Inquiry-based learning (IBL) emerges from the student-centred teaching-learning approaches. The educator, Joseph Schwab, in the middle of 20th century, saw an emergence of the spirit of scientific inquiry in the field of science. He saw that, science and the way it was taught, was gradually shifting to a focus on a “flexible process of inquiry”.[1] The variations and modifications to the IBL approach have been innumerable, with several contributors, but in essence it focuses on 2 dimensions: a) Cognitive Dimension of Inquiry and b) Guidance Dimension of Inquiry[2].
Cognitive Dimension of Inquiry:
An inquiry could take place with respect to Concepts:
- Drawing on/making connections to prior knowledge
- Extracting Student Ideas
- Providing Conceptually oriented feedback
An inquiry could take place with respect to Procedure[3]:
- Asking questions (with a science orientation)
- Designing experiments and carrying through of a procedure
- Data representations
An inquiry could take place with respect to “How scientific knowledge is generated”:
- Evidence collected through students’ own investigations
- Examination of the quality of evidence
- Interpretation of evidence to explain any phenomenon
- Inquiry as to how collection, examination and interpretation resemble how a real scientist would do it
- Understanding that new evidence could make alterations to the knowledge they have constructed
An inquiry could take place with respect to “Social interactions”:
- Collaborative process or group work through which knowledge is constructed
- Communicating these ideas within a larger group, either through debate or other forms of representation
- Reason collectively and arrive at decisions together
Guidance Dimension of Inquiry: The inquiry itself could be either fully led by the teacher (in a traditional classroom); be guided by the teacher or be completely student-led inquiry (discovery). Guidance could also refer to that provided by peers and the curriculum itself.
For example, a learner could pose a question (student-led inquiry); learner could select amongst a databank of questions; learner could clarify/refine a question posed by a teacher or learner works with a question posed by the teacher (teacher-led inquiry).
A striking feature of this learning approach is the opportunity to work collaboratively, that is, there is cognitive interaction amongst all group members, to refine conceptual understanding. The beliefs, concepts, actions or knowledge that emerges from such an interaction is constructed by all the group members creating a “conceptual ecology” within the group[4]. It is not about, dividing tasks and completing a project, as is common in a cooperative group. All minds contribute to constructing the knowledge!
Enhancing IBL
IBL can be enhanced, such that learning is facilitated at a high level. It has elements within its framework where:
- One can engage in experiential learning;
- If entirely student-led, it can become a tool for pure discovery;
- If teacher-assisted it could be a process of discovery with guidance from an expert or person who is more knowledgeable. In this case, road blocks in a student’s learning are thwarted and time saved;
- If technology is used to assist learning – through virtual experiences or simulations; for representation of data in the form of graphs and tables or for interaction with teachers and peers, it could become a blended learning model
The ability to blend the best of different learning approaches with IBL, enhances the latter’s benefits. Each classroom or educational setting, is unique with a variety of factors influencing science learning – learning style; the content; appropriate teaching-learning methodology for given content, learning outcome intended and attitude of the student as well as teacher. Depending on where we stand at a given moment, IBL can be tailored to accommodate the uniqueness of the environment.
Example A: The teacher is in a classroom, where IBL is new to the students. The teacher focuses more on the process of inquiry by guiding students on how to ask questions that: a) are related to the natural world; b) are related to specific scientific concepts; c) can be tested through experiments or observations and d) are amenable to gathering evidence.[5] The teacher may also have to guide them initially on how to make observations and what to look for. In collecting information, they may be guided on how to tap into multiple resources. In group discussions, students may be encouraged to give explanations for what they observed. Studies also show that the more students engage in IBL activities, the better they get at formulating questions, collecting evidence, evaluating it and so on.[6]
Example B: The teacher is well-versed in the IBL approach; children have done multiple iterations of asking questions (in previous classes) and the curriculum supports it. The teacher uses IBL to:
- Encourage observation through a short movie;
- Prior knowledge is connected to observations through interventions by the teacher; here the teacher may get guidance from the curriculum text;
- Questions are constructed through student discussion;
- Materials are at hand for students to collect evidence;
- One group may choose to conduct an experiment to test their hypotheses and present their findings through quantitative data, graphs and tables
- Another group presents their findings through fresh ideas generated based on evidence collected and administering a survey
- Findings are posted on a common online platform for class-wide discussion or entered on a worksheet in the curriculum textbook;
- Findings of each of the groups are presented to the class orally or submitted in a written form, by attaching the evidence and test results.
Learning becomes multi-disciplinary: Example B gives us clues on how IBL can be enhanced to make it a tool for integrated or holistic learning. While activities can be designed by the students or with assistance from various subject teachers, various subject teachers can also assess different aspects of the whole IBL process or the same teacher (if qualified) can assess the student on:
- How was the conceptual understanding of a science principle; whether the experiment led to understanding the concept? – Science
- How the quantitative data was presented and whether students were able to explain the findings and identify trends in the data? – Mathematics
- How were the communication and written skills? – English
- How proficiently technology was used to represent information and data or whether it was leveraged appropriately, say for conducting surveys? – Technology/Computer Science
In this context, real-life case scenarios can be used to enhance IBL. For example: the students of a class may be presented with a case of outbreak of a common flu in their local community. They may be shown a brief movie on similar instances of a flu in another part of the country; they connect this to prior knowledge; make observations; ask questions; collect evidence from the local government health centre; carry out surveys or simple experiments; present their findings to peers and teachers. If findings have been well-debated and argued; the findings may be shared with local health authorities, identifying potential causes for the outbreak. If parents or school authorities have concerns on possible risks involved in field studies, for students; virtual simulations of case studies can be done to enhance IBL.
