1. Inquiry Based Learning EDCP 470.96a July 7, 2015

2. Background  Inquiry Based Learning “refers to the activities of students in which they develop knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas as well as an understanding of how scientists study the natural world” (Anderson, 2002).  Inquiry Based Learning arose out of the discovery learning trends of the 1960s  Based on constructivist learning methods  Joseph Schwab helped define IBL within Science Education, which took off after the launch of Sputnik in 1957  Usually, PBL and IBL are used synonymously. They differ mainly in their origins, as noted by Hmelo-Silver, Duncan, & Chinn (2004).

3. Background  Four categories of IBL, based on Schwab’s work, have been identified:  1. Confirmation Inquiry  Students confirm a principle through an activity where results are known in advance  2. Structured Inquiry  Students investigate a teacher-presented question through prescribed procedure  3. Guided Inquiry  Students investigate a teacher-presented question using student designated/selected procedures  4. Open Inquiry  Students topic related questions that are student formulated through student designated/selected procedures Rezba, Auldridge, & Rhea (1999)

4. Students’ role  Understanding = central focus  Actively participate in developing questions and investigating to find solutions  Active problem-solvers  Construct meaning  Communicate new understandings

5. Teachers’ role  Facilitate learning  Guide by selecting, designing and planning learning tasks  Asking probing questions (Socratic)Socratic  Observe Student work to identify misconceptions  Plan follow-up experiences  Allow student to enter problem from different points  Engage student to think like the expert (the mathematician, the scientist, the historian)

6. Inquiry Perspectives  While IBL has been around for over 50 years, there is still inconsistency within how it is viewed and implemented  Abd-El-Khalick et al.’s 2004 paper discusses how diverse IBL is worldwide, and seeks to address these inconsistencies (ie: inquiry as means VS inquiry as ends)  Paper concludes that there were seven major dichotomies in IBL, and provides a new framework for IBL moving forward through an Evidence-Explanation approach

7. Inquiry Dichotomies  Learning science VS learning about science  Science as search for truth VS Science as problem- solving activity  Raising and answering questions VS posing and revising explanations and/or models  Science as a cognitive activity VS science as a social activity  Demonstrating what we know (concepts) VS investigating how we know and why we believe it  Hypothetico-deductive science VS model-based science  Science as a process of justifying and testing knowledge claims VS science as a process of discovering and generating knowledge claims Duschl via Abd-El-Khalick et al. (2004)

8. “…I found this learning idea is very fun and useful…” “…lets you learn actively instead of mindlessly taking notes” “Its more challenging than what I’m used to, but the way you teach actually gets me interested in the material” “The challenges are tough to complete – but that forces us to engage in the learning”

9. Inquiry Based Activity  How fast is fast? How fast is fast?