that is rather “unfriendly to inquiry pedagogy.” Somehow, our preservice teachers need to 1) understand inquiry and its variations, 2) experience inquiry for themselves, and 3) feel somewhat comfortable creating and implementing inquiry experiences in the science classroom. In the current climate of high-stakes testing, it is difficult to for anyone to feel comfortable experimenting with a new method of teaching that is unfamiliar and so this change is difficult to establish.
In general, the focus on inquiry pedagogy in the science classroom has experienced peaks and valleys repeatedly during the last 100 years, beginning in 1910 when John Dewey first wrote about the importance of the experiential side of students’ experiences with science in the educational realm (Dewey, 1910/1993). As far back as 1938 (Dewey, 1938), discussion about what types of learning experiences are best for students included emphasis on actions similar to current descriptions of inquiry learning and teaching. Although Dewey wrote about the importance of including both experiential and traditional teaching, debate still persisted in the public arena beginning in Dewey's era, and continues today. Some discussion taking place includes whether is inquiry pedagogy is superior to direct instruction and vise versa. Dewey would likely argue that both are necessary and useful at different times, for different purposes, and stated as such in his book titled Experience and Education (Dewey, 1938). Public policy weighs in as parents, teachers, and administrators wish to know whether the types of learning experiences promoted by science educators are the ones that will help their students to learn best and to perform well on national and international standardized tests.
People have explored this idea of “experiential learning” in many ways. There has been the traditional method of sharing information with a class of students in the form of a lecture, followed by practice in a laboratory setting where students carried