Duschl and Grandy Inquiry Reflection
Although the reading was dense and hard to follow at times, I did find both the history of inquiry and their conclusions very interesting. I was most struck by the use of the term ‘full inquiry’ when referring to the teaching of Immersion Units rather than single inquiry lessons. I have difficulty wondering which I do. I feel like it is some of both or perhaps I do not fully understand the difference. If you have a series of single inquiry lessons that are getting at essential questions, is that the same as doing a single “hands-on” lab that was based on students observing some phenomena but necessarily following it up with anything of substance?
Reading this certainly reinforced the value of the Data Tools program and the work that we have done in re-thinking our curriculum. I recently completed the first of my Data Tools lessons that used GLOBE data to learn about the earth system. When considering the trends in the role of inquiry over the last fifty years, I sensed an immediate connection with the following:
• From an image of science education that emphasizes content and process goals to science education that stresses goals examining the relation between evidence and explanations.
I have felt that especially over the past five years or so, that my students have made such a shift but that I would not necessarily would have been able to articulate this with out reading the article. The Data Tools lesson definitely supports this shift in that we discussed what the data was and how the students at Reynolds Jr. Sr. High most likely got their data but the majority of the time was spent thinking about the data. We use the data in various arrangements to hypothesize, examine, and offer explanations that support the data that we saw.
Although the reading was dense and hard to follow at times, I did find both the history of inquiry and their conclusions very interesting. I was most struck by the use of the term ‘full inquiry’ when referring to the teaching of Immersion Units rather than single inquiry lessons. I have difficulty wondering which I do. I feel like it is some of both or perhaps I do not fully understand the difference. If you have a series of single inquiry lessons that are getting at essential questions, is that the same as doing a single “hands-on” lab that was based on students observing some phenomena but necessarily following it up with anything of substance?
Reading this certainly reinforced the value of the Data Tools program and the work that we have done in re-thinking our curriculum. I recently completed the first of my Data Tools lessons that used GLOBE data to learn about the earth system. When considering the trends in the role of inquiry over the last fifty years, I sensed an immediate connection with the following:
• From an image of science education that emphasizes content and process goals to science education that stresses goals examining the relation between evidence and explanations.
I have felt that especially over the past five years or so, that my students have made such a shift but that I would not necessarily would have been able to articulate this with out reading the article. The Data Tools lesson definitely supports this shift in that we discussed what the data was and how the students at Reynolds Jr. Sr. High most likely got their data but the majority of the time was spent thinking about the data. We use the data in various arrangements to hypothesize, examine, and offer explanations that support the data that we saw.
323:1093