Inquiry-based science education: towards a pedagogical framework for primary school teachers

Abstract

Inquiry-based science education (IBSE) has been promoted as an inspiring way of learning science by engaging pupils in designing and conducting their own scientific investigations. For primary school teachers, the open nature of IBSE poses challenges as they often lack experience in supporting their pupils during the different phases of an open IBSE project, such as formulating a research question and designing and conducting an investigation. The current study aims to meet these challenges by presenting a pedagogical framework in which four domains of scientific knowledge are addressed in seven phases of inquiry. The framework is based on video analyses of pedagogical interventions by primary school teachers participating in open IBSE projects. Our results show that teachers can guide their pupils successfully through the process of open inquiry by explicitly addressing the conceptual, epistemic, social and/or procedural domain of scientific knowledge in the subsequent phases of inquiry. The paper concludes by suggesting further research to validate our framework and to develop a pedagogy for primary school teachers to guide their pupils through the different phases of open inquiry. IntroductionInquiry-based science education (IBSE) is regarded as an inspiring way of learning science as it focuses on pupils' own interests and stimulates active learning by enabling pupils to conduct their own investigations (Braund & Driver, 2005;Murphy & Beggs, 2003;Rocard et al., 2007). Since addressing pupils' motivation and own interests positively influences their achievements (Tella, 2007), IBSE is viewed as an effective approach for learning scientific concepts and understanding the nature of science (NOS) in which the process of inquiry is key.The pedagogy of IBSE allows pupils to develop their conceptual understanding of scientific phenomena (Minner, Levy, & Century, 2010;Schroeder, Scott, Tolson, Huang, & Lee, 2007) and their inquiry skills, such as formulating a research question (Zion, Cohen, & © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.CONTACT Martina S. J. van Uum m.vanuum@science.ru.nl Science Education Hub Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2016 VOL. 38, NO. 3, 450-469 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016 Amir, 2007). Moreover, pupils learn about the way scientific knowledge is constructed (Khishfe & Abd-El-Khalick, 2002) and develop an image of the social practice of scientists (Mercer, Dawes, Wegerif, & Sams, 2004). IBSE has been suggested to positively affect learning outcomes of students by means of enabling open inquiries (Berg, ...

Effective characteristics of professional development programs for science and technology education

“…Therefore, this article will focus especially on this combination of subject matters, although the domains might be provided separately in other educational systems. In teaching science and technology content in such an integrated manner, various pedagogies can be used, including inquiry science instruction, problem-based instruction and context-based and science-technology-society approaches (e.g., Bennett et al 2007, Walker and Leary 2009, Furtak et al 2012, Van Uum et al 2016. For example, when teachers use an inquiry-based approach, they need to guide students through the seven inquiry phases (Van Uum et al 2016).…”

“…In teaching science and technology content in such an integrated manner, various pedagogies can be used, including inquiry science instruction, problem-based instruction and context-based and science-technology-society approaches (e.g., Bennett et al 2007, Walker and Leary 2009, Furtak et al 2012, Van Uum et al 2016. For example, when teachers use an inquiry-based approach, they need to guide students through the seven inquiry phases (Van Uum et al 2016). This includes, amongst other things, questioning students to prompt them to retrieve their prior knowledge and improve their understanding (exploration), and scaffolding the procedures of formulating a research question and setting up a proper research design (designing the investigation).…”

Highly Recommended and Poorly Used: English and Spanish Science Teachers’ Views of Inquiry-based Learning (IBL) and its Enactment

“…(Windschitl et al, 2008, p. 944). In examining the evidence during their practical work, students can develop an understanding of how 'scientific knowledge is generated' (Furtak, et al, 2012, p. 305) attending to the epistemic domain (Duschl & Bybee, 2014;Osborne, 2014;van Uum et al, 2016;Windschitl et al, 2008). In a similar vein, the European report 'Science Education for Responsible Citizenship' defines inquiry as 'a complex process of sense-making and constructing coherent conceptual models where students formulate questions, investigate to find answers, build new understandings, meanings and knowledge, communicate their learning to others and apply their learning productively in unfamiliar situations' (European Commission, 2015, p. 68).…”

Que Desafios e Possibilidades Expressam os Licenciandos que Começam a Aprender sobre Ensino de Ciências por Investigação? Tensões entre Visões de Ensino Centradas no Professor e no Estudante

“…Em relação aos objetivos do EnCI, além da aprendizagem dos conteúdos conceituais e factuais das ciências, ele tem como objetivo de aprendizagem intrínseco o desenvolvimento de habilidades relacionadas às práticas científicas, incluindo a dimensão cognitiva de raciocínio lógico e científico, como a interpretação de dados e a reflexão para a produção de conclusões e explicações baseadas em evidências, assim como a argumentação (Krämer et al, 2015;Minner et al, 2010;Pedaste et al, 2015;van Uum, Verhoeff, & Peeters, 2016). É importante ressaltar que esse conjunto de habilidades ultrapassa em muito a mera ação manipulativa, já que a associação direta com atividades práticas ou experimentais está entre as concepções docentes sobre EnCI consideradas equivocadas (Munford, & Lima, 2007;National Research Council, 2000).…”

“…Dentre os principais impedimentos que os professores experimentam para implementar o EnCI estão a pouca motivação e habilidade dos estudantes, a falta de habilidades pedagógicas, o conhecimento inadequado de NdC, a falta de suporte administrativo e de materiais curriculares adequados (Roehrig, & Luft, 2004); além das dificuldades em guiar os estudantes no processo de investigação, como auxiliálos a formular questões científicas e planejar a investigação (van Uum et al, 2016). Os professores sofrem resistência dos alunos que também agem de acordo com seus sistemas de crenças e conhecimentos (Owens, Sadler, Barlow, & Smith-Walters, 2017) que envolve a imagem de estudantes passivos recebendo conhecimento transmitido pelos professores.…”