPARSON BETWEEN DISCOVERY AND LECTURE METHOD OF TEACHING

     COMPARISON BETWEEN DISCOVERY AND LECTURE METHOD OF TEACHING

  Opportunities for discovery activity occur whenever inadequacy of knowledge (of concepts and/or skills) produces a situation where students don't know "what to do next" so they must think on their own, and are allowed to think.  These opportunities for discovery can be accidental (when a teacher doesn't realize that students are struggling) or the obstacles can be intentional, designed into a lab as thinking activities that let students practice existing skills or learn new skills.  If a particular lab has a sufficient amount of discovery activities compared with other types of thinking activities, so the ratio of discovery/non-discovery is high, it can be called an discovery lab.  A well-designed discovery lab, like a well-written mystery story, aims for a level of challenge that is "just right" so students will not become bored with problems that are too easy, or become frustrated because the problems they encounter are too difficult and frequent.  Ideally, students will struggle temporarily but eventually they will succeed, and in doing so they will feel genuine emotional-and-intellectual satisfaction.  They will place a high personal value on their own success because they were able to overcome challenging obstacles during the process of problem solving.
Forms of Discovery learning
Dr. Roger Schank and Chip Cleary (1994) have proposed five main Discoveries for categorizing the Discoveries for discovery learning.
       incidental learning,
       learning by exploring/conversing,
       learning by reflection,
       Simulation-based learning. By utilizing these Discoveries, teachers can build activities to allow their students to discover the desired concepts.
       Incidental Learning
Incidental learning is probably the most entertaining form of discovery learning. In incidental learning, students gain knowledge “in passing” (Schank & Cleary, 1994; Bicknell-Holmes & Hoffman, 2000). Learning is a by-product of an incidental learning task in which the students are engaged. My experience has been that students typically love participating in incidental learning because many times the task takes the form of a game. Incidental learning activities work well with dull topics and rote memorization because they provide motivation to learn topics or skills that are typically perceived by students as not very interesting but are in the curriculum. Two examples of incidental learning would be to have a classroom game show or to make a crossword puzzle on the desired topic. Incidental learning, because of its game-like quality, can be motivational to students. Students often become interested in the topic of study and look for answers because they want to do the activity and must have the knowledge to do it. Many incidental activities are also suited to students being involved in the creation process; hence, additional discovery opportunities result.
Learning by exploring/conversing
Learning by exploring is also known as learning by conversing. This type of discovery learning is based on an organized collection of answers to questions individuals can ask about a particular topic or skill (Schank & Cleary, 1994). The learning by exploring method is much like the Socratic method of questioning, answering, and questioning more. Students are given a mystery to solve and they can only solve it by asking questions. In this Discovery, curiosity is intended to serve as a dramatic motivational tool.  An example of the learning by exploring Discovery is playing “What’s in the bag?” (Bicknell-Holmes & Hoffman, 2000). In this game, a bag containing an item is placed where it is visible. The object in the bag should reflect the desired topic for learning, for example, an elephant when studying animals. The students then ask questions to figure out what is in the bag. The students’ mesh their past experiences and learning and the answers given to formulate new questions to solve the mystery of what is in the bag. For example, in the case of the elephant in the bag, students may begin by asking if the object is living. When they receive the response that it is living, the students then begin to think of all the things they know that are alive and how the next question can narrow down the field. This process allows the students to not only learn that an elephant is an animal, but also discover new ways that the information they know about animals can be categorized.
Learning by reflection
In learning by reflection, students learn to apply higher-level cognitive skills by using an interrogative approach and reflecting on what they know in comparison to the qualities they are examining (Schank & Cleary, 1994). Learning by reflection allows the student to learn to ask better questions (Bicknell-Holmes & Hoffman, 2000). By learning to ask better questions, the students learn to do more sophisticated analyses (Bicknell-Holmes & Hoffman, 2000). A teacher who employs the learning by reflection Discovery typically answers questions with more questions to model how to better ask questions so that answers can be found.
As you can see in this dialogue, the teacher does not answer the student’s question directly. Instead, the teacher leads the student through reflecting on what he or she already knows and then guides the student in finding the answer.
