1. Teachers’ designs of web-based inquiry learning environments as a probe for inquiry teaching and learning frameworks Alexia Sevastidou, Constantinos P. Constantinou Learning in Science Group, University of Cyprus Research is supported by Cyprus Research Promotion Foundation CBLIS 2010 Warsaw

2. Research overview Research goals How teachers elaborate inquiry as a teaching and learning framework through their efforts to design web-based inquiry learning environments How these teachers subsequently transfer their theoretically informed designs of inquiry-based teaching into classroom practice Pilot study to explore the affordances and constraints of a) a design-based learning approach to teachers’ preparation for inquiry based learning and teaching b) web-based tools that were developed to provide teachers’ scaffolding for the task of designing

3. The problem Science curricula policy documents internationally emphasize inquiry as the primary context for learning science (Bybee, 2005) Many teachers appear to have difficulty creating classroom environments that are inquiry-based, and to support their students in developing informed views of scientific inquiry and the nature of science (Chiapetta & Adams, 2000; Lederman, 1992; Marx et al., 1994; Minstrell & van Zee, 2000)

4. What is inquiry-based science teaching? A multifaceted approach to teaching that can be used to accomplish many differing purposes (Deboer, 2004) Difficult to be framed in specific learning and teaching sequences Students in K-12 science classrooms should (NRC, 1996) – develop abilities to do scientific inquiry: identifying and posing questions, designing and conducting investigations, analyzing data and evidence, using models and explanations, and communicating findings – gain understandings about scientific inquiry: how scientists conduct their work, how concepts related to the nature of science Teachers should facilitate students in acquiring deep understanding of science concepts, carrying out inquiry

5. What impacts teachers’ ability to teach science as inquiry? The complex interactions of various factors – Contextual: such as school context, subject matter, assessment standards – Personal: beliefs and knowledge (Wallace & Kang, 2004) Research documents that science teachers’ knowledge and beliefs have a profound effect on all aspects of their teaching (Magnusson et al., 2002) Knowledge of science concepts, pedagogical content knowledge, children’s developmental level and abilities Beliefs about learners and student learning, the nature of science, the role of the teacher

6. Our approach to inquiry based learning and teaching We interpret inquiry as a teaching and learning framework that seeks to promote collaborative development of conceptual models with interpretive capacity through classroom practices and discourse that highlights some aspects of authentic science. Inquiry should rely on self-regulated learning sequences with an emphasis on active engagement, discursive argumentation and emergent student autonomy.

7. Our approach to teacher learning 1.Learning settings should enable teachers to reflect upon their beliefs and understandings about learning, teaching, students, and the subject matter (Davis, 2003), 2.Learning experiences should be situated in meaningful contexts for teachers (Magnusson et. al, 2002) 3.Teacher learning should be framed in constructivist learning theory (Borko & Putnam, l996) 4.Teacher-learning communities should be transformed into knowledge-building communities (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2006)

8. Characteristics of design as an approach to teacher learning Design-based learning can provide teachers a fruitful context for negotiating with self and peers inquiry teaching and learning frameworks Can provide teachers a context to reflect upon their beliefs and understandings about learning and teaching Ill- structured problem solving (Simon, 1973) Can frame teachers’ learning in constructivist learning theory Process of reflective judgment (Kitchner, 1981) Constructionist task, building a public artifact (Papert, 1991) Constructionist task, building a public artifact (Papert, 1991) As a complex activity it promotes and is favored by collaboration

9. Methodology Pilot study, fall semester 2009 – Semester long graduate course at the University of Cyprus about the role of new technologies in science learning and teaching – 13 X 3hour meetings – Participants: 10 graduate education students – Diverse population, first degree in physics (n=3), elementary education (n=7), pre-service (n=8), in- service (n=2) – Participants were grouped in five pairs

10. Our approach: Teachers novice designers of web-based inquiry learning environments Design scaffolds Design tool Design task Design task: develop a web- based inquiry learning environment on a scientific topic of their interest Design tool: STOCHASMOS a web-based, open-ended authoring tool, employs inquiry scaffolding features Relevant scaffolding: Interact with the course website, respond to prompts, receive peer feedback, reflect on issues and design decisions

11. Proposed Design Sequence Access to relevant theoretical information

12. Describe your design decisions Reflect on your design decisions Prompts for reflection

13. Driving question Give and accept peer feedback Sharing ideas, reflections, design decisions on the Reflection Wall

14. Data sources Questionnaires administered during the first and the last course meeting Responses to questions and reflection prompts submitted through the course web-space Learning artifacts (web-based learning environments) Interaction logs with the course web-space Interviews with participants at the end of the course

15. Research Questions 1.In what ways do teachers approach inquiry- based learning and teaching through the task of designing web-based inquiry learning environments? 2.How does the context of designing a web-based inquiry learning environment challenge teachers’ inquiry learning and teaching frameworks

16. Data analysis: Overview of learning environments developed

17. Data analysis: web-based inquiry learning environments developed by teachers Methods – Content analysis using three schemes 1) Five essential features of classroom inquiry (NRC, 2000) 2) Scaffolding design framework (Quintana et al., 2004) 3) Emergent analysis scheme – Constant comparative method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) – Cross-case comparison to determine commonalities and differences among the five cases of environments

