The truth about inquiry-based learning

Worrying research from leading organisations including the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,McKinsey,the Grattan Institute,and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare highlights the harmful impact of lockdowns on the educational future of students.

Consequently,we must make wise choices about what we teach and,more importantly,how we teach it – especially to the vulnerable and disadvantaged.

Students are returning to schools after long lockdowns.

Students are returning to schools after long lockdowns.Peter Rae

Professor John Sweller’sresearch into inquiry-based approaches to learning needs our urgent attention. At the core of Sweller’s work is “cognitive load theory” – something world-renowned educator Dylan Wiliam says is the single most important thing for teachers to know.

Sweller explains that Australia’s declining performance in international assessments such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) coincides with an increased emphasis on inquiry or discovery learning,problem-based learning and “critical thinking” in Australian curricula.

Inquiry learning prioritises the learner’s role in discovering information for themselves,as opposed to explicit pedagogy.

Education expert Peter Adams.

Education expert Peter Adams.Supplied

Sweller argues that 60 years of educational theory supporting inquiry learning does not stack up against what we now know about human cognition. He explains that what he calls “biologically primary information” consists of information that we acquire through evolution. It is acquired unconsciously and effortlessly without tuition,and doesn’t need to be taught.

However,“biologically secondary information” includes knowledge that we consider to be culturally important but that we have not acquired through evolution. Schools,he says,were created to teach domain-specific,biologically secondary skills,such as problem-solving.

His key contention is that we acquire biologically secondary information slowly and with considerable effort using an inquiry-based learning approach,while we acquire it more rapidly and easily via explicit instruction from other people – such as teachers.

Central to this is the role of our working memory,which has very limited capacity and limited duration for retention. Newly acquired information must transfer through this constrained working memory into our large,long-term memory – a memory believed to have no limitations on capacity or duration. When triggered by signals,this stored information can be transferred back to working memory to produce appropriate action. Education is key to these processes.

Sweller’s cognitive load theory is about aligning how we learn with how our brain works. His research evidence has demonstrated the advantages explicit instruction holds over inquiry-based learning. He cites other studies showing that using more inquiry-based learning in classrooms correlates with lower student performance on test scores. This is entirely consistent with the PISA 2015 findings.

I am not arguing for the eradication of inquiry-based learning. Rather,the key lesson is that inquiry-based learning that is not teacher-centred and strongly scaffolded,and does not equip students with a tool kit,including fully worked examples,is likely to be successful only for those students who are already knowledgeable and well-skilled. For those who struggle with new information,the cognitive load might just overwhelm them.

Peter Adams is former OECD global project manager of PISA 2018,and an honorary principal fellow of the University of Melbourne.

Most Viewed in National