Guided Instruction

Putting Students on the
Path to Learning
The Case for Fully Guided Instruction
Our goal in this article is to put an end to this debate. Decades

of research clearly demonstrate that for novices (comprising virtu-
By Richard E. Clark, ally all students), direct, explicit instruction is more effective and
Paul A. Kirschner, and John Sweller more efficient than partial guidance.4 So, when teaching new
content and skills to novices, teachers are more effective when
D
isputes about the impact of instructional guidance they provide explicit guidance accompanied by practice and
during teaching have been ongoing for more than a feedback, not when they require students to discover many
half century.1 On one side of this argument are those aspects of what they must learn. As we will discuss, this does not
who believe that all people—novices and experts mean direct, expository instruction all day every day. Small group
alike—learn best when provided with instruction that contains and independent problems and projects can be effective—not as
unguided or partly guided segments. This is generally defined vehicles for making discoveries, but as a means of practicing
as instruction in which learners, rather than being presented recently learned content and skills.
with all essential information and asked to practice using it, must Before we describe this research, let’s clarify some terms.
discover or construct some or all of the essential information for Teachers providing explicit instructional guidance fully explain
themselves.2 On the other side are those who believe that ideal the concepts and skills that students are required to learn. Guid-
learning environments for experts and novices differ: while ance can be provided through a variety of media, such as lectures,
experts often thrive without much guidance, nearly everyone modeling, videos, computer-based presentations, and realistic
else thrives when provided with full, explicit instructional guid- demonstrations. It can also include class discussions and activi-
ance (and should not be asked to discover any essential content ties—if the teacher ensures that through the discussion or activity,
or skills).3 the relevant information is explicitly provided and practiced. In
a math class, for example, when teaching students how to solve a
new type of problem, the teacher may begin by showing students
Richard E. Clark is a professor of educational psychology, clinical research how to solve the problem and fully explaining the how and why
professor of surgery, and director of the Center for Cognitive Technology at
the University of Southern California. Paul A. Kirschner is a professor of
of the mathematics involved. Often, in following problems, step-
by-step explanations may gradually be faded or withdrawn until,
illustrations by Paul Zwolak
educational psychology at the Centre for Learning Sciences and Technolo-

gies at the Open University of the Netherlands. John Sweller is an emeritus through practice and feedback, the students can solve the prob-
professor of education at the School of Education at the University of New lem themselves. In this way, before trying to solve the problem on
South Wales. This article summarizes sections of “Why Minimal Guidance their own, students would already have been walked through both
During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Construc-
tivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teach-
the procedure and the concepts behind the procedure.
ing,” by Paul A. Kirschner, John Sweller, and Richard E. Clark, which was In contrast, those teachers whose lessons are designed to offer
originally published in Educational Psychologist 41, no. 2 (2006): 75–86. partial or minimal instructional guidance expect students to dis-
6 AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012

to do it, and then have an opportunity to practice doing it while
receiving corrective feedback.12 A number of reviews of empirical
studies on teaching novel information have established a solid
research-based case against the use of instruction with minimal
guidance. Although an extensive discussion of those studies is
outside the scope of this article, one recent review is worth noting:
Richard Mayer (a cognitive scientist at the University of California,
Santa Barbara) examined evidence from studies conducted from
1950 to the late 1980s comparing pure discovery learning (defined
as unguided, problem-based instruction) with guided forms of
instruction.13 He suggested that in each decade since the mid-
1950s, after empirical studies provided solid evidence that the
then-popular unguided approach did not work, a similar
approach soon popped up under a different name with the cycle
repeating itself. Each new set of advocates for unguided
approaches seemed unaware of, or uninterested in, previous
evidence that unguided approaches had not been validated. This
pattern produced discovery learning, which gave way to experi-
cover on their own some or all of the concepts and skills they are
supposed to learn. The partially guided approach has been given
various names, including discovery learning,5 problem-based
Research has provided overwhelming
learning,6 inquiry learning,7 experiential learning,8 and construc- evidence that, for everyone but
tivist learning.9 Continuing the math example, students receiving
partial instructional guidance may be given a new type of problem
experts, partial guidance during
and asked to brainstorm possible solutions in small groups with instruction is significantly less
or without prompts or hints. Then there may be a class discussion
of the various groups’ solutions, and it could be quite some time effective than full guidance.
before the teacher indicates which solution is correct. Through
the process of trying to solve the problem and discussing different
students’ solutions, each student is supposed to discover the
relevant mathematics. (In some minimal guidance classrooms, ential learning, which gave way to problem-based and inquiry
teachers use explicit instruction of the solution as a backup learning, which has recently given way to constructivist instruc-
method for those students who did not make the necessary dis- tional techniques. Mayer concluded that the “debate about dis-
coveries and who were confused during the class discussion.) covery has been replayed many times in education, but each time,
Additional examples of minimally guided approaches include the research evidence has favored a guided approach to learn-
(1) inquiry-oriented science instruction in which students are ing.”14 (To learn about these effective guided approaches, please
expected to discover fundamental principles by mimicking the see the companion article by Barak Rosenshine that begins on
investigatory activities of professional researchers,10 and (2) medi- page 12.)
cal students being expected to discover well-established solutions Evidence from well-designed, properly controlled experimen-
for common patient problems.11 tal studies from the 1980s to today also supports direct instruc-
Two bodies of research reveal the weakness of partially and tional guidance. 15 Some researchers 16 have noted that when
minimally guided approaches: research comparing pedagogies, students learn science in classrooms with pure-discovery meth-
and research on how people learn. The past half century of empiri- ods or with minimal feedback, they often become lost and frus-
cal research has provided overwhelming and unambiguous evi- trated, and their confusion can lead to misconceptions. Others17
dence that, for everyone but experts, partial guidance during found that because false starts (in which students pursue mis-
instruction is significantly less effective and efficient than full guided hypotheses) are common in such learning situations,
guidance. And, based on our current knowledge of how people unguided discovery is most often inefficient. In a very important
learn, there is no reason to expect that partially guided instruction study, researchers not only tested whether science learners
in K–12 classrooms would be as effective as explicit, full learned more via discovery, compared with explicit instruction,
guidance. but also, once learning had occurred, whether the quality of
learning differed.18 Specifically, they tested whether those who
I. Research Comparing Fully had learned through discovery were better able to transfer their
Guided and Partially Guided Instruction learning to new contexts (as advocates for minimally guided
Controlled experiments almost uniformly indicate that when approaches often claim). The findings were unambiguous. Direct
dealing with novel information (i.e., information that is new to instruction involving considerable guidance, including exam-
learners), students should be explicitly shown what to do and how ples, resulted in vastly more learning than discovery. Those rela-
AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012 7

