18/11/15 1 - FMIPA UNJ

(1)

Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology CRICOS Provider Code 00301J

Inquiry-based Teaching and Learning:

What is intended and what is effective?

David F Treagust

8th SMTE 21-24 November 2015 Sari Pan Pacific Hotel, Jakarta

Organization of the presentation

§ What is meant by inquiry?

§ Three approaches that use inquiry

Primary Connections – elementary school Model-based learning – mainly secondary school Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning – mainly

universities

§ How should decisions about effectiveness be measured?

Accumulation of single studies Meta-analyses of similar studies

Footer text - slideshow title

What is meant by inquiry?

§ Scientific inquiry – how scientists study the natural world

§ Inquiry learning – a process by which students acquire knowledge of science concepts and learn about nature of science

§ Inquiry teaching - the pedagogy by which teachers engage students in inquiry

Scientific inquiry vs. Classroom inquiry

§ Inquiry in a scientist’s lab (authentic inquiry) differs from school science inquiry

- students not capable of engaging to a full extent in inquiry - students do not have the technical expertise - students do not have the depth of knowledge

§ Scientific inquiry differs in terms of sophistication in the use of elaborate/expensive equipment, scope and duration

§ However, classroom inquiry can encourage students to construct models in developing explanations and engaging in argumentation

Essential features of inquiry-based learning: What is intended?

§ Each feature should be present over the course of a series of lessons, not all in one lesson:

§ Students begin with a question that can be answered in a scientific way.

§ Students rely on evidence to answer the question.

§ Based on evidence collected, students form an explanation to answer the question.

§ Students evaluate their explanation.

§ Students communicate and justify their explanation.

Teaching science as inquiry: What is intended?

§ Refers to the strategies and techniques teachers use to engage and guide students through scientific investigations

§ Students’ own questions should initiate an investigation

§ Helps students identify and communicate the thought processes in designing and conducting an investigation

§ Learning outcomes also include learning science subject matter by engaging in these investigations

§ In the teaching context, inquiry is used as: Project-based science, problem-based learning, model-based learning, authentic science

(2)

Summary of inquiry teaching in different countries

§ Many countries emphasise science inquiry teaching in policy documents but inquiry teaching & learning not common

§ Differences in definition of inquiry remain

§ Successful student outcomes in teaching science as inquiry

§ Inquiry teaching is absent in many country’s classrooms : - lack of confidence

- traditional teaching due to high stakes testing - more professional development needed

§ Source: Abd-El-Khalick et al. 2004, Crawford 2014

What is Effective? Primary Connections – Linking science with literacy

Australian science education primary program

§ To improve learning outcomes for primary students in science and literacy

§ By developing a professional learning program supported with

§ curriculum resources

§ To improve teachers’ confidence and competence for teaching science through developing their science pedagogical content knowledge.

Underpinning frameworks

•  5Es teaching and learning model Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, Evaluate

(Bybee, 1997)

•  Assessment embedded within the teaching and learning model

•  Linking science with literacy

•  Inquiry and investigative approach

•  Cooperative learning strategies

Source: Primary Connections - Canberra Footer text - slideshow title

2007 TRIAL

10

Australian Curriculum: Science

Three interrelated strands:

Science Understanding Science Inquiry Skills Science as a Human Endeavour

Science Understanding Strand divided into four sub- strands

Biological sciences Chemical sciences Physical sciences Earth and space sciences

2007 TRIAL

11

Australian Curriculum:Science

Science Inquiry Skills content is described in two-year bands.

There are five sub-strands:

Questioning and predicting Planning and conducting

Processing and analysing data and information Evaluating

Communicating

Australian Curriculum: Science

Source: Primary Connections - Canberra Footer text - slideshow title

(3)

Research Findings – Primary Connections

§ Program improved teachers' confidence, self-efficacy and practice, students’ learning, and status of science in schools.

§ Teachers reported positive impacts on their students’

conceptual understanding and inquiry-skill development

§ Changes identified in both teachers’ thinking about inquiry approaches and their implementation.

§ Increase in students’ interest in science, and the impact the units had on their students’ learning in science.

§ No meta-analysis for Primary Connections exists

Sources Hackling at el., 2007, Skamp, 2012 Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology CRICOS Provider Code 00301J

What is Effective? Model-based teaching and learning

• Scientists construct and use models to describe, explain, predict and control some events.

§ By making this process explicit, students can

• Revise their mental schemata (models) in the light of experimental evidence and collaborative discourse

• Understand the scientific process

§ Through carefully guided discourse, students construct models, using various representations, to describe their experiences with physical systems and processes

•  Model-based inquiry involves testing, revising, or rejecting mental models.

