| Chapter 1: | Introduction |
|
|
The farthest left-hand side column of table 1.1, in the variations portion, explains what would be expected in an open-inquiry investigation. There can be variations in the amount of guidance that the teacher provides. The move away from open-inquiry indicates that the inquiry would then be a guided type of inquiry, with the guided portion becoming more teacher-centered and less student-centered as one progressed toward the right side of table 1.1.
Other sources also examined different “types” of inquiry. Specifically targeting student investigations, Germann, Haskins, and Auls (1996) modified the framework for inquiry proposed by Schwab (1962) and Herron (1971) for use in their research regarding the analysis of nine high school biology laboratory manuals that purported to promote scientific inquiry.
Their framework also coincides with the definitions of guided- and open-inquiry in the NSES (NRC, 1996). Table 1.2 presents their modified framework.
Background in the framework refers to the teacher providing an “adequate” amount of background, possibly a guided experience prior to the open-inquiry, for the students to have a better chance in successfully completing the inquiry investigation.
Context and Justification of the Study
This study emerged as part of the development of teachers in the Iowa-SSTEP at The University of Iowa. In a coordinated effort between secondary science methods instructors, inquiry was a main strand of teaching emphasis developed in the methods sequence of three secondary science methods courses and a major emphasis in student teaching. The process involved students beginning with the “intellectualization” of the idea of inquiry when they participated in inquiry investigations as well their examination of inquiry as a