Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 1

Integrating Inquiry-Based Learning and Technology

In the Elementary School Science Classroom

Lisa M. Falconi

University of British Columbia

Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 2

Integrating Inquiry-Based Learning and Technology

In the Elementary School Science Classroom

Inquiry-based learning is not a new pedagogical strategy; however, it has been brought to

the forefront of 21st century learning. According to the Ontario Curriculum, it permits “students

to engage in activities that allow them to develop knowledge and understanding of scientific

ideas in much the same way as scientists would” (p. 12). While there can be many challenges

that arise such as accessibility at home and school, motivation and replication of work,

technology enhances inquiry-based learning in the science classroom. It allows for differentiated

instruction, teaching students problem solving skills, and contributing to greater understanding of

the content, however, in order for teachers to deliver successful inquiry and use technology

appropriately it is important that they have comprehensive content knowledge, receive

professional development, and the opportunity to reflect on their experiences.

What is Inquiry-Based Learning?

Inquiry-based learning is student centred, meaningful, asking questions, exploration, and

wonder. It is not teacher focused, passive, or about being right. We may undermine our students’

learning through the use of convergent questions, teaching concepts through rote, and feeling

that the content is there for consumption. Garfield Gini Newman states that in order to

successfully promote critical thinking and foster collaboration, teachers need to guide students

with questions that require reasoned judgment, allow students to use inductive reasoning to gain

conceptual understanding, and encourage scrutinizing of content. Inquiry provides students with

the opportunity to be creative, think critically, and problem solve while actively driving the

direction of their own learning.

Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 3

Students are eager to learn about what is going on in their environment and because

science is about the world around them, they need to have the opportunity to investigate through

“conceptualized questioning” (Christmann, 2006, p. 3) and inquiry-based learning is the way to

seek answers. The process of inquiry in science dates as far back as the 15th century, however,

over time, as a result of the advancement of technology, scientific inquiry has energized

scientific investigation allowing inquiry in the classroom to create a richer experience for

students.

While inquiry-based learning is applicable to other areas of the curriculum, science is

well-suited to inquiry because it already encourages questioning. Students are encouraged to ask

questions when they are reading as it helps them to synthesize their learning, assisting them with

metacognition in order to determine if they are comprehending what they are reading but

effective inquiry isn’t just about asking questions. It needs to be well designed so that students

have a context for their questions, a framework, and a focus. “Well designed inquiry learning

produces knowledge formation that can be widely applied” (WNET Education).

Inquiry in science engages students in authentic investigations which are a more realistic

approach to science (Kubicek, 2005) and because science is cyclical and driven by questions,

inquiry-based learning is a natural fit. Students aren’t necessarily seeking out answers, but

solving problems based on the natural world.

Edelson, Gordin and Pea (1999) believe there are multiple ways in which inquiry-based

learning can be explored:

Problematize. Students will realize there are gaps in their learning and inquiry

encourages them to go further into finding a solution.

Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 4

Demand. In order to complete a science investigation students need to understand the

content, therefore, there is a demand for the knowledge.

Discover and Refine. While inquiring about their learning students will be improving

upon their theories as new scientific concepts are being discovered .

Apply. Students will “apply and test their scientific knowledge” while seeking out

research questions. (p. 394).

Traditional learning environments tend to discourage thinking beyond the teacher-

planned lessons. Is this a result of lack of teacher expertise in the subject area or the teacher’s

pedagogical beliefs?

Technology Within the Inquiry-Based Learning Environment

There are a number of frameworks that support the use of technology and the consistent

message is that technology needs to be used meaningfully and effectively and not just as a

substitution for other tools. The SAMR model has four stages for technology:

Substitution. There no functional change, however, the technology can be used at times

to make lessons more engaging and gain more focus with students, for example, using an

interactive whiteboard.

Augmentation. While the tool is still being used as a direct substitution, there may be

some enhancement involved. Using the whiteboard as an example, videos may be used to

increase engagement and assist with differentiation.

Modification. At this point, teachers are taking the technology to the next level through

redesigning tasks, encouraging creativity and collaboration. Good examples of this include

having students create iMovie presentations or creating and scanning QR codes.

Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 5

Redefinition. Lastly redefinition will provide students with opportunities previously not

thought possible, such as using Facetime or Skype to meet up with another group of students

around the world.