tively few students who learned via discovery showed no signs of approach tend to like it even though they learn less from it. It
superior quality of learning. appears that guided instruction helps less-skilled learners by
In real classrooms, several problems occur when different providing task-specific learning strategies. However, these strate-
kinds of minimally guided instruction are used. First, often only gies require learners to engage in explicit, attention-driven effort
the brightest and most well-prepared students make the discov- and so tend not to be liked, even though they are helpful to
ery. Second, many students, as noted above, simply become learning.
frustrated. Some may disengage, others may copy whatever the Similarly, more-skilled learners who choose the more-guided
brightest students are doing—either way, they are not actually version of a course tend to like it even though they too have
discovering anything. Third, some students believe they have selected the environment in which they learn less. The reason
discovered the correct information or solution, but they are mis- more guidance tends to be less effective with these learners is that,
taken and so they learn a misconception that can interfere with in most cases, they have already acquired task-specific learning
later learning and problem solving.19 Even after being shown the strategies that are more effective for them than those embedded
right answer, a student is likely to recall his or her discovery—not in the more-guided version of the course. And some evidence
the correction. Fourth, even in the unlikely event that a problem suggests that they like more guidance because they believe they
or project is devised that all students succeed in completing, will achieve the required learning with minimal effort.
I
f the evidence against minimally guided approaches is so
strong, why is this debate still alive? We cannot say with any
certainty, but one major reason seems to be that many edu-
cators mistakenly believe partially and minimally guided
instructional approaches are based on solid cognitive science.
Turning again to Mayer’s review of the literature, many educators
confuse “constructivism,” which is a theory of how one learns and
sees the world, with a prescription for how to teach.22 In the field
of cognitive science, constructivism is a widely accepted theory
of learning; it claims that learners must construct mental repre-
sentations of the world by engaging in active cognitive processing.
Many educators (especially teacher education professors in col-
leges of education) have latched on to this notion of students
having to “construct” their own knowledge, and have assumed
that the best way to promote such construction is to have students
try to discover new knowledge or solve new problems without
explicit guidance from the teacher. Unfortunately, this assump-
minimally guided instruction is much less efficient than explicit tion is both widespread and incorrect. Mayer calls it the “construc-
guidance. What can be taught directly in a 25-minute demonstra- tivist teaching fallacy.” Simply put, cognitive activity can happen
tion and discussion, followed by 15 minutes of independent with or without behavioral activity, and behavioral activity does
practice with corrective feedback by a teacher, may take several not in any way guarantee cognitive activity. In fact, the type of
class periods to learn via minimally guided projects and/or prob- active cognitive processing that students need to engage in to
lem solving. “construct” knowledge can happen through reading a book, lis-
As if these four problems were not enough cause for concern, tening to a lecture, watching a teacher conduct an experiment
there is one more problem that we must highlight: minimally while simultaneously describing what he or she is doing, etc.
guided instruction can increase the achievement gap. A review20 of Learning requires the construction of knowledge. Withholding
approximately 70 studies, which had a range of more- and less- information from students does not facilitate the construction of
skilled students as well as a range of more- and less-guided knowledge.
instruction, found the following: more-skilled learners tend to
learn more with less-guided instruction, but less-skilled learners II. The Human Brain: Learning 101
tend to learn more with more-guided instruction. Worse, a num- In order to really comprehend why full instructional guidance is
ber of experiments found that less-skilled students who chose or more effective and efficient than partial or minimal guidance for
were assigned to less-guided instruction received significantly novices, we need to know how human brains learn. There are two
lower scores on posttests than on pretest measures. For these essential components: long-term memory and working memory
relatively weak students, the failure to provide strong instructional (often called short-term memory). Long-term memory is that big
support produced a measurable loss of learning. The implication mental warehouse of things (be they words, people, grand philo-
of these results is that teachers should provide explicit instruction sophical ideas, or skateboard tricks) we know. Working memory
when introducing a new topic, but gradually fade it out as knowl- is a limited mental “space” in which we think. The relations
edge and skill increase. between working and long-term memory, in conjunction with the
Even more distressing is evidence21 that when learners are cognitive processes that support learning, are of critical impor-
asked to select between a more-guided or less-guided version of tance to developing effective instruction.
the same course, less-skilled learners who choose the less-guided Our understanding of the role of long-term memory in human

cognition has altered dramatically over the last few decades. It is oblivious to the far larger amount of information stored in long-
no longer seen as a passive repository of discrete, isolated frag- term memory. When processing novel information, working
ments of information that permit us to repeat what we have memory is very limited in duration and capacity. We have known
learned. Nor is it seen as having only peripheral influence on at least since the 1950s that almost all information stored in work-
complex cognitive processes such as critical thinking and problem ing memory is lost within 30 seconds25 if it is not rehearsed and
solving. Rather, long-term memory is now viewed as the central, that the capacity of working memory is limited to only a very small
dominant structure of human cognition. Everything we see, hear, number of elements.26 That number is usually estimated at about
and think about is dependent on and influenced by our long-term seven, but may be as low as four, plus or minus one.27 Further-
memory. more, when processing (rather than merely storing) information,
A seminal series of studies23 on chess players, for example, it may be reasonable to conjecture that the number of items that
demonstrated that expert players perform well even in “blitz” can be processed may only be two or three, depending on the
games (which are played in five minutes) because they are not nature of the processing required.
actually puzzling through each move. They have tens of thousands For instruction, the interactions between working memory and
of board configurations, and the best move for each configuration, long-term memory may be even more important than the pro-
stored in long-term memory. Those configurations are learned by
studying previous games for 10 years or more. Expert players can
play well at a fast pace because all they are doing is recalling the
Many educators confuse “constructivism,”

which is a theory of how one learns and
sees the world, with a prescription for
how to teach.
best move—not figuring it out. Similar studies of how experts

function have been conducted in a variety of other areas.24 Alto-
gether, the results suggest that expert problem solvers derive their cessing limitations.28 The limitations of working memory only
skill by drawing on the extensive experience stored in their long- apply to new, to-be-learned information (that has not yet been
term memory in the form of concepts and procedures, known as stored in long-term memory). When dealing with previously
mental schemas. They retrieve memories of past procedures and learned, organized information stored in long-term memory,
solutions, and then quickly select and apply the best ones for solv- these limitations disappear. Since information can be brought
ing problems. We are skillful in an area if our long-term memory back from long-term memory to working memory as needed, the
contains huge amounts of information or knowledge concerning 30-second limit of working memory becomes irrelevant. Similarly,
the area. That information permits us to quickly recognize the there are no known limits to the amount of such information that
characteristics of a situation and indicates to us, often immedi- can be brought into working memory from long-term memory.
ately and unconsciously, what to do and when to do it. (For These two facts—that working memory is very limited when
instance, think about how much easier managing student behav- dealing with novel information, but that it is not limited when
ior was in your fifth year of teaching than in your first year of teach- dealing with organized information stored in long-term mem-
ing.) Without our huge store of information in long-term memory, ory—explain why partially or minimally guided instruction typi-
we would be largely incapable of everything from simple acts such cally is ineffective for novices, but can be effective for experts.
as avoiding traffic while crossing a street (information many other When given a problem to solve, novices’ only resource is their very
animals are unable to store in their long-term memory), to com- constrained working memory. But experts have both their work-
plex activities such as playing chess, solving mathematical prob- ing memory and all the relevant knowledge and skill stored in
lems, or keeping students’ attention. In short, our long-term long-term memory.
memory incorporates a massive knowledge base that is central to One of the best examples of an instructional approach that
all of our cognitively based activities. takes into account how our working and long-term memories
What are the instructional consequences of long-term mem- interact is the “worked-example effect.” A worked example is just
ory? First and foremost, long-term memory provides us with the what it sounds like: a problem that has already been solved (or
ultimate justification for instruction: the aim of all instruction is “worked out”) for which every step is fully explained and clearly
to add knowledge and skills to long-term memory. If nothing has shown; it constitutes the epitome of direct, explicit instruction.*
been added to long-term memory, nothing has been learned.
Working memory is the cognitive structure in which conscious
*For a short YouTube video of a worked example, go to http://bit.ly/xa0TYQ and see
processing occurs. We are only conscious of the information cur- Shaun Errichiello, who teaches seventh-grade math at the Salk School of Science (M.S.
rently being processed in working memory and are more or less 225) in New York City, work through a word problem with fractions.

The “worked-example effect” is the name given to the widely prehended, not discovered) and directs attention (i.e., directs
replicated finding that novice learners who try to learn by being working-memory resources) toward storing the essential relations
required to solve problems perform worse on subsequent test between problem-solving moves in long-term memory. Students
problems, including transfer problems different from the ones learn to recognize which moves are required for particular prob-
seen previously, than comparable learners who learn by studying lems, which is the basis for developing knowledge and skill as a
equivalent worked examples. problem solver.33
The worked-example effect was first demonstrated in the It is important to note that this discussion of worked examples
1980s.29 Researchers found that algebra students learned more by applies to novices—not experts. In fact, the worked-example
studying worked examples than by solving equivalent problems. effect first disappears and then reverses as the learners’ expertise
Since those early demonstrations of the effect, it has been repli- increases. That is, for experts, solving a problem is more effective
cated on numerous occasions using a large variety of learners than studying a worked example. When learners are sufficiently
studying an equally large variety of materials—from mathematics experienced, studying a worked example is a redundant activity
and science to English literature and world history.30 For novices, that places a greater burden on working memory than retrieving
studying worked examples seems invariably superior to discover- a known solution from long-term memory.34 This reversal in effec-
ing or constructing a solution to a problem. tiveness is not limited to worked examples; it’s true of many
Why does the worked-example effect occur? The limitations of
If the learner has no relevant concepts