Students not familiar with discovery learning find learning by reflection exasperating until they become better at the skill of asking good questions (Schank & Cleary, 1994). Learning by reflection requires a great deal of patience on the part of the teacher also because the purpose of this Discovery is to discover better lines of questioning and reflect on previous knowledge (Schank & Cleary, 1994). Teachers must watch as students struggle and follow errant lines of questioning when seeking an answer. The students must make the mistakes and learn from them in order for their ability to ask sophisticated questions to develop so that they might better reflect on topics.
Simulation-based learning
Simulation-based learning is essentially role-playing. Students are given an artificial environment that allows for the opportunity to develop and practice a complex set of skills or witness the application of abstract concepts (Bicknell-Holmes & Hoffman, 2000). The benefit of students learning in a simulation rather than a real life situation is that time and or the natural environment can be manipulated to guide discovery (Bicknell-Holmes & Hoffman, 2000). Also, students do not have to worry about the impact of failing in a simulation. For example, in a simulation where students are learning about adaptations of animals, students can put an elephant on the top of a mountain and see what happens without having to worry about a real elephant being harmed by their mistake in thinking that is where elephants live. Simulations also allow for things to occur that would be impossible in real life. For example, students could plan a space mission and actually take the mission through a simulation, whereas, taking an actual space mission would be impossible.
Technology has played a major role in making simulations easier to incorporate into the classroom. Computers allow for variability in more components of the simulation environment by taking the burden of manually manipulating data. Through technology, simulations can be much more realistic and authentic than without the use of the technology. Technology has provided a great advantage in implementing this Discovery (Bicknell-Holmes & Hoffman, 2000).
Lecture Method
A lecture is an oral presentation of information by the instructor. It is the method of relaying factual information which includes principles, concepts, ideas and all theoretical knowledge about a given topic. In a lecture the instructor tells, explains, describes or relates whatever information the trainees are required to learn through listening and understanding. It is therefore teacher-centred. The instructor is very active, doing all the talking. Trainees on the other hand are very inactive, doing all the listening. Despite the popularity of lectures, the lack of active involvement of trainees limits its usefulness as a method of instruction.
The lecture method of instruction is recommended for trainees with very little knowledge or limited background knowledge on the topic. It is also useful for presenting an organised body of new information to the learner. To be effective in promoting learning, the lecture must involve some discussions and, question and answer period to allow trainees to be involved actively.
Preparation and delivery of a lecture
As stated earlier, during the lecture, the trainees merely listen to the instructor. It is therefore very important to consider the attention span of trainees when preparing a lecture. The attention span is the period of time during which the trainees are able to pay full attention to what the instructor is talking about. It is estimated to be 15-25 minutes only. It is difficult to hold the trainees attention for a long period of time and careful preparation of lectures is very necessary.
The instructor should have a clear, logical plan of presentation. He/she should work out the essentials of the topic, organise them according to priorities and logical connections, and establish relationships between the various items. Careful organisation of content helps the trainees to structure and hence, to store or remember it. When developing a theme in a lecture, the instructor should use a variety of approaches. A useful principle in any instruction is to go from the known to unknown; from simple to complex or from parts to a whole. Knowing the trainees and addressing their needs and interests is very important. For example, in explaining technical processes the instructor should search for illustrations that will be familiar to the trainees. Unfamiliar technical words should be introduced cautiously. New terminologies should be defined and explained and examples given.
In order to gain and focus the attention of trainees, the instructor should be adequately prepared, fluent in his/her presentation and should use various teaching aids and illustrations such as charts, transparencies, codes and even the real objects during presentation. Question and Answer periods should be included in the lecture.
Qualities of a good lecture
       A good lecture should not be too long as to exceed the trainees attention span (up to 25 minutes).
       A good lecture should address a single theme.
       In a good lecture technical terms are carefully explained.
       Familiar examples and analogies are given.
       A good lecture establishes fluency in technical content.
       A good lecture uses illustrations and examples.
       A good lecture builds on existing knowledge.
       A good lecture employs a variety of approaches.

