I would like to clarify that this post is about the tendencies of theorists and practitioners to divide useful learning tools into distinct theories and then champion or criticize them as a whole. This is mainly based on my own observations.
If you yourself find a distinction between the learning tools and the theories then that in itself is a support of this post, since I suggest unifying all the tools into one ‘theory’ to allow them to be used unbiased in the right situations.

By saying that however, we arrive at the crutch of my proposal, since our definitions of effective tools would differ greatly (as you and I differ on discovery learning, which I will address shortly), however, it would still be a positive step, in my opinion, for practitioners to discuss the merits of each tool in on a case by case basis rather then criticize a whole theory.

Although it is not the intent of this post, I am more then willing to discuss the merits of pure discovery in these comments, but I would also ask, if you will, to give your opinion about my suggestion (is it viable? needed? or even if it is not relevant?)

Regarding discovery learning, I also agree that guided discovery is probably more effective in more cases where discovery will be used. However, I do think that pure discovery has a place.
Firstly, you place emphasis on “the time spent” discovering and how it can be “better spent”. Discovery learning takes time, perhaps the most time out of any learning approach, any facilitator that thinks about using this approach would be aware of it. Discovery learning is not about time or perhaps not even about specific learning objectives that must be accomplished (such as competencies). This means that the argument of “time better spent” depends on what you would like to achieve in that time.
Discovery learning, in my opinion, can be used to enhance the cognitive abilities of the learner and thus his or hers ability to learn. Note that there is no specific knowledge or skill that is the target of the learning other then the positive experience of making connections, generating understandings from making assumptions and proving or disproving them. By doing that the learner can grow their ability to continue and make connections, use assumption-making, inferring and so on in any situation, even when sitting in a lecture and jotting down bullet-points.

This alone should be an incentive to use it, as it can greatly enhance any learning experience. We can also look at how fun and interesting discovery learning is and the mere fact that it might encourage the enjoyment of learning. Again, we see an appropriate and valid use for a tool that might be inadequate in teaching raw materials.

Finally, as to my “reinventing the wheel” argument, that does refer specifically to guided discovery and the creation of specific understandings, it appears we both agree that it will be more effective in doing so. If you would like to discuss specific examples where guided discovery would be appropriate, I’ll be happy to oblige in another post but I’ll leave it out of this one.

To summarize, we should not carp a learning approach as a whole and deem it ineffective but look at what it does contribute and apply it to the right learning circumstances. By having an unbiased, undivided access to all learning tools and approaches we can decide which is the most appropriate to use in specific situations rather then trying to match the situation to the learning approach that we hold dear.

The post does oppose discovery learning, which is not the same as constructivism. Constructivism is a theory that looks at how people learn but it does not specify any pedagogy. Discovery learning is a pedagogical approach that asserts that it is based on constructivism. Perhaps I should have been more specific and said “pure” as opposed to “guided” discovery learning. Even then, I would need to look at guided discovery learning a little more to see what it actually does.

But I am still interested in seeing examples of pure discovery learning that results in learning that is best for understanding.

Can you provide some examples of these instances?