Article Review On Inquiry Learning

PART 1: REVIEW OF ARTICLE

The article entitled ‘Using a Guided Inquiry and Modeling Instructional Framework (EIMA) to support Preservice K-8 Science Teaching by Christina V. Schwartz and Yovita N. Gwekwerere from Michigan State University presents results from their study aimed at helping preservice elementary and middle school teachers to incorporate model-centred scientific inquiry into their science teaching practices. The authors studied the effect of using a guided inquiry and making instructional framework (EIMA) which stands for Engage-Investigate-Model-Apply, which incorporates inquiry and modeling components to further emphasize, clarify, and incorporate scientific practices of inquiry and modeling. According to the authors, significance of model-centred scientific inquiry is in the creation of new knowledge and scientific reasoning which is the fundamental aspect of science. However, according to studies in the previous years, scientific modeling is not routinely practiced in schools. This is may be due to the persistence of theories of education that focus on simple forms at lower levels and also may be due to a lack of existing information and frameworks for guiding teachers in engaging students in modelbased inquiry practices. Besides that, previous studies show that teachers who engage in scientific inquiry and modeling often struggle with their teaching because they never learned science through inquiry and therefore they find it difficult to understand the concept of modeling and do not know how to effectively engage their students in scientific modeling.

1

Therefore, due to the reasons above, the authors proposed an appropriate instructional framework focused on model-centred scientific inquiry which useful in developing reform-based pedagogical content knowledge and skills. The framework which is said to be flexible is designed to help preservice teachers understand components of reform-oriented science while planning and conducting their lessons. EIMA instructional framework which stands for: E – engaging students in the topic I – helping students to investigate the topic/phenomena M – helping students create models that represent patterns in the phenomena A – asking students to apply those models to novel situations

EIMA is different from other learning and teaching cycles because it focuses on creating, applying models and investigating rather than discovery-based approach. The authors worked together helping preservice teachers develop their pedagogical content and teaching orientations using EIMA framework. EIMA was incorporated as instructional model in a science method course that was taken by 24 preservice teachers before teaching in K-8 classrooms for one semester. The preservice teachers experienced EIMA as framework to plan their lessons using appropriate scientific models. According to the authors, the impact of using EIMA by preservice teachers were analysed based on pre-posttests, classroom artifacts, peer interviews, and components of lesson plans conducted throughout the semester using a standardized rubric which outlines the distinctive characteristics of instruction and clearly distinguishes the teaching

2

approaches such as didactic, activity driven, academic rigor, project based, conceptual change, inquiry and guided inquiry as shown below: Orientation or Approach Didactic Activity-driven

Characteristics of Instruction Teacher presents information through lecture or discussion, and demonstrations. Students participate in ‘hands on’ activities used for verification or discovery. Teacher gives equipments and directions for activity and

Academic rigor Project based Conceptual change Inquiry

tells students what they are supposed to see. Students are challenged with difficult problems and activities. Laboratory work and demonstrations are used to verify concepts. Centers around a driving question that organizes concepts whereby students develop a series of products that reflect their understanding. Emphasizes on students views, whereby teacher facilitates discussion and assesses students’ ideas before introducing a concept. Investigation-centred. Students do most of the thinking and investigate the problem with teacher’s support. Students explain their findings and

Guided inquiry and

use/create scientific models. Learning community-centred. The teacher and students participate in

Model-centred Guided

defining and investigating problem, determining patterns and

Inquiry (EIMA)

evaluating validity of data. Scientific models created/used to explain phenomena.

