Routledge

Chapter 8 - Research Matters: Breaking into INQUIRY: Scaffolding Supports Beginning Efforts To Implement Inquiry In The Classroom by Charles Eick, Lee Meadows, and Rebecca Balkcom

(Used with permission of the National Science Teachers Association).

For science teachers, implementing inquiry for the first time can seem intimidating. Inquiry-based curriculum requires teachers to design experiences that engage students in scientific phenomena through direct observation, data gathering, and analysis of evidence. Replacing familiar routines and conventional methods with inquiry may seem outside of a teacher's budget, unpredictable, less structured, and more difficult to manage. Appropriately scaffolded inquiry, however, can provide a smooth transition. Teachers who are considering inquiry as an instructional technique for the first time should incrementally apply variations of inquiry, depending on the needs and level of their students. The scaffolding described in Table 8.5 (p. 000) allows teachers to adjust from highly structured environments and teacher-directed inquiry to less structured environments with student-directed inquiry.

Scaffolding inquiry experiences

Teachers should vary the amount of guidance in their inquiry-based teaching, from 'guided" to 'open," depending on student skills and needs. These four different levels of variation can be used by applying the framework in Table 1—the five essential features of classroom inquiry and their variations of 'openness". Teachers can successfully start using structured, teacher-directed inquiry (right-hand column of Table 1) and work up to variations of inquiry that are more open and student-directed (left-hand column). In this way, both teachers and students become accustomed to doing inquiry in an incremental approach, from guided to open degrees of inquiry, building up their confidence and skills through a chosen variation of openness.

Table 1: Essential features of classroom inquiry and their variations.*

Essential Feature Variations

1. Learner is engaged in scientifically oriented questions

Learner poses a question

Learner selects among questions, poses new questions

Learner sharpens or clarifies question provided by teacher, materials, or other source

Learner engages in question provided by teacher, materials, or other source

2. Learner gives priority to evidence in responding to questions

Learner determines what constitutes evidence and collects it

Learner directed to collect certain data

Learner given data and asked to analyze

Learner given data and told how to analyze

3. Learner formulates explanations from evidence

Learner formulates explanations after summarizing evidence

Learner guided in process of formulating explanations from evidence

Learner given possible ways to use evidence to formulate explanation

Learner provided with evidence

4. Learner connects (evaluates) their explanations in relation to scientific explanations

Learner independently examines other resources and forms the links to explanations

Learner directed toward areas and sources of scientific knowledge

Learner given possible connections

 

5. Learner communicates and justifies explanations

Learner forms reasonable and logical argument to communicate explanations

Learner coached in development of communication

Learner provided broad guidelines to sharpen communication

Learner given steps and procedures for communication

More ----- Amount of Learner Self-Direction ---------- Less
Less ------ Amount of Direction from Teacher -------- More

*National Research Council, Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2000, p. 29.

Teacher-directed variants of inquiry are ideal for teachers breaking into inquiry because they can easily be incorporated into existing curriculums and preferred teaching approaches. The level 1 approach breaks into inquiry through use of the first two essential features of inquiry, engaging in scientific questions and giving priority to evidence in responding to questions.

At this level, students should focus on a main sci­entific question to answer based on supplied data. The goal of this approach is for students to under­stand the importance of evidence, and use the dataset to infer or possibly explain scientific principles that are currently being studied in class. This approach, and all the ones we describe, begins with a question designed to elicit student thinking about the science they are about to experience. Teachers new to inquiry can easily incorporate a data-based worksheet into their teaching routine to help students think like scientists as they analyze real data that is tied to their science content. The Internet is a ready source of authentic data that is often generated for scientific use. Data can come from scientific instrumentation directly connected to the Internet (real-time data) or scientists who post it for oth­ers to access and use.

For example, teachers could have their students look at real-time data for stream flow in their area and ask students if the flow is due to the lack of rain or just seasonal fluctuations (Table 2, 'Water cycle"). Earth science students might plot worldwide earthquake pat­terns from real-time seismic readings obtained from the Internet (Table 2, 'Plate tectonics"). Although students are not collecting the data themselves, they are actually experiencing the scientific evidence re­quired by the second essential feature of inquiry. In a follow-up discussion, the teacher should probe student learning from the data exercise and explicitly connect student responses and descriptions of data to the prin­ciple or concept of study. This approach stands in vivid contrast to traditional textbooks, in which the evidence for the scientific ex­planations discussed typically does not appear. Teachers will find that the use of engaging questions and actual evidence will begin moving students from the theoreti­cal world of traditional textbook science to the concrete world of real data about authentic questions.

Table 2. Using authentic data.


Water Cycle

Plate Tectonics

-Ask students 'Is lack of rain (or excessive rain, depending on the year and location) causing the current change in stream flow?"
- Hand out a data set of real-time data from a local river obtained from the website: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/rt.
- Have students plot or graph data sets of stream flow from this year against the 10-year average and respond to questions on patterns observed.
- Teacher guides students to make connections with average seasonal rainfall patterns and unusual patterns of rainfall in the region during that year.

- Ask students 'Do earthquakes and other seismic activities happen in a pattern?"
- Hand out a map of the world and a chart of real-time seismic readings with longitude and latitude coordinates obtained from the website: http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/epic/epic.html.
- Have students plot the earthquakes on their map and respond to questions on patterns observed.
- Teacher guides students to make connections with observed patterns and tectonic activity along the 'Ring of Fire" or Pacific Rim Basin.

Inquiry level 2

Using demonstrations to aid inquiry can be a next step for teachers who are breaking into inquiry. With a few resources and a little practice, teachers can model an inquiry demonstration in front of students. In a level 2 approach, teachers should choose a demonstration that models a scientific phenomenon or targeted principle in action Table 3). Teachers should not initially explain the demonstration to students but instead introduce it through a focusing question. This question should guide students' observation during the demonstration. This approach to demonstration allows students to follow a cycle of predict-observe-explain or P-O-E.

Table 8.3. Predict-observe-explain demonstrations.

Bernoulli principle: Discrepant event

Conduction of heat: Data-gathering event

- Ask students 'What causes an airplane to be able to fly?"
- Direct students to predict what will happen to a piece of notebook paper as you hold the end of it and blow over the top of it.
- Have students record and share their observation as you blow over the top of the paper.
- Ask students to think about their observations and write a possible explanation for them.
- Discuss student explanations and connect them to the scientifically accepted explanation on fast-moving fluids and pressure differentials.

- Ask students 'What's the best type of insulation for keeping something hot?"
- Direct students to predict which cup of hot water (glass or Styrofoam) will lose heat faster.
- Have students record temperature data (thermometer or probe) in tables every minute for 10 minutes.
- Have students graph data, share results, and provide a possible explanation for the outcome.
- Tie student explanations to scientifically accepted explanation on conduction of heat and specific materials.

 

Students may be asked to predict the outcome of the demonstration—demonstrations of discrepant events, where the outcome is unexpected and surprising, can be particularly good. In some demonstrations, actual data may need to be recorded by students. Teachers provide structure for what students record and how they manipulate or depict their data. Then, students must consider their findings to formulate their own tentative explanations. Students present these expla­nations to the class while the teacher acts as a guide, making sure student explanations are logical in light of observable empirical evidence.

After students have had the opportunity to share their explanations, the teacher explicitly makes the connection between the observable phenomenon and the underlying scientific principles. In this last step, however, the teacher must be careful to build on students' thinking, rather than unveiling the true meaning of the demonstration and thereby placing no value on students' work. This approach breaks into inquiry by incorporat­ing another of the five essential features of inquiry, formulating explanations. In addition to engaging in scientifically oriented questions by examining scientific evidence, students learn to develop explanations for the evidence they are considering. For students, this step is critical to develop strong thinking skills and understand how scientific ideas are moored by scientific evidence. For teachers, mastering the teaching skills necessary to guide student success with this facet of inquiry helps further the transition from a teacher-centered classroom to one where stu­dents share in intellectual leadership.

With experience in conducting inquiry demonstrations, teachers can next 'couple" teacher-led demonstrations with student-led extensions (Table 8.4). Coupled inquiry breaks teachers more deeply into inquiry as students begin to master the fourth essential feature of inquiry, evaluating explanations and connecting them to scientific knowledge.

TABLE 4: Coupled inquiry.*

Introduction to gas laws.

Demonstration

Place a jar or beaker over a lit candle in a pan of water for students to observe the candle go out, bubbles created, and the water level in the jar rise (See Ward et al. 1996).

Hypotheses or explanations formed

Students may hypothesize erroneously about the percent of oxygen in the air (21%) being used up in combustion leaving a vacuum that is filled with water. Some may hypothesize correctly that the pressure in the jar initially increases due to heating from the candle, forcing air to bubble out of the jar. When the candle goes out and temperature decreases, the reduced pressure inside the jar allows the higher air pressure outside to force water from the pan into the jar.

Further reading

Students turn to their textbook on the designated pages to search for related 'literature" that could tie to this phenomenon. Students read passages about gas laws and combustion and revise their initial ideas.

Hypothesis testing

Students suggest testing 'oxygen hypothesis" or 'pressure hypothesis" by using multiple candles, varying jar shape or size, varying water level in pan, among others.

Experimentation

Student groups are assigned a hypothesis to test using chosen or prescribed materials available. Students record their data with the pre-approved approach or the teacher-given approach. Each team presents and explains their findings in terms of accepting or refuting their initial hypothesis. The teacher uses results of student experiments to make explicit connections to aspects of the gas laws.

