LITERATURE REVIEW
An Overview of Inquiry-Based Science Instruction Amid Challenges
 
More details
Hide details
1
PhD student in Chemistry Education at the African Center of Excellence for Innovative Teaching and Learning Mathematics and Science (ACEITLMS), College of Education, University of Rwanda, RWANDA
 
 
Publication date: 2021-11-18
 
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2021;17(12):em2042
 
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Despite efforts to incorporate inquiry-based instruction into various science curricular, its adoption has been slow-paced. This has raised many concerns about challenges in the enactment of inquiry-based instruction. Therefore, this article seeks to provide an understanding of the challenges by exploring the perspectives of teachers in the research literature, as well as suggest possible ways of coping with these challenges. The review of literature has indicated that the identification of what constitutes appropriate guidance in inquiry-based instruction, the threat of time management, teachers’ deficiency in inquiry instructional techniques and strategies constitute the most challenges. Although there are strong criticisms against guided inquiry instruction, this study has found that it represents the most appropriate guidance for optimal science learning. A sustained all-year-round training program with support from teaching colleagues and from administration may certainly impact teachers’ self-efficacy in inquiry instruction. With the level of progress made in inquiry instruction research, and the pace of advancement of technology, the future of the adoption and enactment of inquiry in the classroom can only be brighter. Future research needs to focus on determining the effects of a more sustained all-year-round professional development model on the level of teachers’ achievement in inquiry-based instruction.
 
REFERENCES (77)
1.
Abubakarr, H., & Salmanu, Y. (2018). Impact of internet technology usage on job performance of senior secondary school teachers in Kaduna State, Nigeria. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 10(2) 152-167.
 
2.
Alhendal, D., Marshman, M., & Grootenboer, P. (2015). Kuwaiti science teachers’ beliefs and intentions regarding the use of inquiry-based instruction. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 1455-1473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763....
 
3.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the course: Online education in the United States. The Sloan Consortium. https://onlinelearningsurvey.c....
 
4.
Anderson, L. S., Healy, A. F., Kole, J. A., & Bourne, L. E. (2012). The clicker technique: cultivating efficient teaching and successful learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, Appl. Cognitive Psychology, 27(2), 222-234. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.28....
 
5.
Anderson, R. D. (1996). Study of curriculum reform. US Government Printing Office.
 
6.
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015....
 
7.
Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Limited learning on college campuses. Society, 48, Article 203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115....
 
8.
Banchi, H. & Bell, R. (2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and Children, 46(2), 26-29.
 
9.
Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: why it isn’t happening. The Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13, 519-546.
 
10.
Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30-33.
 
11.
Bílek, M., & Kmeťová, J. (2010). Current challenges for computer supported school chemical experiments. Problems of education in the 21st Century, 24, 58-65. https://www.researchgate.net/p....
 
12.
Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., Osborne, J. W., Sampson, V. D., Annetta, L. A., & Granger, E. M. (2010). Is inquiry possible in light of accountability? A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction. Science Education, 94(4), 577-616. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20....
 
13.
Buck, L. B., Bretz, S. L., & Towns, M. H. (2008). Characterizing the level of inquiry in the undergraduate laboratory. Journal of College Science Teaching, 37(7), 52-58.
 
14.
Bybee, R. W. (1987). Science education and the science-technology-society (S-T-S) theme. Science Education, 71(5), 667-683. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.37....
 
15.
Bybee, R. W. (2004). Science inquiry and science teaching. In L. B. Flick, & N. G. Lederman, Scientific Inquiry and Nature of Science. Implications for Teaching, Learning, and Teacher Education (pp. 1-12). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
 
16.
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Scotter, P. V., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model; origins, effectiveness and applications. Colorado Springs.
 
17.
Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. (2013). Inquiry-based professional development: What does it take to support teachers in learning about inquiry and nature of science? International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 1947-1978. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
18.
Capps, D. K., Crawford, B. A., & Constas, M. A. (2012). A review of empirical literature on inquiry professional development: Alignment with best practices and a critique of the findings. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(3), 291-318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972....
 
19.
Chichekian, T., Shore, B. M., & Tabatabai, D. (2016). First-Year Teachers’ Uphill Struggle to Implement Inquiry Instruction: Exploring tnterplay among self-efficacy, conceptualizations, and classroom observations of inquiry enactment. SAGE Open, 6(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/215824....
 
20.
Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. Science Scope, 23(6), 42-44.
 