Source:: Coll and Lajium 2011, Harrison & Treagust, 2006

Model-based teaching and learning

§ Models play an important role in scientific inquiry to understand phenomena

•  Discovery

•  Development

•  Evaluation

•  Exposition

§ Modelling as a cognitive tool

•  Generating diagrams

•  Creating own models

•  Develop and revise own models

Using ball and stick models

Computer Multimedia in Science Education

The 11th grade students in Mrs. Roos’ and Mrs. Mossings’ Chemistry course built molecular models of chemical compounds after learning about Lewis Dot structures and chemical bonding.

CAHS Chemistry Students Build Molecular Models Footer text - slideshow title

(4)

Model-based teaching and learning

§ Teaching models – bridges between known and unknown

§ Student’s view of models can provide some insight:

• Epistemological beliefs – the development of scientific ideas.

• Ontological beliefs – the status of ideas and knowledge.

• Social/affective –promote discussion and to present ideas

§ Model use for making predictions and providing motivation.

§ Model use in science education

•  Produce simpler forms of objects or concepts

•  Stimulation for learning by visualisation

•  Provide explanations for scientific phenomenon

Source:: Coll and Lajium 2011, Harrison & Treagust, 2006

Research Findings – Model-based learning

§ Using an analogical teaching approach to engender conceptual change (Treagust et al. 1996)

§ The modeling ability of non-major chemistry students and their understanding of the submicroscopic level.

(Chittleborough et al. 2006)

§ Model based learning and instruction in science (Clement

& Rea-Ramirez 2008)

§ Models and modelling: Cognitive tools for scientific enquiry (Khine & Saleh, 2011)

§ Model-based inquiry – Concord Consortium (Gobert et al.)

§ Overall positive effect of model use but no meta-analyses

§ Student-centered strategy using guided inquiry – a learning cycle of exploration, concept invention and application – carefully designed materials that students use to guide them to construct new knowledge

§ Underlying theoretical framework: Social constructivism and the Learning cycle

§ Small groups with individual roles and use carefully designed materials that guide them to construct new knowledge

What is Effective? Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning

Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning

§ POGIL activities on core concepts for deep understanding of the course material while developing higher-order thinking skills.

§ Improve student learning, engagement, retention, and performance in large classes through increased use of student-centred teaching

§ Australian implementation of student-centered teaching practices, a blend of lecture, demonstration and worksheet approach

Pedagogies of Engagement: Resource Collections serc.carleton.edu

Research Findings on POGIL

§ Many studies since 1999 report successful outcomes

§ Hein (2012) – First Year Ss taught organic chemistry by POGIL scored higher on ACS exam than students in traditional classes

§ Conway (2014) – Pre-Nursing Ss taught organic and biochemistry, compared guided inquiry, partially guided inquiry and lectures – different cohorts over 7 years. Final exam scores better compared to other groups

§ Barthlow (2014) 10^th and 11^th grade Ss– compare traditional and POGIL classes – particulate nature of matter test. POGIL group had higher scores and less alternative conceptions.

§ Treagust et al. (2014) - First Year Ss taught organic chemistry – POGIL groups scored higher on stereo-chemistry test.

§ No meta-analyses on POGIL so far exist Footer text - slideshow title

(5)

What do meta-analyses tell us about inquiry- based science teaching and learning?

§ Do not discuss inquiry learning specifically but as part of unguided and minimally guided instructional approaches

§ Unguided and minimally guided instructional approaches include constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching --- are very popular and intuitively appealing.

Source: Kirschner P. A., Sweller. J., & Clark, R. E. (2006 Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology CRICOS Provider Code 00301J

What do meta-analyses tell us about inquiry- based science teaching and learning?

§ Guided instruction is superior based on knowledge of human cognitive architecture, expert-novice differences and cognitive load

§ Minimally guided instruction is less effective and less efficient than instructional approaches that place a strong emphasis on guidance

§ The advantage of guidance begins to recede only when learners have sufficiently high prior knowledge to provide

“internal” guidance

Source: Kirschner P. A., Sweller. J., & Clark, R. E. (2006) Footer text - slideshow title

Meta-analysis of studies of inquiry-based science teaching

§ To determine the impact of variations of inquiry-based teaching and learning on student achievement in experimental and quasi-experimental studies published in the ten years following NSES (1996) with inquiry emphasis.

§ 5864 articles from Web of Science and ERIC

§ Various keywords about instruction – inquiry was one word

§ Very detailed descriptions of methodology, explanations of arguments, data from studies and calculations.