in long-term memory, the only thing
to do is blindly search for solutions.
Novices can engage in problem solving
for extended periods and learn almost
nothing.
working memory and the relations between working memory and

long-term memory discussed earlier can explain it. Solving a explicit, fully guided instructional approaches and is known as
problem requires searching for a solution, which must occur using the “expertise reversal effect.”35 In general, the expertise reversal
our limited working memory. If the learner has no relevant con- effect states that “instructional techniques that are highly effective
cepts or procedures in long-term memory, the only thing to do is with inexperienced learners can lose their effectiveness and even
blindly search for possible solution steps that bridge the gap have negative consequences when used with more experienced
between the problem and its solution. This process places a great learners.”36 This is why, from the very beginning of this article, we
burden on working-memory capacity because the problem solver have emphasized that guidance is best for teaching novel informa-
has to continually hold and process the current problem state in tion and skills. This shows the wisdom of instructional techniques
working memory (e.g., Where am I right now in the problem- that begin with lots of guidance and then fade that guidance as
solving process? How far have I come toward finding a solution?) students gain mastery. It also shows the wisdom of using minimal
along with the goal state (e.g., Where do I have to go? What is the guidance techniques to reinforce or practice previously learned
solution?), the relations between the goal state and the problem material.
state (e.g., Is this a good step toward solving the problem? Has
R
what I’ve done helped me get nearer to where I need to go?), the ecommending partial or minimal guidance for novices
solution steps that could further reduce the differences between was understandable back in the early 1960s, when the
the two states (e.g., What should the next step be? Will that step acclaimed psychologist Jerome Bruner 37 proposed
bring me closer to the solution? Is there another solution strategy discovery learning as an instructional tool. At that time,
I can use that might be better?), and any subgoals along the way. researchers knew little about working memory, long-term mem-
Thus, searching for a solution overburdens limited working ory, and how they interact. We now are in a quite different envi-
memory and diverts working-memory resources away from stor- ronment; we know much more about the structures, functions,
ing information in long-term memory. As a consequence, novices and characteristics of working memory and long-term memory,
can engage in problem-solving activities for extended periods and
learn almost nothing.31 *This assumes that the worked example is well designed. It is possible, if one is not
careful, to structure a worked example in a manner that places a large burden on
In contrast, studying a worked example* reduces the burden working memory. Indeed, it is possible to structure worked examples that impose as
on working memory (because the solution only has to be com- heavy a cognitive load as the problem-solving search required to learn via discovery.32