The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) framework by Mishra and

Koehler goes even further by demonstrating the relationship that happens between content

knowledge, pedagogy, and technology. To begin, it is of utmost importance that while teachers

have both the content knowledge and pedagogy, neither should be used in isolation in order to be

successful in delivery. (Harris, Mishra, Koehler, 2009)

This model tells us that in order for technology to be effective, it must fit the needs of

both the curriculum and pedagogical needs. Mishra and Koehler believe that to be successful

when introducing technology, there is a greater understanding required of teachers than can be

obtained through just receiving training. This creates an environment where technology is being

used in seclusion, separate from content and pedagogy, therefore, the TPCK model recommends

“a thoughtful interweaving” (Harris, et al, 2009, p. 1029) of all three forms of knowledge. While

teachers are receiving training on how to use the tools, they are not often receiving the guidance

required as to how to use the tools to enhance student learning. Often teachers are using

technology on the periphery, for low level tasks, such as those described in the substitution phase

in the SAMR model.

Athanassios Jimoyiannis (2010) has taken the TPACK theory, modifying it slightly to a

TPASK by changing the content knowledge to science knowledge. He argues that science lends

itself to the integration of technology because there are a great variety of tools for science

education, such as simulations, and modeling tools, yet, it is still imperative that technology be

integrated meaningfully and “ICT integration in science education should not aim at a simple
Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 6

improvement of the traditional instruction. Rather it is associated to fundamental changes in the

learning process while the teaching profession is evolving from an emphasis on teacher-centred

instruction to student-centred learning environments.” (Jimoyiannis, 2010, p. 3)

How Technology is Used

The use of technology in science is not new. John Harrison, for example, solved the

problem of longitude in the 19th century using a mechanical clock, (Christmann, 2006, p.5),

while the microscope was developed in the 16th century. The difference is that now teachers and

students have access to similar technologies that scientists do, for example, microscopes, and

web sites that connect them to real life experiences around the world such as observing the

eruption of Mount St. Helens which might be on the other side of the world. (Christmann, 2006,

p.7) And because technology has come a long way it also provides greater opportunities for

students to become more engaged in serious inquiry with greater enhancement of scientific

inquiry. Kubicek quotes Hawkey (2001) to say that technology can now provide “a new

opportunity to reconsider fundamental questions about what it means to be scientifically literate”.

(Kubicek, 2005, p. 3)

Teaching from textbooks gives the impression that the content is static whereas using the

internet provides a more accurate representation of the fluidity of some subject content, such as

science. There is also the opportunity to view a variety of sources, both older and more current

allowing for greater exploration of topics and ideas. Technology offers further opportunity for

students to “propose their own research focus, produce their own data, and continue their inquiry

as new questions arise” (Kubicek, 2005, p. 3).

According to Edelson, et al., the “six contributions technology can make to the learning

process are: enhancing interest and motivation, providing access to information, allowing active,
Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 7

manipulable representations, structuring the process with tactical and strategic support,

diagnosing and correcting errors, and managing complexity and aiding production” (p. 395).

Inquiry-based learning environments have become enhanced with the advent of mobile

devices and the internet. Students have the ability to research further questions that arise as a

result of their investigations, they can use multiple platforms to demonstrate their learning and

they can collaborate with peers, teachers, and experts all over the world. Technology also offers

a wide range of benefits with inquiry such as vast amounts of storage, the ability to share data in

many formats, and the ability to perform complex computations. (Edlson, et al., 1999, p. 395)

Some of the ways in which technology can be used in the science classroom include

blogs and simulations. Using technology for modeling allows students to manipulate variables

enabling students to see things that are not readily available to them, i.e., the inner workings of

the human body. Technology can also provide the opportunity to communicate with others

outside of the classroom, including experts in the field that students are working in.

Challenges with Technology

The integration of technology in the classroom comes with its own set of issues including:

Professional Development. As noted earlier in the paper, while teachers may receive

training on how to use the software, there is often no assistance as to how to effectively use it

within the curriculum. Training is frequently left to teachers who demonstrate a personal interest.

There is always a new piece of software or application on the horizon making it very difficult for

teachers to keep up.

Resistance to Change. Often because of the issue above, teachers are reluctant to

incorporate the technology. It may also not fit with their pedagogy.
Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 8

Insufficient Tools. While there may be some computers/iPads in the classroom, there are

not enough for effective teaching. Teachers may need to be creative and supportive of one

another within their school setting. One solution to this is to encourage students to bring in their

own devices.

Lack of Technical Support. Technical support may be an issue as there is rarely

adequate staff to meet the needs of many schools. Teachers then need to become trouble shooters

themselves, trying to meet the demands of simple challenges within the classroom.

Software. Desktops and/or laptops may not come with the appropriate software required

to deliver the program. This may discourage both the teachers and the students leading to further

frustration.

Challenges with Inquiry Based Learning

The fact that inquiry-based learning may not be widely used or used incorrectly can, to

some extent, be attributed to lack of teacher expertise. Teachers need to become facilitators,

guiding their students and poorly trained teachers may leave students confused. Active modeling

and scaffolding is required and if teachers are unclear as to what inquiry looks like, it is difficult

to demonstrate.

There is also the difficulty of “incorporating abstract concepts with inquiry” (Kubicek, p.