3

Besides that, the nature and purpose of scientific models are further categorized into three, which are explanatory model, models that embody pattern in data, and models that embody typical examples of phenomena. Analysis of preservice teachers’ pre-post tests difference indicates an increase in posttests lesson plans that focused on engaging students in scientific inquiry and enable two thirds of the preservice teachers to change their teaching orientation away from discovery or didactic approaches toward reform-based approaches such as conceptual change, inquiry and guided inquiry. However, according to the authors, there existed some factors and challenges that inhibit the change of teaching orientation. Model-centered guided inquiry lesson plans may not be always appropriate foe elementary children to use or create explanatory models. Some preservice teachers also struggled to understand the content investigations in the lesson planning. Besides that, there were instances where some preservice teachers resist toward letting go of from their prior ideas and lack of understanding the new ideas distracted or delayed them from fully incorporating scientific model into their lessons. Last but not least, the authors also wrote their perception about the future directions of using EIMA instructional framework. They emphasized that the methods of instruction require refinement and new teachers need practice critiquing teaching and lesson plans. They also stressed that new teachers also need to practice in evaluating curriculum materials to address core components of reformed-based science teaching. This steps need to be taken to enhance the development of skills and knowledge for reform-based science teaching, specifically model-centred scientific inquiry.

4

PART 2: CRITIQUE ON BENEFITS OF EIMA & CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENT EIMA in MALAYSIA

According to the National Education Philosophy (NPE), education in Malaysia is an ongoing effort towards further developing the potential of individuals in a holistic and integrated manner to produce individuals who are intellectually, spiritually, emotionally and physically balanced and harmonious. In consonance with the National Education Philosophy, Science Education in Malaysia nurtures a Science and Technology Culture by focusing on the development of individuals who are competitive, dynamic, robust and resilient and able to master scientific knowledge and technological competency. In order to achieve this, the teaching and learning strategies in school plays an important role. In line with our NPE, I think the instructional framework that was introduced by the authors are appropriate and suitable to be implemented in Malaysia as our country is leading towards forming a scientifically and technologically literate society. As we know, science is no longer abstract to us as students learn science as early as Year 1 itself. However, the question that is worth asking is whether our teachers and students, specifically beginning teachers and beginning learners have access to scientific inquiry and scientific modeling? Well, the answer is ‘NO’. Our students do not learn science in a meaningful way, and they tend to memorize the science concepts without any mental processing. Furthermore, there is no connection between classroom and outside world as the lessons are conducted in isolation of their daily experiences. Besides that, our teaching and learning process do not engage students with inquiry-based activities.

5

For an example, during a science experiment in class, the teacher provides the students with all the equipments and procedures and also tells them what to do and what results to expect. Therefore, our students do not use their skills and abilities up to their maximum potential. Our students only participate in hands-on activity for verification purpose and not as part of a learning process. That is why I feel that EIMA is a suitable instructional framework to be implemented in Malaysia because it focuses on: engaging students in the topic through investigation, creating scientific models and applying knowledge in daily lives. Besides that, scientific modeling is a crucial science practice in learning science concepts. However, I am aware that in order to infuse the EIMA instructional framework in the Malaysian science education context, the challenges of preparing reform-minded science teachers must be overcome. Firstly, traditional school settings provide limited opportunities of meaningful apprenticeship in inquiry-based approach. Lack of resources, equipments and technology materials impede the process of inquiry among students. Secondly, most teachers did not learn science through inquiry and therefore they do not know how to effectively engage their students in inquiry-based activities. Hence, they find difficulties to understand the underlying concept of EIMA. Most fundamentally, many teachers have limited knowledge of models and modeling (Harrison, 2001; Justi & Gilbert, 2002; van Driel & Verloop, 2002) Thirdly, some teachers who have been using conventional method and conformed to their own ways all these years may find difficulties to change their teaching orientation and adapt to the EIMA instructional framework.

6

Fourthly, our education system which is exam-oriented hinders inquiry-based lessons to be carried out in proper manner. Besides that, teachers who have not personally experienced reform-based science may not be confident in the new instructional framework, or they may be reluctant of taking on a new identity as they may fear of the instructional framework not been successful or appreciated by people. Furthermore, prospective teachers are likely to perceive a disconnection between the learning of educational theories at training colleges and the actual teaching experiences. This may be due to the sociology of school settings which do not provide the platform for the teachers to apply their educational theories. Infusing learning goals associated with scientific modeling further limits the time available to spend on other crucial learning goals, such as those associated with assessment or equity. At the same time, it might also lead teachers to value only modeling, at the expense of other kinds of scientific work, in their science teaching. Another common challenge faced by the teachers is that they need to learn something new and at the same time learn how to put those new ideas into practice. In this case, teachers are learning about modeling, learning to use those new ideas as they engage in modeling, and learning to engage students in modeling—a tall order. Last but not least, I also doubt how far can we change a discovery-driven activity to guided-inquiry based lesson? We also are not certain whether inquiry-based approach is applicable at primary school level as the primary school students are still young and may need the guidance of a teacher to show them the scientific concepts which are present around them.