21.
Conlon, T., & Simpson, M. (2003). Silicon valley versus silicon glen:the impact of computers upon teaching and learning; acomparative study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 137-150. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8....
 
22.
Costenson, K., & Lawson, A. (1986). Why Isn’t Inquiry Used in More Classrooms? The American Biology Teacher, 48(3), 150-158. https://doi.org/10.2307/444824....
 
23.
Dani, D., & Koenig, K. M. (2008). Technology and reform-based science education. Theory and Practice, 47(3), 204-211. https://doi.org/10.1080/004058....
 
24.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009, February). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. National Staff Development Council.
 
25.
Deboer, G. E. (2004). Historical perspectives on inquiry teaching in schools. In L. B. Flick, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific Inquiry and Nature of Science. Implications for Teaching, Learning, and Teacher Education (pp. 17-35). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
 
26.
Dudu, W. T. (2015). Facilitating Small-Scale Implementation of Inquiry-Based teaching: encounters and experiences of experimento multipliers in one south african province. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(4), 625-642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763....
 
27.
Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300-329. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465....
 
28.
Gelder, J. I., Abraham, M. R., & Greenbowe, T. J. (2015). Teaching electrolysis with guided inquiry. In M. V. Orna (Ed.), Sputnik to Smartphones: A Half-Century of Chemistry Education (pp. 141-154). American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-201....
 
29.
Ginns, P., & Ellis, R. (2007). Quality in blended learning: Exploring the relationships between on-line and face-to-face teaching and learning. Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 53-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ihed....
 
30.
Gómez, E., & Rodríguez-Marciel, C. (2012). PGDnet: A new problemsolving virtual learning environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 576-591. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467....
 
31.
Gunstone, R. F., & Chanpagne, A. B. (1990). Promoting conceptual change in the laboratory. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.), The student laboratory and the science curriculum (pp. 159-182). Routledge.
 
32.
Gutierez, S. (2015). Collaborative professional learning through lesson study: Identifying the challenges of inquiry - based teaching. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 118-134. http://www.iier.org.au/iier25/....
 
33.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundation for the 21st century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10....
 
34.
Hofstein, A., & Mamlock-Naaman (2007). The laboratory in science education: the state of the art. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(2), 105-107. https://doi.org/10.1039/B7RP90....
 
35.
Honey, M. A., & Hilton, M. (Eds.). (2011). Learning science through computer games and simulations. The National Academies Press.
 
36.
Hoyle, E. P., & Wallace, M. (2007). Educational reform: An ironic perspective. Educational Management, Administration, and Leadership, 35(1), 9-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/174114....
 
37.
Johnson, C. C. (2007). Whole-school collaborative sustained professional development and science teacher changes: signs of progress. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 629-661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972....
 
38.
Kennedy, G. E., & Cutts, I. Q. (2005). The association between students’ use of an electronic voting system and their learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 260-268. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365....
 
39.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326....
 
40.
Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 15(10), 661-667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956....
 
41.
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2010). Introducing TPCK. In AACTE committee on innovation and technology (Ed.), Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Contentent Knowledge (tpck) for Educators (pp. 3-30). Routledge.
 
42.
Krauskopf, K., Zahn, C., & Hesse, F. (2012). Leveraging the affordances of youtube: The roles of pedagogical knowledge and mental models of technology. Computers and Education, 58(4), 1194-1206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp....
 
43.
Lemov, D. (2010). Teach Like a Champion-49 Teaching Techniques that put students on the path to College. Jossey- Bass.
 
44.
Lunetta, V. N., Hofstein, A., & Clough, M., (2007). Learning and searching in the School science laboratory: An analysis of research, theory, and practice, In N. Leaderman and S. Abel (eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 393-441), Lawrence Erlbaum.
 
45.
Marshall, J. C., & Smart, J. B. (2013). Teachers’ transformation to inquiry-based instructional practice. Creative Education, 4(2), 132-142. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.201....
 
46.
Marshall, J. C., Smart, J. B., & Alston, D. (2016). Inquiry-based instruction: A possible solution to improving student learning of both science concepts and scientific practices. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(5), 777-796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763....
 
47.
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., Geier, R., & Tal, R. T. (2004). Inquiry-based science in the middle grades: assessment of learning in urban systemic reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1063-1080. http://doi.org/10.1002/tea.200....
 
48.
Mayer, R. E., Stull, A., Deleeuw, K., Almeroth, K., Bimber, B., Chun, D., Bulger, M., Campbell, J., Knight, A., & Zhang, H. (2008). Clickers in college classrooms: fostering learning with questioning methods on large lecture classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 51-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedp....
 
