It is the opposite of the inductive approach. Here the learner proceeds from general to particular, abstract to concrete and formula to examples. The pre-constructed formula, or definition is explained to the students and they are asked to solve the problem with the help of that formula. The formula or established truth definition is accepted by the learner as a well-The teacher announces the relevant formula or definition. Students are told air has weight, thus they are asked to verify it by means of experiments. They are told that area of a rectangle’== L x B. Then a few sums are solved before the students. The students apply these formulae to solve the problems and they memorize it for future use. Thus, as the children accept the general statement or the rules and the formulae without challenging, regardless of whether they are correct or incorrect or in harmony with outer reality, the approach is, authoritative and not developmental.


  1. The method is short and time-saving. The books and teachers, thus, have some preterence for it..
  2. It glorifies memory, as the students have to memorize a considerable number of formulae and definitions.
  3. During practice and revisi: stage, deductive methodis adequate and advantageous.lev
  4. It combine with ure indub thod to remove the incompleteness and inadequacy of theter,
  5. It enhances speed and efficiency in sol problems.


  1. It is very difficult for a beginner to understand a abstract formula if it is not preceded by a number of an concrete instances.
  2. Pure deductive work requires a formula for every type of problem and an extensive use of this method wil demand the blind memorization of a large number of formulate. It will thus cause an unnecessary and heavy burden on the brain.
  3. Here memory is more important than understanding and intelligence.
  4. If the pupil forgets the memorized formula which is very likely in cramming, he cannot recollect and reconstruct the formula easily.
  5. The students cannot become active learners.
  6. It is not suitable for the development of thinking, reasoning and discovery.


The two approaches, inductive and deductive, aim at establishing the validity of the thought process. Deduction can only give us formal validity because the rule is taken for granted. This may be misleading if the general statement is wrong. It is only induction which tests the material validity Le. whether the application of deduction is actually real or not. Thus induction must supplement deduction to complete the thought process. Induction is to be the forerunner or predecessor of deductive. The deductive will give a good follow-up, if the understanding is earlier obtained through The loss of time due to the slow speed of induction, nduction. be covered up through quick and time-saving process of deduction. There may be any number of arguments against can deduction but it cannot be driven out of teaching. It is to serve as the complement of induction. Induction leaves the learner at a point where he cannot stop. The after work has to be completed by deduction. The two methods complement each other. Deduction is a process particularly suitable for a final statement and induction is most suited for the exploration of new fields. Probability in induction is raised to certainty in deduction. The modern teaching always starts with induction, leads to deduction, where the knowledge learnt is verified and then ends in induction, where the knowledge is applied to further examples. It should be induction Deduction’ Induction. There is no question of ‘either or’. Both are required.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *