Inquiry-Based Teaching/Learning Approach

Inquiry-Based Teaching (IBT) and Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) refer to a broad pedagogical approach that invites students to explore academic content by posing, investigating, and answering questions. Also known as an umbrella term for ‘inquiry’, ‘design thinking’, ‘authentic learning’, ‘learning by doing’ or ‘problem-based’ teaching, this approach puts students’ questions at the centre of the curriculum.

Inquiry-based Teaching/Learning Approach

The role of the teacher in an inquiry-based classroom is quite different from that of a teacher in a traditional and/or conventional classroom. IBL is a ‘constructivist approach’ (Kidman & Casinader, 2017, p. 15) where the overall goal is for students to make meaning. The term ‘inquiry’ is a multifaceted concept—difficult to define—that can be used to suggest ‘making an informal investigation’ (Kidman & Casinader, 2017, p. 4). Rather than providing direct instruction to students, teachers help them to generate their own content-related questions and guide their investigation that follows thereafter i.e., teachers are viewed as ‘facilitators’ and not ‘distributors’ of knowledge. As the role of the teacher in an inquiry-based classroom is unconventional, it is sometimes misunderstood.

While teachers guide students’ inquiry to various degrees and set parameters/scope for a classroom inquiry, true inquiry is ‘internally’ motivated. In other words, inquiry requires the following five ingredients: (1) it begins with students’ knowledge and curiosity upon which they construct meaning and build connections whereby they are actively involved and take responsibility for their learning in an authentic context; (2) it is connected to essential learnings i.e., allows all students to understand the world in a way that is unique to them; (3) it is placed into the larger context of curriculum through concept-based units structured around central ideas and lines of inquiry; (4) it involves collaborative work among students, as well as a collaborative interplay between students, teachers and the environment; and (5) it requires pre-assessment, continual formative assessment, and a summative task(s) that allows students to demonstrate their conceptual understanding of the central idea at the end of the unit.

NB. Significantly, these five features are dependent on several variables such as: the chosen topic or ‘unit of inquiry’ (see Drake, Savage, Reid, Bernard, & Beres, 2015); the ages (Grade 1, Grade 2 etc.); and the abilities (mainstream, special educational needs (SEN)) of the students.

In chronological order, several inquiry models are presented herein.

1. Kolb’s (1984) ‘Model of Experiential Learning Theory’ (ELT) identified four parts, namely:

• Concrete Experience—a new experience or situation is encountered, or a reinterpretation of existing experience;
• Reflective Observation of the New Experience—of particular importance are any inconsistencies between experience and understanding;
• Abstract Conceptualisation—reflection gives rise to a new idea, or a modification of an existing abstract concept, thus the student has learned from their experience; and
• Active Experimentation—the learner applies their idea(s) to the world around them to see what happens.

2. Murdoch’s (1998) six ‘Classroom Connections’ encompassed the actions of:

• Tuning In—getting students interested in the unit;
• Finding Out—researching or gathering information;
• Sorting Out—sorting information into categories;
• Going Further—adding more interesting information;
• Making Connections—analysing/linking to themselves and their environment; and
• Taking Action—making an informed decision to do something.

3. Wilson and Jan (2005) recorded six phases as part of their ‘Structured Inquiry’ model that identified the following abilities:

• Tuning In—identifying what it is students want to know and do;
• Finding Out—locating appropriate sources of information;
• Sorting Out—gathering, sorting and organising information;
• Going Further—presenting information in appropriate ways;
• Reflection—reflecting on what students have learned and the inquiry process; and
• Action—contemplating ways of applying newly gained information to other situations.

4. Short’s (2009) ‘Inquiry Cycle’ elucidated nine parts as listed below:

• Connections to the Big Idea—inquiry starts with these connections;
• Invitation to Guided Inquiry—this is where the teacher can see and improve student knowledge and perspectives;
• Tension—gathering things and activities that are compelling to students which leads into the next section;
• Investigation—starts out as guided inquiry, and moves into collaborative inquiry;
• Demonstration—teaching follows the students to give them the tools they need and how to deal with it;
• Re-Vision—pulling back and refocus on the central idea, which may or may not be needed;
• Representation—finding ways to share what the students have learned with others;
• Valuation—summative task based on the big idea; and
• Action—seeing what maybe the next step.

Relatedly, IBT/IBL lends itself to ‘scaffolding’ (Hammond, 2001); a term that collectively describes the types of guidance teachers or more capable peers can provide. These social interactions and collaborations are critical to help students actively build ideas about themselves and their discoveries. Through the use of scaffolding teachers can, over time, provide an appropriate amount of challenge, promote self-regulation/self-efficacy (Bandura, 1993, 1994), and grant students more responsibility/autonomy for learning. In this way, scaffolding requires teachers’ attention to social, emotional, and cognitive elements of the student and their environment.

Educators actively guide students as learners, particularly in the primary sector. Though an inquiry-based approach may appear eas(ier) for a bystander looking into the classroom, teachers who choose to use an inquiry-based approach, commit to: providing rich experiences that provoke students’ thinking and curiosity; planning carefully-constructed questioning sequences; managing multiple student investigations at the same time; responding in-the-moment to students’ emerging queries and discoveries; and continuously assessing the progress of each student as they work toward their solution or final product. An inquiry-based approach allows students to draw connections between academic content and their own lives, which can be particularly important for culturally and linguistically diverse learners. As Damen (1987, p. 598) argued, ‘awareness of self is a necessary corollary to awareness of others’.

Conclusion

Albert Einstein famously remarked, 'Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing it is stupid'. This sentiment resonates in today's educational landscape, which is characterized by the complex, multi-faceted, and evolving nature of teachers' roles compared to those in previous decades. While traditional and modern educational practices each have their strengths, weaknesses, and merits, there is a noticeable shift towards emphasizing 'students as inquirers'.

Reference List

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy on cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behaviour (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Damen, L. (1987). Culture learning: The fifth dimension in the language classroom. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Drake, S. M., Savage, M. J., Reid, J. L., Bernard, M. L., & Beres, J. (2015). An exploration of the policy and practice of transdisciplinarity in the IB PYP programme, 1-116. Retrieved from https://www.ibo.org/globalassets/publications/ib-research/pyp/an-exploration-of-the-policy-and-practice-of-transdisciplinarity-in-the-pyp-final-report.pdf

Hammond, J. (Ed.) (2001). Scaffolding: Teaching and learning in language and literacy education. Newtown NSW, Australia: Primary English Teaching Association.

Kidman, G., & Casinader, N. (2017). Inquiry-based teaching and learning across disciplines: Comparative theory and practice in schools. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Murdoch, K. (1998). Classroom connections: Strategies for integrated learning. Melbourne, Victoria: Eleanor Curtain Publishing.

Wilson, J., & Wing Jan, L. (2005). Focus on inquiry: A practical approach to integrated curriculum and planning. Carlton, Australia: Curriculum Corporation.