Examples,” Journal of Educational Psychology 91, no. 2 (1999): 334–341.
the relations between them, and their consequences for learning,
16. Ann L. Brown and Joseph C. Campione, “Guided Discovery in a Community of
problem solving, and critical thinking. We also have a good deal Learners,” in Classroom Lessons: Integrating Cognitive Theory and Classroom Practice, ed.
more experimental evidence as to what constitutes effective Kate McGilly (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994), 229–270; and Pamela Thibodeau Hardiman,
Alexander Pollatsek, and Arnold D. Well, “Learning to Understand the Balance Beam,”
instruction: controlled experiments almost uniformly indicate Cognition and Instruction 3, no. 1 (1986): 63–86.
that when dealing with novel information, learners should be 17. See, for example, Richard A. Carlson, David H. Lundy, and Walter Schneider, “Strategy
Guidance and Memory Aiding in Learning a Problem-Solving Skill,” Human Factors 34, no. 2
explicitly shown all relevant information, including what to do (1992): 129–145; and Leona Schauble, “Belief Revision in Children: The Role of Prior
and how to do it. We wonder why many teacher educators who Knowledge and Strategies for Generating Evidence,” Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology 49, no. 1 (1990): 31–57.
are committed to scholarship and research ignore the evidence 18. Klahr and Nigam, “The Equivalence of Learning Paths.”
and continue to encourage minimal guidance when they train 19. Eve Kikas, “Teachers’ Conceptions and Misconceptions Concerning Three Natural
new teachers. Phenomena,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41, no. 5 (2004): 432–448.
20. Richard E. Clark, “When Teaching Kills Learning: Research on Mathemathantics,” in
After a half century of advocacy associated with instruction Learning and Instruction: European Research in an International Context, ed. Heinz Mandl,
using minimal guidance, it appears that there is no body of Neville Bennett, Erik De Corte, and Helmut Friedrich, vol. 2 (London: Pergamon, 1989), 1–22.
sound research that supports using the technique with anyone 21. Richard E. Clark, “Antagonism between Achievement and Enjoyment in ATI Studies,”
Educational Psychologist 17, no. 2 (1982): 92–101.
other than the most expert students. Evidence from controlled, 22. Mayer, “Three-Strikes Rule”; and Richard E. Mayer, “Constructivism as a Theory of
experimental (a.k.a. “gold standard”) studies almost uniformly Learning versus Constructivism as a Prescription for Instruction,” in Constructivist Instruction:
Success or Failure? ed. Sigmund Tobias and Thomas M. Duffy (New York: Taylor and Francis,
supports full and explicit instructional guidance rather than 2009), 184–200.
partial or minimal guidance for novice to intermediate learners. 23. See Adriaan D. de Groot, Thought and Choice in Chess (The Hague, Netherlands:
Mouton Publishers, 1965) (original work published in 1946); followed by William G. Chase
These findings and their associated theories suggest teachers and Herbert A. Simon, “Perception in Chess,” Cognitive Psychology 4, no. 1 (1973): 55–81;
should provide their students with clear, explicit instruction and Bruce D. Burns, “The Effects of Speed on Skilled Chess Performance,” Psychological
Science 15, no. 7 (2004): 442–447.
rather than merely assisting students in attempting to discover
24. See, for example, Dennis E. Egan and Barry J. Schwartz, “Chunking in Recall of Symbolic
knowledge themselves. ☐ Drawings,” Memory and Cognition 7, no. 2 (1979): 149–158; Robin Jeffries, Althea A.
Turner, Peter G. Polson, and Michael E. Atwood, “The Processes Involved in Designing
Endnotes Software,” in Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition, ed. John R. Anderson (Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1981), 255–283; and John Sweller and Graham A. Cooper,
1. David P. Ausubel, “Some Psychological and Educational Limitations of Learning by “The Use of Worked Examples as a Substitute for Problem Solving in Learning Algebra,”
Discovery,” The Arithmetic Teacher 11 (1964): 290–302; Robert C. Craig, “Directed versus Cognition and Instruction 2, no. 1 (1985): 59–89.
Independent Discovery of Established Relations,” Journal of Educational Psychology 47, no. 4
(1956): 223–234; Richard E. Mayer, “Should There Be a Three-Strikes Rule against Pure 25. Lloyd Peterson and Margaret Jean Peterson, “Short-Term Retention of Individual Verbal
Discovery Learning? The Case for Guided Methods of Instruction,” American Psychologist Items,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 58, no. 3 (1959): 193–198.
59, no. 1 (2004): 14–19; and Lee S. Shulman and Evan R. Keislar, eds., Learning by Discovery: 26. George A. Miller, “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our
A Critical Appraisal (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1966). Capacity for Processing Information,” Psychological Review 63, no. 2 (1956): 81–97.
2. See, for example, Jerome S. Bruner, “The Art of Discovery,” Harvard Educational Review 27. See, for example, Nelson Cowan, “The Magical Number 4 in Short-Term Memory: A
31 (1961): 21–32; Seymour Papert, Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas Reconsideration of Mental Storage Capacity,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24, no. 1
(New York: Basic Books, 1980); and Leslie P. Steffe and Jerry Gale, eds., Constructivism in (2001): 87–114.
Education (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1995).
28. Sweller, “Evolution of Human Cognitive Architecture”; and John Sweller, “Instructional
3. See, for example, Lee J. Cronbach and Richard E. Snow, Aptitudes and Instructional Design Consequences of an Analogy between Evolution by Natural Selection and Human
Methods: A Handbook for Research on Interactions (New York: Irvington, 1977); David Klahr Cognitive Architecture,” Instructional Science 32, no. 1–2 (2004): 9–31.
and Milena Nigam, “The Equivalence of Learning Paths in Early Science Instruction: Effects of
29. Sweller and Cooper, “The Use of Worked Examples”; and Graham Cooper and John
Direct Instruction and Discovery Learning,” Psychological Science 15 (2004): 661–667;
Sweller, “Effects of Schema Acquisition and Rule Automation on Mathematical Problem-
Mayer, “Three-Strikes Rule”; Shulman and Keislar, Learning by Discovery; and John Sweller,
Solving Transfer,” Journal of Educational Psychology 79, no. 4 (1987): 347–362.
“Evolution of Human Cognitive Architecture,” in The Psychology of Learning and Motivation,
ed. Brian Ross, vol. 43 (San Diego: Academic, 2003), 215–266. 30. William M. Carroll, “Using Worked Examples as an Instructional Support in the Algebra
Classroom,” Journal of Educational Psychology 86, no. 3 (1994): 360–367; Craig S. Miller, Jill
4. John Sweller, Paul Ayres, and Slava Kalyuga, Cognitive Load Theory (New York: Springer,
Fain Lehman, and Kenneth R. Koedinger, “Goals and Learning in Microworlds,” Cognitive
2011).
Science 23, no. 3 (1999): 305–336; Fred Paas, “Training Strategies for Attaining Transfer of
5. W. S. Anthony, “Learning to Discover Rules by Discovery,” Journal of Educational Problem-Solving Skill in Statistics: A Cognitive-Load Approach,” Journal of Educational
Psychology 64, no. 3 (1973): 325–328; and Bruner, “The Art of Discovery.” Psychology 84, no. 4 (1992): 429–434; Fred Paas and Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer,
6. Howard S. Barrows and Robyn M. Tamblyn, Problem-Based Learning: An Approach to “Variability of Worked Examples and Transfer of Geometrical Problem-Solving Skills: A
Medical Education (New York: Springer, 1980); and Henk G. Schmidt, “Problem-Based Cognitive-Load Approach,” Journal of Educational Psychology 86, no. 1 (1994): 122–133;
Learning: Rationale and Description,” Medical Education 17, no. 1 (1983): 11–16. Hitendra K. Pillay, “Cognitive Load and Mental Rotation: Structuring Orthographic Projection
for Learning and Problem Solving,” Instructional Science 22, no. 2 (1994): 91–113; Jill L.
7. Papert, Mindstorms; and F. James Rutherford, “The Role of Inquiry in Science Teaching,” Quilici and Richard E. Mayer, “Role of Examples in How Students Learn to Categorize
Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2, no. 2 (1964): 80–84. Statistics Word Problems,” Journal of Educational Psychology 88, no. 1 (1996): 144–161;
8. David Boud, Rosemary Keogh, and David Walker, eds., Reflection: Turning Experience into Arianne Rourke and John Sweller, “The Worked-Example Effect Using Ill-Defined Problems:
Learning (London: Kogan Page, 1985); and David A. Kolb and Ronald E. Fry, “Toward an Learning to Recognise Designers’ Styles,” Learning and Instruction 19, no. 2 (2009):
Applied Theory of Experiential Learning,” in Studies Theories of Group Processes, ed. Cary L. 185-199; and J. Gregory Trafton and Brian J. Reiser, “The Contributions of Studying Examples
Cooper (New York: Wiley, 1975), 33–57. and Solving Problems to Skill Acquisition,” in Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual
Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
9. David Jonassen, “Objectivism vs. Constructivism,” Educational Technology Research and
1993), 1017–1022.
Development 39, no. 3 (1991): 5–14; and Leslie P. Steffe and Jerry Gale, eds., Constructivism
in Education (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1995). 31. John Sweller, Robert F. Mawer, and Walter Howe, “Consequences of History-Cued and
Means-End Strategies in Problem Solving,” American Journal of Psychology 95, no. 3 (1982):
10. Wouter R. van Joolingen, Ton de Jong, Ard W. Lazonder, Elwin R. Savelsbergh, and Sarah
455–483.
Manlove, “Co-Lab: Research and Development of an Online Learning Environment for
Collaborative Scientific Discovery Learning,” Computers in Human Behavior 21, no. 4 (2005): 32. Rohani A. Tarmizi and John Sweller, “Guidance during Mathematical Problem Solving,”
671–688. Journal of Educational Psychology 80, no. 4 (1988): 424–436; and Mark Ward and John
Sweller, “Structuring Effective Worked Examples,” Cognition and Instruction 7, no. 1 (1990):
11. Henk G. Schmidt, “Problem-Based Learning: Does It Prepare Medical Students to Become
1–39.
Better Doctors?” Medical Journal of Australia 168, no. 9 (May 4, 1998): 429–430; and Henk
G. Schmidt, “Assumptions Underlying Self-Directed Learning May Be False,” Medical 33. Michelene T. H. Chi, Robert Glaser, and Ernest Rees, “Expertise in Problem Solving,” in
Education 34, no. 4 (2000): 243–245. Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, ed. Robert J. Sternberg, vol. 1 (Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1982), 7–75.
12. Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer and Paul A. Kirschner, Ten Steps to Complex Learning
(Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2007). 34. Slava Kalyuga, Paul Chandler, Juhani Tuovinen, and John Sweller, “When Problem Solving
Is Superior to Studying Worked Examples,” Journal of Educational Psychology 93, no. 3
13. Mayer, “Three-Strikes Rule.”
(2001): 579–588.
14. Mayer, “Three-Strikes Rule,” 18.
35. Kalyuga et al., “When Problem Solving Is Superior.”
15. See, for example, Roxana Moreno, “Decreasing Cognitive Load in Novice Students:
36. Slava Kalyuga, Paul Ayres, Paul Chandler, and John Sweller, “Expertise Reversal Effect,”
Effects of Explanatory versus Corrective Feedback in Discovery-Based Multimedia,”
Educational Psychologist 38, no. 1 (2003): 23.
Instructional Science 32, nos. 1–2 (2004): 99–113; and Juhani E. Tuovinen and John Sweller,
“A Comparison of Cognitive Load Associated with Discovery Learning and Worked 37. Bruner, “The Art of Discovery.”

Principles of Instruction
Research-Based Strategies That All Teachers Should Know
By Barak Rosenshine Even though these are three very different bodies of research,
there is no conflict at all between the instructional suggestions
T
his article presents 10 research-based principles of that come from each of these three sources. In other words, these
instruction, along with suggestions for classroom prac- three sources supplement and complement each other. The fact
tice. These principles come from three sources: (a) that the instructional ideas from three different sources supple-
research in cognitive science, (b) research on master ment and complement each other gives us faith in the validity of
teachers, and (c) research on cognitive supports. Each is briefly these findings.
explained below. Education involves helping a novice develop strong, readily
A: Research in cognitive science: This research focuses on how accessible background knowledge. It’s important that background
our brains acquire and use information. This cognitive research knowledge be readily accessible, and this occurs when knowledge
also provides suggestions on how we might overcome the limita- is well rehearsed and tied to other knowledge. The most effective
tions of our working memory (i.e., the mental “space” in which teachers ensured that their students efficiently acquired,
thinking occurs) when learning new material. rehearsed, and connected background knowledge by providing
B: Research on the classroom practices of master teachers: Mas- a good deal of instructional support. They provided this support
ter teachers are those teachers whose classrooms made the high- by teaching new material in manageable amounts, modeling,
est gains on achievement tests. In a series of studies, a wide range guiding student practice, helping students when they made errors,
of teachers were observed as they taught, and the investigators and providing for sufficient practice and review. Many of these
coded how they presented new material, how and whether they teachers also went on to experiential, hands-on activities, but they
checked for student understanding, the types of support they always did the experiential activities after, not before, the basic
provided to their students, and a number of other instructional material was learned.
activities. By also gathering student achievement data, research- The following is a list of some of the instructional principles
ers were able to identify the ways in which the more and less effec- that have come from these three sources. These ideas will be
tive teachers differed. described and discussed in this article:
C: Research on cognitive supports to help students learn complex • Begin a lesson with a short review of previous learning.1
tasks: Effective instructional procedures—such as thinking aloud, • Present new material in small steps with student practice after
providing students with scaffolds, and providing students with each step.2
models—come from this research. • Ask a large number of questions and check the responses of all
Barak Rosenshine is an emeritus professor of educational psychology in the students.3
College of Education at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. • Provide models.4
illustrations by James Yang
A distinguished researcher, he has spent much of the past four decades • Guide student practice.5
identifying the hallmarks of effective teaching. He began his career as a • Check for student understanding.6
high school history teacher in the Chicago public schools. This article is
• Obtain a high success rate.7
adapted with permission from Principles of Instruction by Barak Rosen-
shine. Published by the International Academy of Education in 2010, the • Provide scaffolds for difficult tasks.8
original report is available at www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ • Require and monitor independent practice.9
Publications/Educational_Practices/EdPractices_21.pdf. • Engage students in weekly and monthly review.10