Advantages/Disadvantages of Discovery Learning versus Lecture Learning
There has not been a great deal of research done comparing the discovery learning method and lecture teaching. From research that does exist, there appear to be four main areas of focus. These areas are
       motivation 
       retention
       achievement
       transference
A significant advantage of the discovery learning method is its capacity to motivate students. Discovery learning allows learners to seek information that satisfies their natural curiosity. It provides the opportunity for students to explore their desires and consequently creates a more engaging learning environment. Simply put, discovery learning makes learning fun (Schank & Cleary, 1994). In a study conducted by D.W. Hardy (1967), the students learning the principles of archaeology and anthropology through the discovery method of an archaeological dig were better organizers of information, more active in the task of learning, and more highly motivated than those who were taught in a lecture, lecture method. It is easy to imagine that students find it a lot more fun to dig out artifacts from an archaeological dig and figure out that the children that lived near the school 2,000 years ago played with rocks that they used as marbles than it is to read the same fact in a textbook.
In terms of information retention, discovery learning appears to be at least similar to the level found when using lecture teaching methods and possibly increases information retention. Alleman and Brophy (1992) conducted research with college students by asking them to report memorable kindergarten through eighth grade social studies activities. More students recalled activities that involved opportunities for experiential learning and higher order applications, characteristics of discovery learning, than activities that involved repetitive, low level seatwork. Students remembered more of what they learned in discovery learning activities than lecture activities. An older study also looked at the level of information retention among kindergarteners over a shorter timeframe.
Peters (1970) compared kindergarten students learning mathematics through a discovery learning method and a verbal didactic instructional method. The students taught using a discovery learning method had equal retention to those taught using a lecture method.
In agreement with Peters (1970), Nelson & Frayer (1972) looked at the retention of concepts in their study comparing a discovery learning method and an expository learning method. Nelson & Frayer studied 228 seventh grade students learning four geometry concepts (quadrilateral, rhombus, trapezoid, and parallelogram) and found that the students scored equally on retention tests
Discovery learning increases student achievement when the students are learning skills rather than facts. In Hardy’s (1967) archaeological study, the n   v\students who were taught with the discovery learning method showed a positive significant difference in achievement on pre- and post-tests measuring anthropological understandings over those students taught using the lecture method. Rachel Mabie and Matt Baker in 1996 also showed an increase in achievement with their study of students learning about nutrition. Mabie and Bake r studied three groups of fifth and sixth grade students who were taught about food and fiber using three different methods. One group was taught over a 10-week period using garden projects. A second group was taught using short, in-class projects, and the third group was taught using lecture methods. Both the garden project and in-class project groups showed an improvement in pretest knowledge of 70-80% compared to an 11% increase in the group taught using lecture methods. Nelson and Frayer (1972) and Peters’ (1970) studies contradict Hardy (1967) and Mabie and Baker
(1996). The lecture methods were found to be significantly better for achievement; however, the content taught in the Nelson and Fayer and Peters studies measured fact-based information and did not provide for open-ended responses that are more consistent with the discovery learning method.
The fourth area of discovery learning versus lecture learning is transference. D. W. Chambers (1971) did a study that compared discovery learning with over learning. Over learning is a lecture method of drill and practice in which students practice a skill many times. Chambers found that students learning with the over learning method were better at transferring what they had learned than those who learned the concept through discovery learning. This study is greatly flawed due to the topic the students were learning which was rote memorization of math facts. Again, the fact that discovery learning does not work well with rote memorization impacted this study greatly.
Recognizing motivation, information retention, and achievement as positive effects of discovery learning that are grounded in research, the question becomes, why do teachers and school systems hesitate to adopt discovery learning. Some reasons are based more on self-imposed misconceptions and attitudes than on discovery learning’s creative and practical demands (Bicknell-Holmes & Hoffman, 2000). Some reasons are because of imposed accountability and the structure of the educational system. Three major reasons teachers do not teach using discovery learning are that they believe 1) discovery learning will not cover the course content, 2) discovery learning will require too much preparation and learning time, or 3) class sizes are too big or too small to permit the strategy’s use (Bonwell, 1998).
