Solving a novel problem has recently garnered some attention as a viable alternative to traditional explicit instruction in the preparation of students for learning. This study investigated the effectiveness of introducing problem-solving tasks and worked examples prior to explicit instruction, along with the use of contrast, for gifted and non-gifted adolescents. One hundred and ninety-nine students from academically selective government and Independent high schools participated in this study. The 2 × 2 × 2 research design that was used examined the effects of giftedness (i.e., gifted vs. non-gifted), instruction-type (i.e., problem-solving vs. worked examples), and structure (i.e., high vs low contrast materials) on the learning outcomes of transfer and procedural knowledge. The study also examined the impact of explicit instruction and invention-first instruction strategies on non-performance variables--self-efficacy, extraneous load, experience of knowledge gaps, and interest. The results of the study suggested that invention-first instruction may be more effective than example-first instruction in transfer, and that gifted students may benefit more from invention-first instruction than example-first instruction. The use of contrast materials was not found to affect performance. Furthermore, instruction was found to have no significant effects on the investigated non-performance variables. Collectively, these findings challenge the conventional teaching modality of explicit instruction in gifted education, and puts forward the possibility of the invention-first strategy as an effective instructional strategy for gifted students.