§ Articles classified by level of guidance – teacher-led traditional instruction - teacher guided inquiry – student-led enquiry (discovery)

§ 37 papers from 10 different countries meet criteria for meta-analysis

§ Effect size of 0.5 is equivalent to a one grade jump

Source: Furtak, Seidel, Iverson, Briggs, 2012

Meta-analysis of studies of inquiry-based science teaching

§ Further detailed analysis about Inquiry contrast

• Procedural (P) – asking questions, designing experiments, recording and representing data, hands-on

• Epistemic (E) – nature of science, drawing conclusions, generating and revising theories

• Conceptual (C) –drawing connections to prior knowledge, eliciting Ss ideas and mental models

• Social (S) – participating in class discussions, making presentations, arguing and debating, working collaboratively

§ What elements of inquiry were varied in the studies and to what domain the effect of the intervention can be attributed?

Meta-analysis of studies of inquiry-based science teaching - Mean effect sizes

§ Overall effect size of the 37 studies was 0.56

§ Traditional v inquiry-based (n =10) was 0.65

§ Inquiry: Procedural-Epistemic-Social (n = 6) was 0.65

§ Inquiry: Epistemic (n = 3) was 0.75

§ Higher effect sizes for teacher-led inquiry activities

§ Correlation Traditional v Inquiry teaching and PES was .80

§ Correlation Traditional v Inquiry teaching and E was .73

Meta-analysis of studies of inquiry-based science teaching

§ Inquiry based teaching indicates a positive effect on student learning with particular large effect size of students engaging in Epistemic learning and combination of PES

§ Higher effect sizes for studies involved teacher-led activities

§ Four Faceted Model of Inquiry Based Science -- conceptual, procedural, epistemic and social -- forms a framework

§ This model warrants further research carefully taking these categories into account

Source: Furtak, Seidel, Iverson, Briggs, 2012 title

(6)

Search for Gold standards in science education

§ Evaluation of projects has moved from reporting of exposure or impact on teachers to the impact on student performance.

§ Privileges one research approach – randomised controlled trials in medical research

§ Being a student is quite different from being a patient

§ Favours a technocratic model – overlooks inductive inquiries and consideration of rigorous mixed methods

§ Ignores high-quality qualitative research approaches

§ Ignores stages 1 and 2 of medical research approaches

§ Use of meta-analyses partially addresses these issues

Source:Biesta, 2007, Shelley, Yore, Hand 2012,

Summary

§ Examined the nature of inquiry learning

§ Illustrated by three approaches

§ Raised issues of how to measure the effectiveness of inquiry teaching and learning

References

§ Abd-El-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R. Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H-L. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives.

Science Education, 88, 397-419.

§ Biesta, G. (2007). Educational Theory, 57(1), 1-22.

§ Chittleborough, G. & Treagust, D. F. (2007). The modeling ability of non-major chemistry students and their understanding of the submicroscopic level. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 274-292.

§ Chittleborough, G., David Treagust, D. F., Mamiala, T.L., & Mocerino, M. (2005). Students’

perceptions of the role of models in the process of science and in the process of learning. Research in Science & Technological Education,23 (2), 195-212.

§ Conway M. J. (2014). The effectiveness of process-oriented guided inquiry learning to reduce alternative conceptions in secondary classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 114(5), 246-255

§ Crawford, B. (2014). From inquiry to scientific practices in the classroom. In Lederman N and Abell, S (Eds.), Handbook of science education research (pp. 515-541). Routledge.

§ Furtak,E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta–analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300-329.

References

§ Hackling, M, Pears, S & Prain V. (2007). Primary Connections: Reforming science teaching in Australian primary schools. Teaching Science,

§ Kirschner P. A., Sweller. J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry- based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

§ Osborne J. (2014). Scientific practices and inquiry in the science classroom. In Lederman N and Abell, S (Eds.), Handbook of science education research (pp. 579-599). Routledge.

§ Shelley, M. C. II, Yore, L. D. & Hand, B. (2009). Education research meets the “Gold Standard”:

Evaluation, research methods and statistics after No Child Left Behind. In M. C. Shelley II, L. D. Yore

& B. Hand (Eds.). Quality research in literacy and science education: International perspectives and gold standards (pp. 3-15). Springer ..

§ Skamp, K. (2012). Teaching Primary Science: Trial-teacher feedback on the implementation of Primary Connections and the 5E model. Canberra, ACT: Australian Academy of Science.

§ Treagust, D. F., Harrison, A. G., Venville, G. J., & Dagher, Z. (1996). Using an analogical teaching approach to engender conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 213-229

§ 