Knowing Inquiry as Practice and Theory: Developing a Pedagogical Framework with Elementary School Teachers

Research in Science Education

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 303-327

  Poon, Chew Leng ^a   Lee, Yew Jin ^a   Tan, Aik Ling ^a   Lim, Shirley S L ^a  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Elementary school; Inquiry science; Pedagogical framework

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857924832     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-010-9199-9     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Abell, S. K. (1999). What's inquiry? Stories from the field. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 45, 33-40.
2. Anderson, R. D. (2007). Inquiry as an organizing theme for science curricula. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 807-830). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
3. Associated Press (2008, 28 June). Where have all the bees gone? The Straits Times, p. 41.
4. Baker, C. (1997). Ethnomethodological studies of talk in educational settings. In B. Davies & D. Corson (Eds.), Oral discourse and education (pp. 43-52). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
5. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139-148.
6. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86, 9-21.
7. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229-270). Cambridge: MIT Press.
8. Bybee, R. W. (2004). Scientific inquiry and science teaching. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning and teacher education (pp. 1-14). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
9. Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., et al. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs: BSCS.
10. Datnow, A., & Park, V. (2009). Conceptualizing policy implementation: Large-scale reform in an era of complexity. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, & D. L. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 348-361). New York: Routledge.
11. Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.
12. Egan, K. (1992). Imagination in teaching and learning: Ages 8-15. London: Routledge.
13. Egan, K. (1997). The educated mind: How cognitive tools shape our understanding. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
14. Evers, C. W., & Wu, E. H. (2006). On generalising from single case studies: epistemological reflections. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 40, 511-526.
15. Flick, L. B. (2000). Cognitive scaffolding that fosters scientific inquiry in middle level science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 109-129.
16. Grandy, R. E., & Duschl, R. A. (2008). Consensus: Expanding the scientific method and school science. In R. A. Duschl & R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation (pp. 304-325). Rotherdam: Sense.
17. Hammer, D., Russ, R., Mikeska, J., & Scherr, R. (2008). Identifying inquiry and conceptualizing students' abilities. In R. A. Duschl & R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementations (pp. 138-156). Rotterdam: Sense.
18. Hodson, D. (1985). Philosophy of science, science and science education. Studies in Science Education, 12, 25-57.
19. Holliday, W. G. (2004). A balanced approach to science inquiry teaching. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning and teacher education (pp. 201-217). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
20. Karplus, R., & Thier, H. D. (1967). A new look at elementary school science, new trends in curriculum and instruction series. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co.
21. Kelly, G. J. (2008). Inquiry, activity, and epistemic practice. In R. A. Duschl & R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation (pp. 99-117). Rotterdam: Sense.
22. Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 631-645.
23. Kim, M. C., Hannafin, M. J., & Bryan, L. A. (2007). Technology-enhanced inquiry tools in science education: an emerging pedagogical framework for classroom practice. Science Education, 91, 1010-1030.
24. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). 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, 75-86.
25. Knapp, M. S. (1997). Between systemic reforms and the mathematics and science classroom: the dynamics of innovation, implementation, and professional Learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 227-266.
26. Krajcik, J., McNeill, K. L., & Reiser, B. J. (2008). Learning-goals-driven design model: developing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy. Science Education, 92, 1-32.
27. Magnusson, S. J., Palincsar, A. M., & Templin, M. (2004). Community, culture, and conversation in inquiry-based science instruction. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning and teacher education (pp. 131-155). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
28. Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
29. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers' instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 53-78.
30. Millar, R., Lubben, F., Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1994). Investigating in the school science laboratory: conceptual and procedural knowledge and their influence on performance. Research Papers in Education, 9, 207-248.
31. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington: National Academy Press.
32. Rowell, P. M., & Ebbers, M. (2004). Shaping school science: competing discourses in an inquiry-based elementary program. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 915-934.
33. Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. J. Schwab & P. F. Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science (pp. 1-103). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
34. Schwarz, C. V., & Gwekwerere, Y. N. (2007). Using a guided inquiry and modelling instructional framework (EIMA) to support preservice K-8 science teaching. Science Education, 91, 158-186.
35. Shymansky, J. A., Hedges, L. V., & Woodworth, G. (1990). A reassessment of the effects of inquiry-based science curricula of the 60's on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 127-144.
36. Spillane, J. P., Reiser, B. J., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72, 387-431.
37. Tien, L. T., Ricky, D., & Stacy, A. M. (1999). The MORE thinking frame: guiding students' thinking in the laboratory. Journal of College Science Teaching, 28, 318-324.
38. Venthan, A. M. (2006). An insight into secondary science education in Singapore classrooms. Unpublished Masters, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.