7

PART 3: HOW TO IMPEMENT EIMA in MALAYSIAN SCIENCE EDUCATION

To make sure that we gain the most from the EIMA instructional framework, I suggest the following ways to implement EIMA in our science education:

1. Introduce EIMA to prospective teachers during their science-education programmes/course.  The science education courses offered at universities/training colleges need refinement so that the teachers have a stronger understanding of the nature of reformed-science.

2. Incorporate additional practices experiences throughout the teaching programme that is rich in reform-based pedagogies like EIMA instructional framework.  The reform-based pedagogies are not only infused in the education courses in the university/training colleges, but also in the science courses as well so that future teachers learn science through inquiry.

3. Motivational programmes to current teachers to entice them to adopt the underlying concepts of EIMA in their lesson plan whenever possible.

4. Government and NGOs and educational agencies should organize courses for teachers to adapt the inquiry-based approaches as underlined in EIMA. However, the

8

training programmes must be done in clusters and not according to cascade model to prevent dilution of information.

5. Evaluate curriculum materials and modify accordingly to infuse inquiry-based approach and scientific modeling in teaching and learning process.

PART 4: IDENTIFYING AND MAKING USE OF SCIENTIFIC MODELLING IN SCIENCE LESSONS

Consider the typical primary science experience of building a volcano model using baking soda and vinegar. Is this really a scientific model? What scientific practices will children gain through the construction of such a model? What higher-level knowledge will they develop about how science is conducted? What science content will they learn? And, how can a teacher differentiate between scientific models and exciting activities? A scientific model is an abstraction and simplification of a system that make its central features explicit and visible, allowing someone to illustrate, generate explanations, or make predictions of natural phenomena (Harrison & Treagust, 2000). In this sense, then, the volcano described above cannot easily be used as a scientific model, since it does not accurately explain the phenomenon of volcanic activity. The term model in science learning is typically used in two related ways (Gobert & Buckley, 2000). First, a conceptual or mental model refers to the individual’s internal representation, or their understanding of a phenomenon, which is also generally referred 9

as idea models. Second, expressed models are external representations of an individual’s idea model, and may be simply verbal descriptions, or more typically are inscriptions such diagrams, material depictions, or computer simulations. Such idea models and expressed models are the product of scientific modeling. Current reforms in science education encourage engaging students in authentic scientific practices (NRC, 2000, 2007) such as scientific modeling. Scientific modeling involves a set of modeling practices, including constructing, using, evaluating, and revising models. Constructing a model—through identifying the salient features of the system or phenomenon under consideration and determining how those, and the relationships among them, can be depicted or represented—is accompanied by using the model to illustrate a system, explain a system or phenomenon, or to make predictions about a phenomenon. This leads to evaluating and revising models in light of findings so it will better achieve its intended purpose. Engaging in these modeling practices can promote the development of scientific knowledge. Models need to be evaluated against empirical evidence to motivate the practice and make learners' engagement meaningful, rather than simply going through a rote sequence of steps. Understanding the purpose of models helps students engage productively in modeling practices (Schwarz & White, 2005; Snir, Smith, & Raz, 2003). Models can serve important sense-making and communicative purposes- to develop new understandings of a phenomenon and move toward being able to apply those ideas to making predictions about a new phenomenon or a new set of conditions.

