Are Inductive Teaching Methods Compatible with Cognitive Load Theory?

Since Bruner’s introduction of discovery learning in the 1960s, there has been an ongoing and intensive debate on the value of inductive teaching methods (e.g., problem-solving followed by instruction, such as in problem-based learning and productive failure) compared to deductive teaching methods (instruction followed by problem-solving, such as direct instruction). Although it has been strongly argued that problem-first inductive methods are incompatible with human cognitive architecture as perceived by cognitive load theory, the main goal of this position paper is to appeal to broaden cognitive load research on inductive and deductive methods, and especially, their orchestration in educational programs of longer duration. We describe eight possible sequences of problem-solving and instruction and conclude that, when well designed, at least six of these sequences can be compatible with cognitive load theory, including productive failure and problem-based learning. We suggest that rather than comparing inductive with deductive methods, future research should also include inductive methods that use different types of supported problem-solving in combination with expository and inquisitory instruction. We propagate a design perspective, looking for the instructional goals, learner characteristics, and other conditions that make selected teaching methods effective, efficient, and attractive.