ensured that the students had a firm grasp of the skills and con-
cepts that would be needed for the day’s lesson.
Effective teachers also reviewed the knowledge and concepts
that were relevant for that day’s lesson. It is important for a teacher
to help students recall the concepts and vocabulary that will be
relevant for the day’s lesson because our working memory is very
limited. If we do not review previous learning, then we will have
to make a special effort to recall old material while learning new
material, and this makes it difficult for us to learn the new
material.
Daily review is particularly important for teaching material that
will be used in subsequent learning. Examples include reading
sight words (i.e., any word that is known by a reader automati-
cally), grammar, math facts, math computation, math factoring,
and chemical equations.
When planning for review, teachers might want to consider
1. Begin a lesson with a short review of previous which words, math facts, procedures, and concepts need to
learning: Daily review can strengthen previous
learning and can lead to fluent recall.
Research findings
Daily review is an important component of instruction. Review
The most effective teachers ensured
can help us strengthen the connections among the material we that students efficiently acquired,
have learned. The review of previous learning can help us recall
words, concepts, and procedures effortlessly and automatically rehearsed, and connected knowledge.
when we need this material to solve problems or to understand Many went on to hands-on activities,
new material. The development of expertise requires thousands
of hours of practice, and daily review is one component of this but always after, not before, the basic
practice.
For example, daily review was part of a successful experiment
material was learned.
in elementary school mathematics. Teachers in the experiment
were taught to spend eight minutes every day on review. Teachers
used this time to check the homework, go over problems where become automatic, and which words, vocabulary, or ideas need
there were errors, and practice the concepts and skills that needed to be reviewed before the lesson begins.
to become automatic. As a result, students in these classrooms In addition, teachers might consider doing the following dur-
had higher achievement scores than did students in other ing their daily review:
classrooms.
• Correct homework.
Daily practice of vocabulary can lead to seeing each practiced
• Review the concepts and skills that were practiced as part of
word as a unit (i.e., seeing the whole word automatically rather
the homework.
than as individual letters that have to be sounded out and
• Ask students about points where they had difficulties or made
blended). When students see words as units, they have more
errors.
space available in their working memory, and this space can now
• Review material where errors were made.
be used for comprehension. Mathematical problem solving is also
• Review material that needs overlearning (i.e., newly acquired
improved when the basic skills (addition, multiplication, etc.) are
skills should be practiced well beyond the point of initial mas-
overlearned and become automatic, thus freeing working-mem-
tery, leading to automaticity).
ory capacity.
In the classroom 2. Present new material in small steps with student
The most effective teachers in the studies of classroom instruction practice after each step: Only present small amounts
understood the importance of practice, and they began their les- of new material at any time, and then assist students
sons with a five- to eight-minute review of previously covered as they practice this material.
material. Some teachers reviewed vocabulary, formulae, events, Research findings
or previously learned concepts. These teachers provided addi- Our working memory, the place where we process information,
tional practice on facts and skills that were needed for recall to is small. It can only handle a few bits of information at once—too
become automatic. much information swamps our working memory. Presenting too
Effective teacher activities also included reviewing the con- much material at once may confuse students because their work-
cepts and skills that were necessary to do the homework, having ing memory will be unable to process it.
students correct each others’ papers, and asking about points on Therefore, the more effective teachers do not overwhelm their
which the students had difficulty or made errors. These reviews students by presenting too much new material at once. Rather,

these teachers only present small amounts of new material at any tifying the topics of new paragraphs. Then, she taught students to
time, and then assist the students as they practice this material. identify the main idea of a paragraph. The teacher modeled this
Only after the students have mastered the first step do teachers step and then supervised the students as they practiced both find-
proceed to the next step. ing the topic and locating the main idea. Following this, the
The procedure of first teaching in small steps and then guiding teacher taught the students to identify the supporting details in a
student practice represents an appropriate way of dealing with paragraph. The teacher modeled and thought aloud, and then the
the limitation of our working memory. students practiced. Finally, the students practiced carrying out all
three steps of this strategy. Thus, the strategy of summarizing a
In the classroom
paragraph was divided into smaller steps, and there was modeling
The more successful teachers did not overwhelm their students
and practice at each step.
by presenting too much new material at once. Rather, they pre-
sented only small amounts of new material at one time, and they 3. Ask a large number of questions and check the
responses of all students: Questions help students
practice new information and connect new material
to their prior learning.
Research findings
Students need to practice new material. The teacher’s questions
and student discussion are a major way of providing this neces-
sary practice. The most successful teachers in these studies spent
more than half of the class time lecturing, demonstrating, and
asking questions.
Questions allow a teacher to determine how well the material
has been learned and whether there is a need for additional
instruction. The most effective teachers also ask students to
explain the process they used to answer the question, to explain
how the answer was found. Less successful teachers ask fewer
questions and almost no process questions.
In the classroom
taught in such a way that each point was mastered before the next In one classroom-based experimental study, one group of teach-
point was introduced. They checked their students’ understand- ers was taught to follow the presentation of new material with lots
ing on each point and retaught material when necessary. of questions.11 They were taught to increase the number of factual
Some successful teachers taught by giving a series of short questions and process questions they asked during this guided
presentations using many examples. The examples provided practice. Test results showed that their students achieved higher
concrete learning and elaboration that were useful for processing scores than did students whose teachers did not receive the
new material. training.
Teaching in small steps requires time, and the more effective Imaginative teachers have found ways to involve all students
teachers spent more time presenting new material and guiding in answering questions. Examples include having all students:
student practice than did the less effective teachers. In a study of
• Tell the answer to a neighbor.
mathematics instruction, for instance, the most effective math-
• Summarize the main idea in one or two sentences, writing the
ematics teachers spent about 23 minutes of a 40-minute period
summary on a piece of paper and sharing this with a neighbor,
in lecture, demonstration, questioning, and working examples.
or repeating the procedures to a neighbor.
In contrast, the least effective teachers spent only 11 minutes
• Write the answer on a card and then hold it up.
presenting new material. The more effective teachers used this
• Raise their hands if they know the answer (thereby allowing
extra time to provide additional explanations, give many exam-
the teacher to check the entire class).
ples, check for student understanding, and provide sufficient
• Raise their hands if they agree with the answer that someone
instruction so that the students could learn to work independently
else has given.
without difficulty. In one study, the least effective teachers asked
only nine questions in a 40-minute period. Compared with the Across the classrooms that researchers observed, the purpose
successful teachers, the less effective teachers gave much shorter of all these procedures was to provide active participation for the
presentations and explanations, and then passed out worksheets students and also to allow the teacher to see how many students
and told students to solve the problems. The less successful teach- were correct and confident. The teacher may then reteach some
ers were then observed going from student to student and having material when it was considered necessary. An alternative was for
to explain the material again. students to write their answers and then trade papers with each
Similarly, when students were taught a strategy for summariz- other.
ing a paragraph, an effective teacher taught the strategy using Other teachers used choral responses to provide sufficient
small steps. First, the teacher modeled and thought aloud as she practice when teaching new vocabulary or lists of items. This
identified the topic of a paragraph. Then, she led practice on iden- made the practice seem more like a game. To be effective, how-

ever, all students needed to start together, on a signal. When ing students as they develop independence. When teaching read-
students did not start together, only the faster students answered. ing comprehension strategies, for example, effective teachers
In addition to asking questions, the more effective teachers provided students with prompts that the students could use to ask
facilitated their students’ rehearsal by providing explanations, themselves questions about a short passage. In one class, students
giving more examples, and supervising students as they practiced were given words such as “who,” “where,” “why,” and “how” to
the new material. help them begin a question. Then, everyone read a passage and
The following is a series of stems12 for questions that teachers the teacher modeled how to use these words to ask questions.
might ask when teaching literature, social science content, or sci- Many examples were given.
ence content to their students. Sometimes, students may also Next, during guided practice, the teacher helped the students
develop questions from these stems to ask questions of each other. practice asking questions by helping them select a prompt and
Many of the skills taught in classrooms

can be conveyed by providing prompts,
modeling use of the prompt, and then
guiding students as they develop
independence.
develop a question that began with that prompt. The students

