Editing Instructional scaffolding (section)

==== Minimal guidance in education: synthesis and solutions ====
<blockquote>One of the consequences of this reconceptualization is abandoning the rigid explicit instruction versus minimal guidance dichotomy and replacing it with a more flexible approach based on differentiating specific goals of various learner activities in complex learning.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Kalyuga |first1=Slava |last2=Singh |first2=Anne-Marie |date=December 2016 |title=Rethinking the Boundaries of Cognitive Load Theory in Complex Learning |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10648-015-9352-0 |journal=[[Educational Psychology Review]] |volume=28 |issue=4 |pages=831–852 |doi=10.1007/s10648-015-9352-0 |issn=1040-726X |s2cid=254468337|url-access=subscription }}</ref></blockquote>There have been several attempts to move beyond the minimal guidance versus fully guided instruction controversy. These are often developed by introducing the variable of learner expertise and using that to suggest adapting instructional styles depending on the level of expertise of the learner, with more expert learners generally requiring less direct instruction.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Bokhove |first1=C. |url=https://uk.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-assets/112572_book_item_112572.pdf |title=The Early Career Framework Handbook. |last2=Campbell |first2=R. |publisher=Sage |year=2020 |isbn=978-1-5297-2457-8 |edition=2nd |pages=75–83 |chapter=Adapting teaching.}}</ref> For example, despite providing many of the criticisms of minimal guidance, [[Cognitive load|cognitive load theory]] does also suggest a role for less direct guidance from the teacher as learners become more expert due to the [[expertise reversal effect]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Kalyuga |first1=Slava |last2=Ayres |first2=Paul |last3=Chandler |first3=Paul |last4=Sweller |first4=John |date=2003-01-01 |title=The Expertise Reversal Effect |url=https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1141&context=edupapers |journal=Educational Psychologist |language=en |volume=38 |issue=1 |pages=23–31 |doi=10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4 |s2cid=10519654 |issn=0046-1520}}</ref> Other attempts at synthesis include using pedagogies more associated with martial arts instruction that apply explicit instruction as a means of fostering student discovery through repeated practice.<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal |last=Trninic |first=Dragan |date=February 2018 |title=Instruction, repetition, discovery: restoring the historical educational role of practice |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11251-017-9443-z |journal=Instructional Science |volume=46 |issue=1 |pages=133–153 |doi=10.1007/s11251-017-9443-z |issn=0020-4277 |s2cid=255111187 |hdl-access=free |hdl=20.500.11850/226164}}</ref> <blockquote>If instead we entertain the possibility that instruction and discovery are not oil and water, that instruction and discovery coexist and can work together, we may find a solution to this impasse in the field. Perhaps our way out of the instructivist-constructivist impasse thus involves not a "middle ground" compromise but an alternative conceptualization of instruction and discovery.<ref name=":3" /></blockquote>