De Jong et al. (2023) objected to the evidence presented by Zhang et al. (2022) to support their concerns about the unreserved acceptance and promotion of inquiry-based learning and problem solving in current policy documents related to the teaching of science. In their response, De Jong et al. (2023) reiterated their advocacy for inquiry approaches, arguing that an emphasis on a mixture of inquiry learning and explicit instruction is needed. The present article rebuts De Jong et al. (2023), in which we: 1) challenge their view of and approach to scientific methods in establishing the efficacy of different instructional approaches; 2) indicate that an underpinning theory to explain the cognitive machinery that drives inquiry-based instructional approaches is missing from their argument; and 3) address the empirical issues arising in their argument. We also highlight potential agreement with De Jong et al. (2023) on the essential role of explicit instruction and thus raise a call to the field to revise current science educational policies and standards to reflect such a role. Our agreements and disagreements advance the debate to a new focus concerning when and how inquiry-based learning and explicit instruction should be used and combined. While De Jong et al. (2023), in their theory-free paper, provided no answer to how explicit instruction and inquiry learning should be combined, we offer our suggestions based on evolutionary psychology and the expertise reversal effect from cognitive load theory.

德容等人。 （2023）反对张等人提出的证据。 （2022）支持他们对当前与科学教学相关的政策文件中毫无保留地接受和促进探究式学习和问题解决的担忧。在他们的回应中，德容等人。 （2023）重申了他们对探究方法的倡导，认为需要强调探究学习和明确指导的结合。本文反驳德容等人的观点。 （2023），其中我们：1）在确定不同教学方法的有效性方面挑战他们对科学方法的看法和方法； 2）表明他们的论点中缺少解释驱动基于探究的教学方法的认知机制的基础理论； 3）解决他们的论点中出现的实证问题。我们还强调与德容等人可能达成的协议。 （2023）关于显性教学的重要作用，从而呼吁该领域修改当前的科学教育政策和标准以反映这种作用。我们的共识和分歧将辩论推向了一个新的焦点：何时以及如何使用和结合基于探究的学习和显性教学。而德容等人。 （2023）在他们的无理论论文中，没有回答如何将显性教学和探究学习结合起来，我们根据进化心理学和认知负荷理论的专业逆转效应提出我们的建议。