This approach begins with a teacher demonstration and the P-O-E strategy (described in level 2), but after­ward, teachers ask students to peruse the 'scientific lit­erature" (often their textbook) on how science explains the phenomenon or applied principles in the demonstra­tion. Turning to related literature is what scientists do to inform their ideas and prepare for further research. After reading the literature, students then revise their ideas in writing based on their reading and share those revisions with the class. The teacher poses how students might test their revised explanations (i.e., for­mulate a hypothesis) through further exploration with the demonstration materials.

Next, teams of students are commissioned to test their hypotheses after first planning out the needed materials, data to be gathered, and method of analyzing that data. Teachers who want a more structured approach can as­sign hypotheses, materials, and procedures for students to follow. At this time, teachers may want to discuss how scientists work to refute their hypotheses because data simply affirming a hypothesis do not 'prove" it cor­rect.

After testing their hypotheses, student groups report their findings and whether the data support or refute the working hypotheses. Teachers may choose to have groups present their findings more formally in front of the class using an overlay, white board, poster, or PowerPoint presentation. After the presentation, the teacher connects what students have been learning from their inquiries to current knowledge and understanding of the principles or concepts at work.

As with developing explanations, coupled inquiry and evaluation of explanations involve complex, high-level thinking skills. Students have to examine mul­tiple explanations for the evidence at hand to determine which one has the best explanatory power. Students often find that more experimentation is required before they can finalize a satisfactory explanation. At this level, teachers will be pleased to see that students are taking on the nature of true inquiry-based science.
Almost any demonstration of a scientific phenom­enon or principle can be extended into student-led inquiry, allowing students to more deeply understand the concept under study. More resources are required for this type of inquiry than with demonstration alone, but this approach moves the science teacher into student-centered inquiry.

Forms of inquiry in which students generate the questions of interest, develop the methods for exploring them, and generate data for analysis can be very challenging for teachers and students who are new to inquiry. This final form of inquiry breaks into the fifth essential feature of inquiry in which students communicate and justify their explanations.

One historical approach to this form of inquiry that is feasible for beginners is the science fair—or similar research—project, which follows an experi­mental design. With guidance from the teacher, stu­dents choose their own research topic, review and read the relevant literature, design the experimental research, analyze the data, and present their results. For a science fair-type project, students have to de­velop an attractive, cogent display of their process and findings. Students who have become experienced in inquiry throughout the year will be better prepared to produce high-quality projects than those who sim­ply are assigned a project during the final weeks of the year, with no prior experience in inquiry.

Teachers must allocate time for students to pre­pare, conduct, and complete these projects. Because most student project work generally is done outside of class time, teachers must provide the structure needed through handouts on format guidelines, partial work deadlines, and rubrics used to evaluate their final work.
Teachers should devote in-class time to guiding stu­dent preparation for the earlier portions of the project, such as searching for related literature. Teachers can plan product deadlines around direct teachings on im­portant skills needed in the project, such as choosing a topic and designing a hypothesis.

Setting up the experiment in school helps the success of the final experimental product, even if much of the work is done outside of school. This approach to the project allows the teacher to teach under structured, whole-class contexts while still having students com­plete meaningful inquiry that is completely student-directed. Developing the final presentation of the proj­ect helps students to see the importance scientists place on formalizing inquiry so that others can review it critically for quality and value.

Even if teachers choose not to set up the competitive aspect of science fairs, having students complete experi­mental inquiries of their choosing and communicate their findings is a big motivation and can be inquiry at its best!

Becoming an inquiry-based science teacher

Science teachers know the importance of inquiry-based teaching, but it takes time and practice before teachers feel comfortable and successful doing it. By beginning with teacher-led variants of inquiry, science teachers can start to use inquiry within familiar and conventional methods of teaching. For science teachers who are also concerned about planning and management issues, starting to implement inquiry within existing classroom routines and arrangements is essential if inquiry is to occur at all. This is especially true for science teachers new to inquiry. With time and practice, teachers can scaffold their own learning by moving toward student-led variants of inquiry one step at a time.

---

National Research Council (NRC). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2000).

A.M. Bodzin and W.M. Cates, 'Inquiry Dot Com," The Science Teacher, 2002, 69(12): 48-52.

E.L. Chiapetta, and T. R. Koballa, Science Instruction in the Middle and Secondary Schools (Upper Saddle River, N.J: Merrill Prentice Hall, 2002).

J. V. Ebenezer, and S.M. Haggerty, Becoming a Secondary School Science Teacher (Columbus, OH: Merrill, 1999.

L. Martin-Hansen, 'Defining Inquiry," The Science Teacher, 2002, 69(2): 34-37.

V.J. Mannoia, What is Science? An Introduction to the Structure and methodology of Science (Lanham, MD: University of America Press, 1980.s

M.D. Ambruso, 'Challenging Students with Experiments," The Science Teacher, 2003, 70(1): 41-43.

M. Timmons, 'Inquiring Minds," The Science Teacher, 2003, 70(7): 31-36.