What Is It about Inquiry?

Previous research on inquiry-based learning, both in science and other subjects, while generally indicating a positive connection between inquiry and improved student learning, has often produced mixed results.

This is mainly due to the fact that the definition of inquiry has either been left vague, or has varied greatly from study to study. A group of researchers from the University of Colorado argue that the problem is that we are not talking about a dichotomy here, of inquiry-based learning vs. direct instruction. We should be considering a continuum, which varies along a number of different dimensions.

These researchers therefore devised a system for coding various dimensions of inquiry, and applied it as they conducted a meta-analysis of studies on inquiry-based learning in science. The meta-analysis included 37 different studies.

Two dimensions of inquiry were identified, a cognitive dimension and a guidance dimension. The cognitive dimension varied in these four areas:

• The conceptual domain consisted of science as a body of knowledge, including facts, theories and principles.

• The epistemic domain consisted of activities which supported the students in understanding how scientific knowledge comes about. This domain included activities where students had to examine, evaluate and interpret evidence and use it to build their own theories and explanations of phenomena.

• The social domain consisted of activities where students made public their understanding through writing, modeling, presenting and other forms of representation.

• The procedural domain consisted of the methods of discovery, where students were involved in asking questions, designing experiments and executing procedures.

The guidance dimension varied according to the amount of teacher guidance, provided as follows:

• Teacher-led instruction, where the teacher gave students the know-ledge they were expected to learn.

• Discovery learning, where students designed and led the activities.

• Teacher-guided inquiry, where the teacher actively guided student activities.

What were the results?

Overall,

• Seven studies showed a negative effect for inquiry, while the remaining 30 showed a positive effect.

• There was a positive mean effect size of 0.50 for inquiry-based methods; 0.50 is generally considered to be a large effect.

Cognitive Dimension:

• The epistemic domain had the largest mean effect size on student learning (0.75 - a very large effect size)

• A combination of the procedural, epistemic and social domains had the next largest effect size.

• Studies that varied only the social domain of inquiry showed the lowest effect size (0.09)

Guidance Dimension:

• The highest mean effect size was for studies that contrasted teacher-led instruction and teacher-guided instruction. The positive effect for teacher-guided instruction was a notable 0.60.

• The largest effect sizes among this group were those that combined teacher-guided instruction and activities from either the epistemic domain, or a combination of the procedural epistemic and social domains.

What does this mean for our classrooms?

This meta-analysis provides some compelling evidence for ways in which we should structure inquiry-based learning in order to ensure that it has the maximum impact on student learning.

Firstly, the extremely large effect size for the epistemic domain suggests that we must create the space for students to generate, develop and justify their own theories of phenomena. Asking questions, designing and carrying out experiments are not enough. Students must be given opportunities to consider the bigger picture, and piece together their own theories about how the world works.

Secondly, with relation to the guidance dimension, it seems that teacher guidance is essential for student success. Neither discovery learning, nor direct instruction has the positive impact on student learning that can be achieved by a teacher guiding and scaffolding students towards the generation of their own theories. ?

Reference

Furtak, E., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. (2012) “Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies of Inquiry-Based Science Teaching: A Meta-Analysis.” Review of Educational Research 82 3, pp. 300-329.

---

Please fill out the form below if you would like to post a comment on this article:

Nickname

(this will appear with your comments)

Email

Comments

---

Comments

There are currently no comments posted. Please post one via the form above.

MORE FROM

GORDON ELDRIDGE: LESSONS IN LEARNING