Forms of inquiry-based science instruction and their relations with learning outcomes: Evidence from high and low-performing education systems

Abstract

Inquiry-based science instruction is widely advocated, but studies based on international large-scale assessments (ILSA) often show inquiry to be negatively associated with achievement. We re-examine this issue by taking a more nuanced look at the inquiry scale in PISA 2015. Previous studies using PISA and other ILSA assume that scales measuring inquiry-based instruction are invariant across regions/countries. This study tests whether measurement invariance could indeed be established, and if not, what regional patterns of instructional practice exist. This study also examines whether the association between inquiry and learning outcomes depend upon the provision of teacher guidance. Participants were 151,721 students from 5,089 schools from 10 highest and 10 lowest science performers in PISA 2015. Multigroup confirmatory factor analyses found that measurement invariance cannot be established, suggesting substantial regional variation in the pattern of inquiry-based instruction. Exploratory factor analyses confirm that at the measurement level, inquiry takes different forms in each region. However, at the conceptual level many regions exhibit a pattern which contrasted between “Guided inquiry” and “Independent inquiry”. Results of structural equation modelling show that inquiry is positively associated with outcomes when it incorporates teacher guidance, and negatively when it doesn’t. This pattern of association is remarkably consistent across the 20 regions examined. These findings are in line with current theories regarding the importance of scaffolding in learning from inquiry. This study suggests that it would be misguided to use PISA findings to support arguments to scale back inquiry and other constructivist approaches to teaching science.

Are students in Italy really disinterested in science? A person‐centered approach using the PISA 2015 data

“…Studies using the person‐centered approach are on the rise and have addressed a variety of topics (e.g., Chen, 2012; Fryer & Ainley, 2019; Kampa et al, 2016; Schmidt et al, 2018; Snodgrass Rangel et al, 2020; Wormington & Linnenbrink‐Garcia, 2017). Despite this, the field is still very much lacking in attempts that address the different phenomena related to how students experience science from a person‐centered perspective and which of these experiences and beliefs may be facilitating in students becoming competent participants of scientific practice (Aditomo & Klieme, 2020). Given the need for understanding a diverse student body and the characteristics of different subgroups in their relationship to the domain of science, the current study contributes by relying on a person‐centered approach.…”

“…Although some studies show students’ inquiry practices in the classroom negatively affecting these outcomes (Areepattamannil et al, 2011; Grabau & Ma, 2017), other studies reject such findings, differentiating between the various types of inquiry that may take place in the classroom. For example, Aditomo and Klieme (2020) show that inquiry is positively associated with outcomes when the inquiry incorporates teacher guidance; it is negatively associated with outcomes when it is student lead. In a similar vein, Lau and Lam (2017) show that interactive application (a subconstruct of inquiry teaching that implies a teacher may have a more direct role in the process of inquiry) is also positively associated with student outcomes.…”

“…It is also crucial to uncover any qualitative differences (e.g., motivational patterns between first‐ and second‐generation students; Alivernini et al, 2018 or first‐generation and majority population; Snodgrass Rangel et al, 2020). Examining all these aspects can continue to foster our understanding of how particular learning environments may be even more supportive in the process of building a highly competent individual engaged in scientific practice later in life (Aditomo & Klieme, 2020; Freeman et al, 2015; Weeth Feinstein & Kirchgasler, 2015).…”

“…Thus, although in the current paper we also scrutinize competent individuals in science, we build our investigation on the assumption that the competent participants of scientific practice are also those who possess particular beliefs about science as a field. These may include changing beliefs about the nature of science and an understanding that scientific knowledge is subject to revision and ongoing inquiry (Aditomo & Klieme, 2020; Sandoval et al, 2016). In addition, from the perspective of life‐long learning, it is more relevant that a student develops a set of optimal noncognitive characteristics (i.e., self‐efficacy and interest) because through these, even students with lower competence have an opportunity to move forward in developing their own skills and can possibly become active citizens engaged in scientific practice and reasoning (Freeman et al, 2015; Weeth Feinstein & Kirchgasler, 2015).…”

“…Jeffries et al (2020) also use PISA 2015 data and find a complex relationship between SES measures, immigrant background, gender, attitudes towards science, and future career choice. Both Aditomo and Klieme (2020) and Lau and Lam (2017) emphasize that there is a complex relationship between science literacy and the different aspects of teaching and learning. Lee (2020) adds environmental awareness to this discussion, while Areepattamannil et al (2020) showcase the importance of further investigating the links between students’ self‐beliefs and instruction.…”