Educators fear that discovery learning will not cover the course content. This belief may stem from the fact that discovery learning is a square peg that is being placed in a round hole. Current curricula for K-12 education do not outline broad concepts to be learned. Instead, curricula detail isolated facts that students should know by a certain age (Schank & Cleary, 1994). Also, the structure of grade levels hinders discovery learning’s natural progression. Students are given 180 days to learn a certain amount of content. Teachers cannot offer the amount of time some students would require to discover the content the teachers are held accountable for teaching. Discovery learning does not work well on the same timeframe or with such specific, fact-based, information. A second reason for a lack of discovery learning strategies in education is the belief that discovery learning will require too much time for preparation and learning. Theoretically, it should require less time for preparation (Schank & Cleary, 1994). The idea in discovery learning is to teach processing skills so that the initial investment in preparation is high, but the exercises and activities can be used repeatedly with minor adjustments to address different content areas (Bonwell, 1998). The preparation done by the teacher in discovery learning is simply to guide students as they build the investigation skills and then allow their investigation of the topic. Since the skills are easily transferable, creating new lessons do not take a great deal of time. Preparation time should be less, however, learning time will be greater because students must be given time to explore. In the Nelson and Frayer (1972) study, it was noted that the students learning through a discovery learning method spent more time studying the lessons than those in the expository group. With current school structures and curricula, many times it is impossible to allow the time needed for discovery learning. It was not stated in the Nelson and Frayer study, but past experiences with discovery learning could play a part in the additional time spent. The skills needed to be efficient learners in a discovery learning environment must be learned; therefore, students’ first attempts at learning through discovery learning would be different from their later attempts in terms of time needed (Schank & Cleary, 1994). A third barrier to discovery learning is that class sizes are too large or too small for discovery learning.
When looking at Dewey (1916/1997), Piaget (1954), and Vygotsky (Rice & Wilson, 1999), class sizes are almost always too large to use discovery learning in the way described because of the importance of one-on-one interaction.
On the other hand, group interaction is also important so that the collective experiences of the group can assist in the creation of new knowledge; therefore, if class sizes are too small, the collective experiences are limited. The key to addressing this disadvantage is finding the Discovery that best fits the circumstances (Bonwell, 1998). Three major barriers exist, but research has found some advantages in the areas of motivation, retention, and achievement. More research in the comparison of the discovery learning method versus lecture teaching on process-based content would be very beneficial. However, current school structure, in terms of class sizes, curricula and grade levels, and accountability requirements, including standardized tests, hinder the use of the discovery learning method in the classroom.
Conclusion
Guided discovery method contradicts sharply with lecture method because it enhances students’ academic achievement in biology going by the result of this study. The method is practical oriented, student-centered and enables students to be actively engaged in a lesson. Some difficulties encountered in biology teaching like poor performance, topic difficulty can be reduced using the guided discovery method which is teacher-guided and effective. The method can stimulate students’ interest to learn due to activity-oriented nature of the method. There is every reason to encourage teachers to use the guided discovery method in biology teaching because the method has proved effective by the result of this study.
Essentially there are five basic Discoveries found in discovery learning. Discovery Description Example Case-based Learning Very old Students examine cases and discuss how to solve problems. Groups of students are given a case to read and examine. The class then discusses possible solutions to the problem described, Incidental Learning and Game-like activities. Motivational Jeopardy game Crossword puzzle learning by Exploring/Conversing Students asking questions. Encourages thinking of multiple ways to categorize what’s in the bag? Game Learning by Reflection, Learning to ask better questions and Builds analysis skills Teacher answers a student’s questions with additional questions for the student to answer Simulation-based Learning, Experimenting in an artificial environment and allows for trials without fear of failing Planning and taking a space mission

REFERENCES
Love, S. (1996). Thomas Alva Edison [Online]. Available:                                          
http://www.minot.k12.nd.us/mps/edison/edison/edison.html.
Lunenberg, F. C. (1998). Constructivism and technology: Instructional designs for                         successful education reform. Journal of Instructional Psychology. 25 (2), 75-81.
Mabie, R. & Baker, M. (1996). A comparison of experiential instructional strategies upon   the science process skills of urban elementary students. Journal of Agricultural                    Education. 37(2), 1-7.
McCain, T. (2000, April). New schools for the new millennium. Concurrent session   presented at the Georgia Educational Technology Conference, Macon, Georgia.
Moore, G. (1965). Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics. 38(8).
Mosca, J. & Howard, L. (1997). Grounded learning: Breathing live into business education. Journal of Education for Business. 73, 90-93.

Previous Post Next Post

Contact Form