49.
McCarthy, J. (2010). Blended learning environments: Using social networking sites to enhance the first year experience. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(6), 729-740. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.....
 
50.
Menkhoff, T., & Bengtsson, M. L. (2012). Engaging students in higher education through mobile learning: lessons learnt in a Chinese entrepreneurship course. Educational Research Policy and Practice, 11(3), 225-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671....
 
51.
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction-what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
 
52.
Minstrell, J. (2000). Implications for teaching and learning inquiry: A summary. In J. Minstrell, & Z. E. Van (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 471-496). American Association for the Advancement of Science.
 
53.
Mistler-Jackson, M., & Songer, N. B. (2000). Students’ motivation and internet technology: Are students empowered to learn science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 459-479. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)...<459:AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-C.
 
54.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press.
 
55.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for teaching and learning. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9596.
 
56.
Nompula, Y. (2012). An investigation of strategies for integrated learning experiences and instruction in the teaching of creative art subjects. South African Journal of Education, 32(3), 293-306. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.....
 
57.
O’Malley, C., Vavoula, G., Glew, J., Taylor, J., Sharples, M., Lefrere, P., Lonsdale, P., Naismith, L., & Waycott, J. (2005, March 25). Guidelines for learning/teaching/tutoring in a mobile environment. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.....
 
58.
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychology, 38(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326....
 
59.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms—Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, Inc.
 
60.
Paulson, P., Williams-Tuenge, L., Roth, S., Wippler, R., & Paulson, D. (2009). Inquiry is elementary: Differing approaches to inquiry within two elementary schools. In R. Yager (Ed.), Inquiry: The key to exemplary science (pp. 139-150). NSTA Press.
 
61.
Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. P. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921-958. https://doi.org/10.3102/000283....
 
62.
Quigley, C., Mashall, J. C., Deaton, C. C., & Cook, M. P. (2011). Challenges to inquiry teaching and suggestions for how to meet them. Science Educator, 20(1), 55-61.
 
63.
Reiff, R., Harwood, W. S., & Phillipson, T. (2002). A scientific method based upon research scientists’ conceptions of scientific inquiry. In Annual International Conference of the Association of Teachers in Science (pp. 1-25). Association for the Education of Teachers in Science.
 
64.
Sahin, I., & Shelley, M. (Eds.). (2020). Educational practices during the COVID-19 viral outbreak: International Perspectives. ISTES Organization.
 
65.
Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Tolson, H., Huang, T. Y., & Lee, Y. H. (2007). A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(10), 1436-1460. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
 
66.
Settlage, J. (2007). Demythologizing science teacher education: Conquering the false ideal of open inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(4), 461-467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972....
 
67.
Shapley, K., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F. (2011). Effects of technology immersion on middle school students’ learning opportunities and achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(5), 299-315. https://doi.org/10.1080/002206....
 
68.
Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323(5910), 122-124. https://doi.org/10.1126/scienc....
 
69.
Staver, J., & Bay, M. (1987). Striving for excellence: The National Education Goals. Michigan University.
 
70.
Sweller, J. (2003). Evolution of human cognitive architecture. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 215-266). Academic. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-....
 
71.
Tan, A.-L., C. L. Poon, & S. S. L. Lim (Eds.) (2014). Inquiry into the Singapore science classroom: Research and practices. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-98....
 
72.
Tang, N.-E., Tsai, C.-L., Barrow, L., & Romine, W. (2019). Impacts of enquiry-based science teaching on achievement gap between high-and-low SES students: Findings from PISA 2015. International Journal of Science Education, 41(4), 448-470. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
73.
Twigg, V. V. (2010). Teachers’ practices, values and beliefs for successful inquiry-based teaching in the international baccalaureate primary years programme. Journal of Research in International Education, 9(1), 40-65. https://doi.org/10.1177/147524....
 
74.
Webb, M., & Cox, M. (2004). A review of pedagogy related to information and communications technology. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(3), 235-286. https://doi.org/10.1080/147593....
 
75.
Yerrick, R. K. (2000). Lower track students’ argumentation and open inquiry instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 807-838. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2...<807::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-7.
 
76.
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007-No. 033). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/....
 
77.
Zahn, C., Pea, R., Hesse, F., Rosen, J. (2010). Comparing simple and advanced video tools as support for complex collaborative design process. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(3), 403-440. https://doi.org/10.1080/105084....
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top