Inquiry Reflection
By Mark Murphy
Before:
I feel that scientific inquiry is the deepening of ones understandings of various natural phenomena driven by the role of questioning. I see scientific inquiry as a type of scientific method, following a systematic approach of observing phenomena, developing questions about it, calling on prior knowledge to develop a prediction, developing a fair test, interpreting those results, and offering an analysis. Like any scientific method, the inquiry model is cyclical as the final analysis may lead to a deeper understanding and further questions or may necessitate an alternative hypothesis.
Inquiry in my classroom is directly related to the value placed on what my students do not know. Many students come into science class ready to raise their hands in a moments notice, diligently supplying answers to trivial questions asked by their teachers. Some students have so much knowledge that they at times appear to be smarter than their teacher. The problem with that knowledge is that students often do not know the process necessary to deepen their understandings tied to that knowledge. Other students in my classroom seem to never raise their hand, and often lack confidence if you call on them to share their ideas. One of the reasons why is the due to the fear of not knowing, or perhaps not knowing as much as the others who have shared. In this environment, it is difficult to deepen their understandings because they are limiting their opportunities to confront their pre-conceptions about scientific phenomena. When you tell a student that what they don’t know is more important that what they do know, it seems to even the ‘playing field’ for all students. Thinking about what you don’t know is harder than it sounds and it easily offers a challenge to bright students, or ones who are just full of trivial facts. Thinking about what you don’t often takes pressure off of students who might not otherwise share fearing that they do not have the ‘right answer’. To me, inquiry is about using what you do not know to help determine what you need to find out next. In the end, inquiry leads to your ‘best’ answer, drawn from direct observation of data and ultimately compared to your prior knowledge in order to confront possible misconceptions.
I facilitate the inquiry process by balancing a student’s knowledge/understandings with opportunities for them to compare their preconceptions. This can be done by asking questions, making predictions and rationales by calling up their prior knowledge and then examining other’s bodies of knowledge (e.g. text books, research articles, etc) or by collecting their own data through conducting experiments or analyzing others’ data sets.
I also remind students that each of them may be in slightly different part of the inquiry cycle and stress the importance of communicating their ideas to others. To that end, I form study groups (4-5 students) that meet after experiments to share their results and analysis. Each group member then fills out a self-evaluation rubric as they consider their efforts to established criteria. Lastly, if I have a student that continually shares answers and facts, I tell them that every three answers should elicit one good question.
After:
After reading the articles and statements by fellow datatools participants, I have begun to think about inquiry as more specific tool rather than a general phrase. I feel that to engage in the inquiry process, it takes lots of planning, flexibility, and careful thought with respect to scope and sequence of ones curriculum. I found the history around inquiry fascinating and yet I also feel torn. I feel that in this day of NCLB, MCAS, and other standardized tests, no test that I have seen has yet to fully assess the inquiry model, as it should be in its purest form. Because of this, I feel that I will always feel a certain amount of conflict between running smaller inquiry lessons as part of larger units versus teaching in a more problem solving, or unit based inquiry events. I also have some concerns about the direction of science in moving from data collectors to data analyzers. If we all agree that there are great data sets waiting for us in the great unknown of the World Wide Web, can we all agree that some very skilled, motivated persons collected the data? How did such people get motivated? Perhaps it was due in part to some meaningful data collection (e.g. GLOBE) through their past educational experiences.
By Mark Murphy
Before:
I feel that scientific inquiry is the deepening of ones understandings of various natural phenomena driven by the role of questioning. I see scientific inquiry as a type of scientific method, following a systematic approach of observing phenomena, developing questions about it, calling on prior knowledge to develop a prediction, developing a fair test, interpreting those results, and offering an analysis. Like any scientific method, the inquiry model is cyclical as the final analysis may lead to a deeper understanding and further questions or may necessitate an alternative hypothesis.
Inquiry in my classroom is directly related to the value placed on what my students do not know. Many students come into science class ready to raise their hands in a moments notice, diligently supplying answers to trivial questions asked by their teachers. Some students have so much knowledge that they at times appear to be smarter than their teacher. The problem with that knowledge is that students often do not know the process necessary to deepen their understandings tied to that knowledge. Other students in my classroom seem to never raise their hand, and often lack confidence if you call on them to share their ideas. One of the reasons why is the due to the fear of not knowing, or perhaps not knowing as much as the others who have shared. In this environment, it is difficult to deepen their understandings because they are limiting their opportunities to confront their pre-conceptions about scientific phenomena. When you tell a student that what they don’t know is more important that what they do know, it seems to even the ‘playing field’ for all students. Thinking about what you don’t know is harder than it sounds and it easily offers a challenge to bright students, or ones who are just full of trivial facts. Thinking about what you don’t often takes pressure off of students who might not otherwise share fearing that they do not have the ‘right answer’. To me, inquiry is about using what you do not know to help determine what you need to find out next. In the end, inquiry leads to your ‘best’ answer, drawn from direct observation of data and ultimately compared to your prior knowledge in order to confront possible misconceptions.
I facilitate the inquiry process by balancing a student’s knowledge/understandings with opportunities for them to compare their preconceptions. This can be done by asking questions, making predictions and rationales by calling up their prior knowledge and then examining other’s bodies of knowledge (e.g. text books, research articles, etc) or by collecting their own data through conducting experiments or analyzing others’ data sets.
I also remind students that each of them may be in slightly different part of the inquiry cycle and stress the importance of communicating their ideas to others. To that end, I form study groups (4-5 students) that meet after experiments to share their results and analysis. Each group member then fills out a self-evaluation rubric as they consider their efforts to established criteria. Lastly, if I have a student that continually shares answers and facts, I tell them that every three answers should elicit one good question.
After:
After reading the articles and statements by fellow datatools participants, I have begun to think about inquiry as more specific tool rather than a general phrase. I feel that to engage in the inquiry process, it takes lots of planning, flexibility, and careful thought with respect to scope and sequence of ones curriculum. I found the history around inquiry fascinating and yet I also feel torn. I feel that in this day of NCLB, MCAS, and other standardized tests, no test that I have seen has yet to fully assess the inquiry model, as it should be in its purest form. Because of this, I feel that I will always feel a certain amount of conflict between running smaller inquiry lessons as part of larger units versus teaching in a more problem solving, or unit based inquiry events. I also have some concerns about the direction of science in moving from data collectors to data analyzers. If we all agree that there are great data sets waiting for us in the great unknown of the World Wide Web, can we all agree that some very skilled, motivated persons collected the data? How did such people get motivated? Perhaps it was due in part to some meaningful data collection (e.g. GLOBE) through their past educational experiences.
347:1145