How are __________ and __________ alike? practiced this step many times with lots of support from the
What is the main idea of __________? teacher.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of __________? Then, the students read new passages and practiced asking
In what way is __________ related to __________? questions on their own, with support from the teacher when
Compare __________ and __________ with regard to __________. needed. Finally, students were given short passages followed by
What do you think causes __________? questions, and the teacher expressed an opinion about the quality
How does __________ tie in with what we have learned before? of the students’ questions.
Which one is the best __________, and why? This same procedure—providing a prompt, modeling, guiding
What are some possible solutions for the problem of __________? practice, and supervising independent practice—can be used for
Do you agree or disagree with this statement: __________? many tasks. When teaching students to write an essay, for exam-
What do you still not understand about __________? ple, an effective teacher first modeled how to write each para-
graph, then the students and teacher worked together on two or
4. Provide models: Providing students with more new essays, and finally students worked on their own with
models and worked examples can help them supervision from the teacher.
learn to solve problems faster. Worked examples are another form of modeling that has been
used to help students learn how to solve problems in mathematics
Research findings
and science. A worked example is a step-by-step demonstration
Students need cognitive support to help them learn to solve prob-
of how to perform a task or how to solve a problem. The presenta-
lems. The teacher modeling and thinking aloud while demonstrat-
tion of worked examples begins with the teacher modeling and
ing how to solve a problem are examples of effective cognitive
explaining the steps that can be taken to solve a specific problem.
support. Worked examples (such as a math problem for which the
The teacher also identifies and explains the underlying principles
teacher not only has provided the solution but has clearly laid out
for these steps.
each step) are another form of modeling that has been developed
Usually, students are then given a series of problems to com-
by researchers. Worked examples allow students to focus on the
plete at their desks as independent practice. But, in research car-
specific steps to solve problems and thus reduce the cognitive
ried out in Australia, students were given a mixture of problems
load on their working memory. Modeling and worked examples
to solve and worked examples. So, during independent practice,
have been used successfully in mathematics, science, writing, and
students first studied a worked example, then they solved a prob-
reading comprehension.
lem; then they studied another worked example and solved
In the classroom another problem. In this way, the worked examples showed stu-
Many of the skills that are taught in classrooms can be conveyed dents how to focus on the essential parts of the problems. Of
by providing prompts, modeling use of the prompt, and then guid- course, not all students studied the worked examples. To correct

this problem, the Australian researchers also presented partially dents to work on the problems. Under these conditions, the stu-
completed problems in which students had to complete the miss- dents made too many errors and had to be retaught the lesson.
ing steps and thus pay more attention to the worked example. The most successful teachers presented only small amounts of
material at a time. After this short presentation, these teachers
5. Guide student practice: Successful teachers then guided student practice. This guidance often consisted of the
spend more time guiding students’ practice teacher working the first problems at the blackboard and explain-
of new material. ing the reason for each step, which served as a model for the
Research findings students. The guidance also included asking students to come to
It is not enough simply to present students with new material, the blackboard to work out problems and discuss their proce-
because the material will be forgotten unless there is sufficient dures. Through this process, the students seated in the classroom
rehearsal. An important finding from information-processing saw additional models.
research is that students need to spend additional time rephras- Although most teachers provided some guided practice, the
ing, elaborating, and summarizing new material in order to store most successful teachers spent more time in guided practice,
this material in their long-term memory. When there has been more time asking questions, more time checking for understand-
sufficient rehearsal, the students are able to retrieve this material ing, more time correcting errors, and more time having students
work out problems with teacher guidance.
Teachers who spent more time in guided practice and had
higher success rates also had students who were more engaged
during individual work at their desks. This finding suggests that,
when teachers provided sufficient instruction during guided
practice, the students were better prepared for the independent
practice (e.g., seatwork and homework activities), but when the
guided practice was too short, the students were not prepared for
the seatwork and made more errors during independent
practice.
6. Check for student understanding: Checking

for student understanding at each point can help
students learn the material with fewer errors.
Research findings
The more effective teachers frequently checked to see if all the
students were learning the new material. These checks provided
easily and thus are able to make use of this material to foster new some of the processing needed to move new learning into long-
learning and aid in problem solving. But when the rehearsal time term memory. These checks also let teachers know if students
is too short, students are less able to store, remember, or use the were developing misconceptions.
material. As we know, it is relatively easy to place something in a
In the classroom
filing cabinet, but it can be very difficult to recall where exactly we
Effective teachers also stopped to check for student understand-
filed it. Rehearsal helps us remember where we filed it so we can
ing. They checked for understanding by asking questions, by ask-
access it with ease when needed.
ing students to summarize the presentation up to that point or to
A teacher can facilitate this rehearsal process by asking ques-
repeat directions or procedures, or by asking students whether
tions; good questions require students to process and rehearse the
they agreed or disagreed with other students’ answers. This check-
material. Rehearsal is also enhanced when students are asked to
ing has two purposes: (a) answering the questions might cause
summarize the main points, and when they are supervised as they
the students to elaborate on the material they have learned and
practice new steps in a skill. The quality of storage in long-term
augment connections to other learning in their long-term mem-
memory will be weak if students only skim the material and do not
ory, and (b) alerting the teacher to when parts of the material need
engage in it. It is also important that all students process the new
to be retaught.
material and receive feedback, so they do not inadvertently store
In contrast, the less effective teachers simply asked, “Are there
partial information or a misconception in long-term memory.
any questions?” and, if there were no questions, they assumed the
In the classroom students had learned the material and proceeded to pass out
In one study, the more successful teachers of mathematics spent worksheets for students to complete on their own.
more time presenting new material and guiding practice. The Another way to check for understanding is to ask students to
more successful teachers used this extra time to provide addi- think aloud as they work to solve mathematical problems, plan
tional explanations, give many examples, check for student under- an essay, or identify the main idea in a paragraph. Yet another
standing, and provide sufficient instruction so that the students check is to ask students to explain or defend their position to oth-
could learn to work independently without difficulty. In contrast, ers. Having to explain a position may help students integrate and
the less successful teachers gave much shorter presentations and elaborate their knowledge in new ways, or may help identify gaps
explanations, and then they passed out worksheets and told stu- in their understanding.

Another reason for the importance of teaching in small steps, vised student practice), and by giving sufficient practice on each
guiding practice, and checking for understanding (as well as part before proceeding to the next step. These teachers frequently
obtaining a high success rate, which we’ll explore in principle 7) checked for understanding and required responses from all
comes from the fact that we all construct and reconstruct knowl- students.
edge as we learn and use what we have learned. We cannot simply It is important that students achieve a high success rate during
repeat what we hear word for word. Rather, we connect our under- instruction and on their practice activities. Practice, we are told,
standing of the new information to our existing concepts or makes perfect, but practice can be a disaster if students are prac-
“schema,” and we then construct a mental summary (i.e., the gist ticing errors! If the practice does not have a high success level,
of what we have heard). However, when left on their own, many there is a chance that students are practicing and learning errors.
students make errors in the process of constructing this mental Once errors have been learned, they are very difficult to
summary. These errors occur, particularly, when the information overcome.
is new and the student does not have adequate or well-formed As discussed in the previous section, when we learn new mate-
background knowledge. These constructions are not errors so rial, we construct a gist of this material in our long-term memory.
much as attempts by the students to be logical in an area where However, many students make errors in the process of construct-
their background knowledge is weak. These errors are so common ing this mental summary. These errors can occur when the infor-
that there is a research literature on the development and correc- mation is new and the student did not have adequate or
The most successful teachers spent

