Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've been teaching Algebra 1 to lower- and on-level students for 5 of my 7 years of teaching so far (yes I am only 28!) and I can say 100% inquiry-based learning does NOT work for this type of student. Especially at the 8th-10th grade level. I tend to think I am rather traditional and don't buy in to tech "games" or "apps" or do anything online. My class is very straightforward: pass out structured notes sheets that we complete together (which I created myself), try a few practice problems, walk around and watch as they complete, go over practice problems, pass out homework worksheet (which I again created myself from scratch) that closely mimic the notes we just took. The next day, do a warm up problem based on yesterday's lesson, go over the HW answers (by showing the answer key on a document camera and having kids check their own papers with red pens), repeat.
Quiz/test time, I make a review that follows pretty much the same format as the quiz/test, and go over every answer the day before. I do not think I am really doing anything "innovative" or really dropping any of the buzz words, but my students are very successful. I've had lots of experience with special ed/co-taught classes and one year, got a class of sophomore Alg. 1 "Part 2" co-taught students to be able to successfully solve a proportion where they had to cross-multiply, FOIL when they cross multiplied, get equal to 0, factor, and solve the resulting quadratic equation. Granted, it took a while and we spent SO MANY WEEKS on factoring, but they did it and I was proud of them, and myself!
A lot of people approach lower-level classes as "they'll never be able to do this, so I won't attempt it" - and I think with that attitude, they never will be able to. But if you approach it as, yes, they can, I just need to break it up and chunk it appropriately - they can be successful. I just had a group of low-level Applied Geometry students accurately construct the medians, altitudes, and midsegments of a triangle -- and if you know anything about geometry, those are not the simplest of tasks. It's all in the approach.
Anyway, I agree with you that inquiry-based learning only works best when the students have the knowledge they need to get to the goal. If I just told my students "Your goal is to isolate x, have at it!" without teaching them the proper skills of using inverse operations, etc. etc., they'd have no clue what to do. Many would get frustrated and shut down.
Your post reminded me of what I have observed in special education. In some sped and speech settings, they use a lot of repetition, old fashioned worksheets, old fashioned phonics to help kids with reading and speech. But you are not allowed to do that any more in regular ed. So the average or the bottom suffer because they have to "figure it out"on their own or navigate through a mass of information and have to pick out specific skills that they need from it. The top-down approach doesn't work for everyone.
We're not debating the article. I asked for opinions on inquiry based teaching.
Then don't try to use an appeal to authority as a debate tactic if what really happens is you are just making things up. It is intellectually dishonest.
Would those of you who said they love inquiry based learning mind explaining what you do? How much do you teach before the inquiry activity if at all? How do you deal with groups that simply do the experiment/activity poorly and get poor results? How do you deal with kids coming to the wrong conclusion and then having difficulty letting go of what they believe because of their interpretation of what they saw?
Inquiry based learning is not a model that will work for you. You do not have the temperament for it. Luckily, most kids can learn in many different ways.
As for me, I flipped my classroom. Now we have lots of time for inquiry based learning. Kids learn the basics as homework, we use real data sets in class rather than canned ones, and there is no "conclusion" as that is not appropriate in science anyway.
Are you familiar with Visible Learning? It's an analysis on what works for achievement. Inquiry based learning is low on the list. Inquiry based has shown to have a low effect on achievement.
There is a program that is being used in a couple of states that is NOT inquiry based learning. It is learning science via heavy emphasis of math problems and repetition. The program, itself, will also certify teachers in STEM content areas. According to them, it has proven to yield the best results out of any program on Standardized Tests.
Has anyone heard of or used this program? It's called "Progressive Science Initiative" (PSI) or "Progressive Math Initiative" (PMI)
Teaching methods - https://njctl.org/courses/teaching-methods/
Are you familiar with Visible Learning? It's an analysis on what works for achievement. Inquiry based learning is low on the list. Inquiry based has shown to have a low effect on achievement.
I can find nothing that supports the bolded statement, at least as written.
The only article I could find that had no correlation between achievement and inquiry based learning only found it for novice learners who had no knowledge of the subject.
Kirschner, Paul A., John Sweller, and Richard E. Clark. "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 (2006): 75-86.
But it is inherently a strawman. Those who are actually familiar with inquiry based learning know that it does not happen in a vacuum at any of the recommended levels. The vast majority of primary or secondary classes with utilize level one inquiry based, where the subject is introduced (usually through traditional methods) so students are not "blind" when it comes to the subject.
This is a common mistake when people are complaining about inquiry methods, and it is so bad that there are many, many paper in the primary lit refuting this single paper and its methods which completely ignores what is and what is not inquiry based learning. Example:
Hmelo-Silver, Cindy E., Ravit Golan Duncan, and Clark A. Chinn. "Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006)." Educational Psychologist 42.2 (2007): 99-107.
In fact, the largest review paper on the topic
Minner, Daphne D., Abigail Jurist Levy, and Jeanne Century. "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 (2010): 474-496.
found that "Various findings across 138 analyzed studies indicate a clear, positive trend favoring inquiry-based instructional practices, particularly instruction that emphasizes student active thinking and drawing conclusions from data. Teaching strategies that actively engage students in the learning process through scientific investigations are more likely to increase conceptual understanding than are strategies that rely on more passive techniques, which are often necessary in the current standardized-assessment laden educational environment."
So unless you have something to counter some 138 studies which found a positive correlation between actual inquiry based learning and achievement, then your original bolded statement is just plain old not true.
There is a program that is being used in a couple of states that is NOT inquiry based learning. It is learning science via heavy emphasis of math problems and repetition. The program, itself, will also certify teachers in STEM content areas. According to them, it has proven to yield the best results out of any program on Standardized Tests.
Has anyone heard of or used this program? It's called "Progressive Science Initiative" (PSI) or "Progressive Math Initiative" (PMI)
Teaching methods - https://njctl.org/courses/teaching-methods/
As a science teacher AND a researcher, the notion that standardized test scores have any connection to understanding or even being able to "do" science is flawed.
The best science schools in the country, that produce the students who will actually produce people in the STEM fields, frequently focus on research over math drills. These students actually conduct original research, which by its definition is inquiry based learning.
As a science teacher AND a researcher, the notion that standardized test scores have any connection to understanding or even being able to "do" science is flawed.
The best science schools in the country, that produce the students who will actually produce people in the STEM fields, frequently focus on research over math drills. These students actually conduct original research, which by its definition is inquiry based learning.
The proof is in the pudding as they say. Thirty plus years of inquiry based science education in a STEM themed high school and we have an average college graduation rate of over 93% within 5 years for our graduates. Over 70% of them are working in STEM fields (much higher than the typical college graduate).
The proof is in the pudding as they say. Thirty plus years of inquiry based science education in a STEM themed high school and we have an average college graduation rate of over 93% within 5 years for our graduates. Over 70% of them are working in STEM fields (much higher than the typical college graduate).
Got any stats on that program?
Aren't you in a special magnet school comprised of parents who are involved and educated themselves?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