18. Content analysis scheme 1: Openness of inquiry Five essential features of classroom inquiry (NRC, 2000) – 1. Learner engages in scientifically oriented questions – 2. Learner prioritizes evidence in responding to questions – 3. Learner formulates explanations from evidence – 4. Learner connects explanations to scientific knowledge – 5. Learner communicates and justifies explanations Environments’ level of openness (level 1, 2, or 3) Structured Guided Student-Initiated Inquiry might be LOWHIGH 123 Findings: All environments received an average a 1.6 – 1.8 rating

19. Content analysis scheme 2: Types of scaffolding prompts Types of scaffolding prompts used in environments Scaffolding design framework (Quintana et al., 2004) – Sense Making: constructing meaning and elaborating on new knowledge – Process Management: taking strategic decisions involved in controlling the inquiry process – Articulation and Reflection: constructing, evaluating and articulating what has been learned Findings: Sense Making Articulation and Reflection Process Management

20. Content analysis scheme 3: Inquiry patterns General pattern traced Activity types Inquiry patterns: the way inquiry activities were sequenced Categories of activities according to their role in the inquiry sequence.

21. Content analysis scheme 3: Inquiry patterns Inquiry patterns: the way inquiry activities were sequenced Activity types according to their role in the inquiry sequence. Patterns that were sequential Data analysis activities missing or limited

22. Content analysis scheme 3: Inquiry patterns Extended and elaborate patterns Emphasis into theoretical sense making and then progressed into data analysis

23. Content analysis scheme 3: Inquiry patterns Elaborate data analysis activity sequences, repeated and blended with elaboration and articulation activities

24. Content analysis scheme 3: Inquiry patterns Inquiry patterns: the way inquiry activities were sequenced in environments Constant comparative method – Recurrence of data selection and analysis activities – Blending of reflection and articulation activities with data selection and analysis – Required reasoning addressed by planned tasks Coherence of inquiry pattern

25. Inquiry patterns: attribute analysis Recurrence of data selection and analysis activities Blending of reflection and articulation activities with data selection Addressing required reasoning skills through environment tasks Pair10Absent0 0 Pair21Present1 0Absent Pair31Present1 1 Pair40Absent0 0 Pair51Present1 1 LOW HIGH 0213 Environment 3 Environment 5 Environment 2 Coherence of inquiry patterns continuum Environment 1 Environment 4

26. Data analysis: design decisions, reflection on design decisions Data analysed qualitatively Self –reported challenges: – Specifying an inquiry topic – Specifying and sequencing inquiry tasks – Goal setting – Ways of achieving concept elaboration and understanding – The role of experimentation – The open-ended nature of the approach Challenges with inquiry based teaching were problematized and illustrated in environments

27. Problematizing the issue of sequencing and specifying inquiry tasks “A problem we have to deal with is that the students’ final learning products have to come out from the elaboration of various datasets” (Pair5, reflection notes) “Developing a sequence of activities is not as hard as finding a way to present the activities so that they will serve your goals. We had to deal with the problem of how to present students the data at each stage”. (Pair5, reflection notes) A carefully planned sequence data selection and analysis activities, dealing with a single dataset at a time

28. Problematizing the issue of choosing an appropriate driving question “We are very much concerned with our scenario and I believe it is too directing and shows what the problem is… so we should not ask students to inquire into this problem” (Pair 1, reflection notes) “I am concerned though whether we should let the students find out themselves about the problem of water shortage or whether we should state this in our scenario” (Pair1, reflection notes) The uncertainty of participants about the issue they wanted to present to students resulted into an incoherent inquiry problem and into an environment with a series of activities that seemed disconnected.

29. Discussion - Conclusions Teachers’ designs shared common characteristics – Participants designed guided inquiry environments where learners were independent in carrying out the various tasks, but questions pursued, sequence of activities were provided – The scaffolding on all the environments followed the same trend Management prompts were overemphasized revealing a need for teachers to control the flow of activities Commonalities in designs can be attributed to – Functionality provided by the authoring platform e.g. the absence of dedicated sense making tools – Scaffolding provided through the course

30. Discussion - Conclusions Teachers’ designs varied in the way inquiry sequences and tasks were developed on implicit inquiry patterns – Patterns on which activities were sequenced could respond to the nature of scientific inquiry respond to constructivist pedagogy serve administrative purposes Variations in inquiry patterns can be attributed to participants’ knowledge and beliefs about learning and teaching, learners, nature of scientific inquiry Future step to explore how and if knowledge and beliefs progress or change through the process of design

31. Conclusions Self-reported challenges faced by participants were in some cases successfully overcome, while in other cases were not In both cases challenges were illustrated in successful or unsuccessful design decisions The process of design provided a means for teachers’ challenges to be illustrated in design decisions and allowed them to react on these challenges on a metacognitive level

32. Thank you! alexiasevastidou@gmail.com

33. Example of a process management prompt Study On this page you can find information about sound and its properties. Study this information carefully. Observe Watch a video about sound. Write down your observations in the template named “Observations”.

34. Example of a sense making prompt Complete the concept map with information concerning bacteria

35. Example of an articulation and reflection prompt Prepare a report to show to your colleagues how your research has progressed.