more time in guided practice, more
time asking questions, more time
checking for understanding, and more
time correcting errors.
tion of student misconceptions in science. Providing guided

practice after teaching small amounts of new material, and check-
ing for student understanding, can help limit the development of
well-formed background knowledge. These constructions are not
misconceptions.
errors so much as attempts by the students to be logical in an area
7. Obtain a high success rate: It is important where their background knowledge is weak. But students are more
for students to achieve a high success rate likely to develop misconceptions if too much material is presented
during classroom instruction. at once, and if teachers do not check for student understanding.
Providing guided practice after teaching small amounts of new
Research findings
material, and checking for student understanding, can help limit
In two of the major studies on the impact of teachers, the investi-
the development of misconceptions.
gators found that students in classrooms with more effective
I once observed a class where an effective teacher was going
teachers had a higher success rate, as judged by the quality of their
from desk to desk during independent practice and suddenly
oral responses during guided practice and their individual work.
realized that the students were having difficulty. She stopped the
In a study of fourth-grade mathematics, it was found that 82 per-
work, told the students not to do the problems for homework, and
cent of students’ answers were correct in the classrooms of the
said she would reteach this material the next day. She stopped the
most successful teachers, but the least successful teachers had a
work because she did not want the students to practice errors.
success rate of only 73 percent. A high success rate during guided
Unless all students have mastered the first set of lessons, there
practice also leads to a higher success rate when students are
is a danger that the slower students will fall further behind when
working on problems on their own.
the next set of lessons is taught. So there is a need for a high suc-
The research also suggests that the optimal success rate for
cess rate for all students. “Mastery learning” is a form of instruc-
fostering student achievement appears to be about 80 percent. A
tion where lessons are organized into short units and all students
success rate of 80 percent shows that students are learning the
are required to master one set of lessons before they proceed to
material, and it also shows that the students are challenged.
the next set. In mastery learning, tutoring by other students or by
In the classroom teachers is provided to help students master each unit. Variations
The most effective teachers obtained this success level by teaching of this approach, particularly the tutoring, might be useful in
in small steps (i.e., by combining short presentations with super- many classroom settings.

8. Provide scaffolds for difficult tasks: The teacher and at the same time provide labels for their mental processes.
provides students with temporary supports and Such thinking aloud provides novice learners with a way to
scaffolds to assist them when they learn difficult tasks. observe “expert thinking” that is usually hidden from the student.
Research findings Teachers also can study their students’ thought processes by ask-
Investigators have successfully provided students with scaffolds, ing them to think aloud during problem solving.
or instructional supports, to help them learn difficult tasks. A scaf- One characteristic of effective teachers is their ability to antici-
fold is a temporary support that is used to assist a learner. These pate students’ errors and warn them about possible errors some
scaffolds are gradually withdrawn as learners become more com- of them are likely to make. For example, a teacher might have
petent, although students may continue to rely on scaffolds when students read a passage and then give them a poorly written topic
they encounter particularly difficult problems. Providing scaffolds sentence to correct. In teaching division or subtraction, the
is a form of guided practice. teacher may show and discuss with students the mistakes other
Scaffolds include modeling the steps by the teacher, or thinking students have frequently made.
aloud by the teacher as he or she solves the problem. Scaffolds In some of the studies, students were given a checklist to evalu-
also may be tools, such as cue cards or checklists, that complete ate their work. Checklist items included “Have I found the most
part of the task for the students, or a model of the completed task important information that tells me more about the main idea?”
against which students can compare their own work. and “Does every sentence start with a capital letter?” The teacher
then modeled use of the checklist.
In some studies, students were provided with expert models
with which they could compare their work. For example, when
students were taught to generate questions, they could compare
One characteristic of effective their questions with those generated by the teacher. Similarly,
teachers is their ability to anticipate when learning to write summaries, students could compare their
summaries on a passage with those generated by an expert.
students’ errors and warn them
9. Require and monitor independent practice: Students
about possible errors some of them need extensive, successful, independent practice in
are likely to make. order for skills and knowledge to become automatic.
Research findings
In a typical teacher-led classroom, guided practice is followed by
independent practice—by students working alone and practicing
the new material. This independent practice is necessary because
The process of helping students solve difficult problems by
a good deal of practice (overlearning) is needed in order to
modeling and providing scaffolds has been called “cognitive
become fluent and automatic in a skill. When material is over-
apprenticeship.” Students learn strategies and content during this
learned, it can be recalled automatically and doesn’t take up any
apprenticeship that enable them to become competent readers,
space in working memory. When students become automatic in
writers, and problem solvers. They are aided by a master who
an area, they can then devote more of their attention to compre-
models, coaches, provides supports, and scaffolds them as they
hension and application.
become independent.
Independent practice provides students with the additional
In the classroom review and elaboration they need to become fluent. This need for
One form of scaffolding is to give students prompts for steps they fluency applies to facts, concepts, and discriminations that must
might use. Prompts such as “who,” “why,” and “how” have helped be used in subsequent learning. Fluency is also needed in opera-
students learn to ask questions while they read. Teaching students tions, such as dividing decimals, conjugating a regular verb in a
to ask questions has been shown to help students’ reading foreign language, or completing and balancing a chemical
comprehension. equation.
Similarly, one researcher developed the following prompt to
help students organize material.13
1. Draw a central box and write the title of the article in it.
2. Skim the article to find four to six main ideas.
3. Write each main idea in a box below the central box.
4. Find and write two to four important details to list under each
main idea.
Another form of scaffolding is thinking aloud by the teacher.
For example, teachers might think aloud as they try to summarize
a paragraph. They would show the thought processes they go
through as they determine the topic of the paragraph and then
use the topic to generate a summary sentence. Teachers might
think aloud while solving a scientific equation or writing an essay,

In the classroom
The more successful teachers provided for extensive and success- 17 Principles of
ful practice, both in the classroom and after class. Independent
practice should involve the same material as the guided practice.
Effective Instruction
If guided practice deals with identifying types of sentences, for
The following list of 17 principles emerges from the research
example, then independent practice should deal with the same
discussed in the main article. It overlaps with, and offers
topic or, perhaps, with a slight variation, like creating individual slightly more detail than, the 10 principles used to organize
compound and complex sentences. It would be inappropriate if that article.
the independent practice asked the students to do an activity such
• Begin a lesson with a short review of previous learning.
as “Write a paragraph using two compound and two complex • Present new material in small steps with student practice
sentences,” however, because the students have not been ade- after each step.
quately prepared for such an activity. • Limit the amount of material students receive at one
Students need to be fully prepared for their independent prac- time.
tice. Sometimes, it may be appropriate for a teacher to practice • Give clear and detailed instructions and explanations.
some of the seatwork problems with the entire class before stu- • Ask a large number of questions and check for
dents begin independent practice. understanding.
Research has found that students were more engaged when • Provide a high level of active practice for all students.
their teacher circulated around the room, and monitored and • Guide students as they begin to practice.
• Think aloud and model steps.
• Provide models of worked-out problems.
The best way to become an expert • Ask students to explain what they have learned.
• Check the responses of all students.
is through practice—thousands of • Provide systematic feedback and corrections.
• Use more time to provide explanations.
hours of practice. The more the • Provide many examples.
practice, the better the • Reteach material when necessary.