10

The following summarizes the general guidelines for beginning teachers and learners to engage in scientific modeling in lessons:

 Familiarize the terms model, idea model, expressed model.  Understand importance of engaging students in modeling.  Describe a scientific model as a representation of a system.  Describe scientific modeling as – constructing, using, evaluating, revising scientific knowledge.  Recognizing and using both idea models and expressed models.  Understand the purpose of model-explanatory, predictive or illustrative tool.  Recognizing models in curriculum  Experiencing modeling practices.  Identifying set of criteria to evaluate students’ models.  Identifying instructional strategies.  Identifying instructional sequences.  Analyzing curriculum materials.

Adapted from, Source: MoDeLS: Designing supports for teachers using scientific modeling.

11

PART 5: FUNCTIONALITY OF EIMA in MALAYSIAN SCIENCE EDUCATION

In general, I summarize the steps involved in engaging students in scientific modeling by using EIMA instructional framework as shown below:

First, the teacher should get the students to think about a topic. For example, why there are different shapes of moon at different times in the sky. This is the first stage, engaging students in the topic. Then, the students will investigate (2nd stage) the topic. In this case, the students chart their observations on the moon for a period of time and they do references or use simulation software to see if their thoughts about the moon are accurate. Then, the teacher ask questions to direct class discussion in order to make connections with their observations and students make a model of the moon using Styrofoam ball and questions led by the teacher. Note that the modeling the 3rd stage involved in meaningful learning to find new ideas and data, not for verification purpose. Then, in the final stage, the students present their findings to the class and perhaps prepare a journal to be published in a small scale. This is the final stage, to apply findings.

12

The following are some of the ways that I suggest to implement EIMA instructional framework in our teaching and learning science lessons:

1. Teacher addresses core elements of reform-based science teaching within lessons and analyzes materials/topics that can infuse guided-inquiry and scientific modeling in lessons.

2. Teacher only guide students on how to go about it, but the investigation and modeling are done by students. It should-be more student-centred whereby students engaged in the topic and they learn through guided-inquiry and scientific modeling in their lesson activities such as problem-solving, project work, designing experiment, creating models and paper presentation.

3. Teacher should provide pathways for students to indulge in hands-on experiences which is more inquiry-based rather than discovery-based. For example, instead of having the students do the usual way (as suggested in the syllabus) to obtain scientific observations, perhaps teacher should allow them to come up with their own models and ideas using the same basic materials.

4. Teacher should promote open-group discussion which is directed towards the topic and encourage brainstorming to synthesize new ideas.

13

5. When conducting field work, teacher should not restrict the students to specific task, but encourage them to investigate on their own to generate new ideas, views and thoughts that can be applied in daily lives in all related topics.

6. Teachers with the support of the School and NGOs and agencies can organize competitions to encourage students to synthesize new things, and develop new ideas. For example, competition to create models on spacecrafts using their own creativity related science concepts.

7. Teacher can also encourage students to create their own computational software which outlines the students’ thoughts and ideas to create a more meaningful and sensemaking learning environment.

8. Teacher with the support of the school and NGOs can organize seminars, programmes and campaigns which provide opportunities for students to generate new ideas and create models using their creativity and critical thinking skills. These models can be showcased to public and the ideas can be presented in public seminars and school bulletin. In this way, students become more competitive in producing and sharing new ideas with the members of the public.

14

Reference:

Main Reference: 1. Schwartz, C., & Gwekwerewere, Y. (2007). Using a guided inquiry and modeling instructional framework (EIMA) to support preservice K-8 science teaching. Science Education, 91 (No. 1), 158-186.

Additional References: 2. Davis, Kenyon, Hug, Nelson, Beyer, Schwarz, & Reiser. (January, 2008). MoDeLS: Designing supports for teachers using scientific modeling. Paper presented at Association for Science Teacher Education, St. Louis, MO., from wwwpersonal.umich.edu/~betsyd/ASTE08MoDeLSDavis.pdf

3. Schwartz, C., & Gwekwerewere, Y. (2007). EIMA appendix. Retrieved from August 10, 2008, from www.msu.edu/~cschwarz/EIMA appendix.html

15