The above ways of enhancing IBL (making learning multi-disciplinary, holistic, experiential, inquiry-driven and learner-centric) are completely in line with the National Education Policy, 2020 (NEP, 2020) and learning outcomes as delineated by NCERT in 2017, as discussed further below.
The above discussion reveals to us that IBL becomes most effective when teachers are well-acquainted with the approach and its usage; when learning outcomes or standards are clearly defined (to support IBL); when curriculum/content material is aligned to IBL; when there are resources and materials available (to cater to different approaches or learning styles) and when assessments are built into the IBL process. If assessment is focused on testing knowledge of accumulated facts, then the motivation to engage in IBL will correspondingly diminish for the teacher and student alike.[7]
IBL in India and How it can be Enhanced
The recent National Education Policy, 2020 has drawn attention to focusing on inquiry as a pedagogical tool. While the policy has indicated broad standards in education; documents such as the Position Paper by the National Focus Group on Teaching of Science[8] and Learning Outcomes documents (providing subject-wise expected outcomes for each class along with suggested pedagogical processes) have been more specific in defining standards in science education. The CBSE, is currently in the process of introducing a ”Learning Standards Framework” for science, mathematics, English, social science and Hindi for Class IX and X.
The NEP, 2020 states: “Pedagogy must evolve to make education more experiential, holistic, integrated, inquiry-driven, discovery-oriented, learner-centred, discussion-based, flexible, and, of course, enjoyable.”[9] With respect to assessment it states: “The progress card will be a holistic, 360-degree, multidimensional report. It will include self-assessment and peer assessment, and progress of the child in project-based and inquiry-based learning, quizzes, role plays, group work, portfolios, etc., along with teacher assessment.”[10] As far as curriculum content is concerned it states: “Curriculum content will be reduced in each subject to its core essentials, to make space for critical thinking and more holistic, inquiry-based, discovery-based, discussion-based, and analysis-based learning.”[11]
Further, the Learning Outcomes for Science in Upper Primary (Middle School), clearly support IBL, when they state curricular expectations as: developing scientific thinking; understanding nature of scientific knowledge and developing process skills of science.[12] Engaging in familiar experiences, designing models, activities, experiments and surveys are all encouraged. We find a similar consonance with IBL as far as Primary level (Preparatory school – Classes III to V) learning outcomes in Environmental Sciences are concerned; where the emphasis is on observation of surroundings; exploration; developing process skills and asking questions, collecting information and conducting simple experiments.
NCERT’s Science Exhibition; National Children’s Science Congress and Initiative for Research and Innovation in Science by the Department of Science and Technology and Atal Tinkering Laboratories are some government initiatives outside of the school curriculum which have focused on encouraging inquiry in science education.[13] Several non-government organizations have also contributed to the furthering of the cause of inquiry in science but it is yet to be adopted on a large-scale in schools across India.
With the NEP, 2020, there is certainly a move in this direction but critical to the success of implementing an inquiry-driven approach in schools will be extensive professional development of teachers and change in perceptions of teachers who may be used to didactic methodology[14]. Are the changes in the textbooks conducive for IBL? A teacher’s approach may not change, even if textbook content changes, if a) Guiding principles for such changes are not adequately communicated and reinforced; b) Assessment is not aligned to IBL. “Integration of curriculum, instruction and assessment”, all 3 components are needed for effective teaching of science through IBL.[15] What opportunities exist within and outside the school environment to enable this integration is a question for all stakeholders. This integration would convey a uniform message to the parent, teacher, school administration and student fraternity – that science education is truly going to be inquiry-driven.
[1] Doing Science: The Process of Scientific Inquiry, BSCS (Centre for Curriculum Development), 2005
[2] R.A. Duschl, 2003 & 2008 cited in E.M.Furtak, T.Seidel, H.Iverson and D.C.Briggs; Experimental and Quasi-
Experimental Studies of Inquiry-Based Science Teaching: A Meta-Analysis, 2012
[3] E.M.Furtak, T.Seidel, H.Iverson and D.C.Briggs; Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies of Inquiry-Based
Science Teaching: A Meta-Analysis, 2012
[4] Kelly & Green, 1998 cited in R. Kuech, Collaborative and interactional Processes in an Inquiry-Based, Informal
Learning Environment, 2004 (Journal of Classroom Interaction)
[5] Doing Science: The Process of Scientific Inquiry, BSCS (Centre for Curriculum Development), 2005
[6] M.Eltanahy & S.Forawi, Science Teachers’ and Students’ Perceptions of the Implementation of Inquiry-Based
Learning Instruction in a Middle School in Dubai, 2019
[7] G.Bansal, Teachers’ Perception of Inquiry-based Science Education in Indian Primary School, 2018
[8] Position Paper, National Focus Group on Teaching of Science, NCERT, 2006
[9] National Education Policy, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, 2020
[10] ibid
[11] ibid
[12] Learning Outcomes at the Elementary Stage, NCERT, 2017. Note – Upper Primary as referred to in pre-NEP,
2020 document. As per NEP, 2020 classes VI-VIII are categorized as “Middle” school.
[13] Dr.G.Bansal, Inquiry-Based Science Education in India: Prospects and Challenges
[14] Dr. G.Bansal, Teachers’ Perception of Inquiry-based Science Education in Indian Primary School, 2017
[15] D.Ness, S.J.Farenga, V.Shah & S.G.Garofalo, Repositioning Science Reform Efforts: Four Practical
Recommendations from the Field, 2016