• Prepare students for independent practice.
performance. • Monitor students when they begin independent practice.
–B.R.
supervised their seatwork. The optimal time for these contacts

was 30 seconds or less. Classrooms where the teachers had to stop particular topic is large and well connected, it is easier to learn
at students’ desks and provide a great deal of explanation during new information and prior knowledge is more readily available
seatwork were the classrooms where students were making errors. for use. The more one rehearses and reviews information, the
These errors occurred because the guided practice was not suf- stronger these interconnections become. It is also easier to solve
ficient for students to engage productively in independent prac- new problems when one has a rich, well-connected body of
tice. This reiterates the importance of adequately preparing knowledge and strong ties among the connections. One of the
students before they begin their independent practice. goals of education is to help students develop extensive and avail-
Some investigators 14 have developed procedures, such as able background knowledge.
cooperative learning, during which students help each other as Knowledge (even very extensive knowledge) stored in long-
they study. Research has shown that all students tend to achieve term memory that is organized into patterns only occupies a tiny
more in these settings than do students in regular settings. Pre- amount of space in our limited working memory. So having larger
sumably, some of the advantage comes from having to explain the and better-connected patterns of knowledge frees up space in our
material to someone else and/or having someone else (other than working memory. This available space can be used for reflecting
the teacher) explain the material to the student. Cooperative on new information and for problem solving. The development
learning offers an opportunity for students to get feedback from of well-connected patterns (also called “unitization” and “chunk-
their peers about correct as well as incorrect responses, which ing”) and the freeing of space in the working memory is one of the
promotes both engagement and learning. These cooperative/ hallmarks of an expert in a field.
competitive settings are also valuable for helping slower students Thus, research on cognitive processing supports the need for
in a class by providing extra instruction for them. a teacher to assist students by providing for extensive reading of
a variety of materials, frequent review, and discussion and appli-
10. Engage students in weekly and monthly cation activities. The research on cognitive processing suggests
review: Students need to be involved in extensive that these classroom activities help students increase the number
practice in order to develop well-connected and of pieces of information in their long-term memory and organize
automatic knowledge. this information into patterns and chunks.
Research findings The more one rehearses and reviews information, the stronger
Students need extensive and broad reading, and extensive prac- the interconnections between the materials become. Review also
tice in order to develop well-connected networks of ideas (sche- helps students develop their new knowledge into patterns, and it
mas) in their long-term memory. When one’s knowledge on a (Continued on page 39)

Principles Endnotes
1. Suggested readings: George A. Miller, “The Magical
(Continued from page 19) Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our
Capacity for Processing Information,” Psychological Review
helps them acquire the ability to recall past 63, no. 2 (1956): 81–97; and David LaBerge and S. Jay
Samuels, “Toward a Theory of Automatic Information
learning automatically. Processing in Reading,” Cognitive Psychology 6, no. 2
(1974): 293–323.
The best way to become an expert is
2. Suggested readings: Carolyn M. Evertson, Charles W.
through practice—thousands of hours of Anderson, Linda M. Anderson, and Jere E. Brophy,
practice. The more the practice, the better “Relationships between Classroom Behaviors and Student
Outcomes in Junior High Mathematics and English Classes,”
the performance. American Educational Research Journal 17, no. 1 (1980):
43–60; and Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy, Educational
In the classroom Psychology: A Realistic Approach, 4th ed. (New York:
Longman, 1990).
Many successful programs, especially in 3. Suggested readings: Thomas L. Good and Douglas A.
the elementary grades, provided for exten- Grouws, “The Missouri Mathematics Effectiveness Project,”
Journal of Educational Psychology 71, no. 3 (1979):
sive review. One way of achieving this goal 355–362; and Alison King, “Guiding Knowledge
is to review the previous week’s work every Construction in the Classroom: Effects of Teaching Children
How to Question and How to Explain,” American
Monday and the previous month’s work Educational Research Journal 31, no. 2 (1994): 338–368.
every fourth Monday. Some effective 4. Suggested readings: John Sweller, “Cognitive Load
Theory, Learning Difficulty, and Instructional Design,”
teachers also gave tests after their reviews. Learning and Instruction 4, no. 4 (1994): 295–312; Barak
Research has found that even at the sec- Rosenshine, Carla Meister, and Saul Chapman, “Teaching
Students to Generate Questions: A Review of the
ondary level, classes that had weekly quiz- Intervention Studies,” Review of Educational Research 66,
no. 2 (1996): 181–221; and Alan H. Schoenfeld,
zes scored better on final exams than did Mathematical Problem Solving (New York: Academic Press,
classes with only one or two quizzes during 1985).
the term. These reviews and tests provided 5. Suggested readings: Evertson et al., “Relationships
between Classroom Behaviors and Student Outcomes”; and
the additional practice students needed to Paul A. Kirschner, John Sweller, and Richard E. Clark, “Why
Minimal Guidance during Instruction Does Not Work: An
become skilled, successful performers who Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery,
could apply their knowledge and skills in Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching,”
Educational Psychologist 41, no. 2 (2006): 75–86.
new areas. 6. Suggested readings: Douglas Fisher and Nancy Frey,
INTENTIONALLY Teachers face a difficult problem when

they need to cover a lot of material and
Checking for Understanding: Formative Assessment
Techniques for Your Classroom (Alexandria, VA: Association
LEFT BLANK
for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2007); and
don’t feel they have the time for sufficient Michael J. Dunkin, “Student Characteristics, Classroom
Processes, and Student Achievement,” Journal of
review. But the research states (and we all Educational Psychology 70, no. 6 (1978): 998–1009.
know from personal experience) that 7. Suggested readings: Lorin W. Anderson and Robert B.
Burns, “Values, Evidence, and Mastery Learning,” Review of
material that is not adequately practiced Educational Research 57, no. 2 (1987): 215–223; and
and reviewed is easily forgotten. Norman Frederiksen, “Implications of Cognitive Theory for
Instruction in Problem Solving,” Review of Educational
T
Research 54, no. 3 (1984): 363–407.
he 10 principles in this article 8. Suggested readings: Michael Pressley and Vera Woloshyn,
Cognitive Strategy Instruction that Really Improves Children’s
come from thre e different Academic Performance, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, MA: Brookline
sources: research on how the Books, 1995); and Barak Rosenshine and Carla Meister, “The
Use of Scaffolds for Teaching Higher-Level Cognitive
mind acquires and uses informa- Strategies,” Educational Leadership 49, no. 7 (April 1992):
tion, the instructional procedures that are 26–33.
9. Suggested readings: Barak Rosenshine, “The Empirical
used by the most successful teachers, and Support for Direct Instruction,” in Constructivist Instruction:
the procedures invented by researchers to Success or Failure? ed. Sigmund Tobias and Thomas M.
Duffy (New York: Routledge, 2009), 201–220; and Robert E.
help students learn difficult tasks. The Slavin, Education for All (Exton, PA: Swets and Zeitlinger,
research from each of these three sources 1996).
10. Suggested readings: Good and Grouws, “The Missouri
has implications for classroom instruction, Mathematics Effectiveness Project”; and James A. Kulik and
and these implications are described in Chen-Lin C. Kulik, “College Teaching,” in Research on
Teaching: Concepts, Findings, and Implications, ed. Penelope
each of these 10 principles. L. Peterson and Herbert J. Walberg (Berkeley, CA:
Even though these principles come McCutchan, 1979).
11. Good and Grouws, “The Missouri Mathematics
from three different sources, the instruc- Effectiveness Project.”
tional procedures that are taken from one 12. These stems were developed by King, “Guiding
source do not conflict with the instruc- Knowledge Construction in the Classroom.”
13. Sandra J. Berkowitz, “Effects of Instruction in Text
tional procedures that are taken from Organization on Sixth-Grade Students’ Memory for
another source. Instead, the ideas from Expository Reading,” Reading Research Quarterly 21, no. 2
(1986): 161–178. For additional strategies to help students
each of the sources overlap and add to each organize material, see Wisconsin Department of Public
other. This overlap gives us faith that we are Instruction, Strategic Learning in the Content Areas
(Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction,
developing a valid and research-based 2005).
understanding of the art of teaching. ☐ 14. Slavin, Education for All.

Guided Instruction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guided Instruction

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guided Instruction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Putting Students on the

Our goal in this article is to put an end to this debate. Decades

educational psychology at the Centre for Learning Sciences and Technolo-

6 AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012

AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012 7

8 AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012

Many educators confuse “constructivism,”

best move—not figuring it out. Similar studies of how experts

AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012 9

If the learner has no relevant concepts

working memory and the relations between working memory and

10 AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012

AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012 11

12 AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012

AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012 13

14 AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012

Many of the skills taught in classrooms

develop a question that began with that prompt. The students

AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012 15

6. Check for student understanding: Checking

16 AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012

The most successful teachers spent

tion of student misconceptions in science. Providing guided

AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012 17

18 AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012

practice, the better the • Reteach material when necessary.

supervised their seatwork. The optimal time for these contacts

AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012 19

INTENTIONALLY Teachers face a difficult problem when

AMERICAN EDUCATOR | SPRING 2012 39

You might also like