1) If teachers lack the content knowledge, they are unable to encourage greater conceptualization

of ideas in students. If the goal is exploration, teachers need to know the content to guide

students to dig deeper in the right direction.

Edelson, et al. (p. 399) share the five challenges they have developed to inquiry-based

learning as follows:
Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 9

Motivation. If students are not motivated they will not become active participants in the

inquiry activities which will result in a lack of learning and support of their investigations.

Encouraging student curiosity and interest is not always an easy task.

Accessibility of Investigation Techniques. In order for students to be successful with

their inquiries, they need to have an understanding of how to obtain and analyze data in order to

conduct investigations that provide valid conclusions. As a result, it can be hard trying to provide

learners with a range of tools to meet the many diverse needs of a classroom.

Background Knowledge. In order to develop meaningful inquiry, students also need

some content knowledge. The difficulty is providing students with the opportunity to develop the

knowledge in order to make their inquiry meaningful.

Management of Extended Activities. Organization can be very tough for students,

specifically within an elementary classroom. In order to complete an inquiry-based research

project, students need to be able to manage and organize ongoing, extensive activities.

The Practical Constraints of the Learning Context. Using inquiry can have restrictions

such as schedules and lack of resources which make it difficult to be successful. These

complications need to also be considered when designing the learning needs for a project.

Solutions

Providing students with meaningful problems is one solution to assist in successful

inquiry. Staging activities are structured investigations which introduce students to the

techniques required to develop their background knowledge. The process of bridging activities

uses actions familiar to students to introduce unfamiliar practices used by scientists. Supportive

user interfaces is like scaffolding in that it moves students forward progressively towards a

greater independence and understanding of the process. Embedded information sources are “a
Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 10

library of resources” (Edelson, et al, p. 401) to assist students in accessing timely information

with academic support and expertise. Lastly record-keeping tools support students with

management and organization.

Case Studies

Williams, Linn, Ammon, and Gearhart (2004) completed a two-year case study of an

elementary school teacher called Alice (pseudonym) using WISE which is a Web-Based Inquiry

Science Environment. WISE fosters science inquiry, allowing students to navigate through

problems, analyze, and explore ideas while finding evidence to assist in developing theories. The

case study determined that through the use of this program and appropriate support, the teacher

shifted her pedagogy to become an effective inquiry science teacher over a two-year period

(Williams, et al., 2004, p. 190).

Using relevant issues, WISE uses models and visualizations to assist students in building

new knowledge on top of their existing understanding of scientific concepts. It also provides a

grading tool that teachers can use to respond directly to their students.

Alice had been teaching for just over two years, had limited experience with inquiry and

the science content, however, she was motivated to implement inquiry-based learning and

integrate technology meaningfully. (Williams, et al., 2004, p. 192). The study focussed on

Alice’s ability to make thinking visible for students which is the first tenet in the Scaffolded

Knowledge Integration framework. (Williams, et al., 2004, p. 189). In order to do this, teachers

need to be “attentive to students’ conceptualization” (Williams, et al., 2004, p. 190) and while

teachers may have some content knowledge, they also need to know how to teach it to their

students in order to encourage learning; this is pedagogical content knowledge.

Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 11

Throughout the study, Alice also received some support from the authors of the study.

For example, they gave her assistance to obtain more technology in the classroom which

provided her with greater access to computers. The authors also implemented teacher workshops

which focussed on reflection, pedagogy, and lesson planning.

During the first year, a lot of learning took place for both Alice and her students but over

the two-year period, a shift towards inquiry-based learning took place. A great deal of her

questioning during the first year was logistical, such as ensuring students were saving their

information or reading/viewing important details. These questions weren’t providing students

with the opportunity to really develop answers to the simulations but as the projects continued

and the teacher’s content knowledge improved, her ability to become more of a guide to her

students increased. There was a greater integration of content and the number of conceptual

questions, which require “students provide explanations for their responses, made predictions,

and justify their conclusions”, (Williams, et al., 2004, p. 194) doubled. She was also able to

spend more time with her students ensuring there were no misunderstandings or

miscommunications. During the second year the teacher was making students’ thinking visible

and engaging students in more sustained interactions. (Williams, et al., 2004, p. 194). Lastly, the

study also showed that in year two, technology was integrated better and to a greater extent.

All these successes came as a result of having greater content knowledge, more

familiarity with the software, and increased knowledge of inquiry-based teaching. As with any

pedagogical tool, lack of content knowledge delays the performance. Greater knowledge of the

content and students’ understanding of it allows the teacher to focus on teaching and guiding

students to where you want them to be through refocusing of questions or redirection. Through
Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 12

her reflection Alice felt that the students had more background knowledge during the second

year because of her proficiency.

Before the study, Alice had little training in technology and used her own initiative to try

and discover how to do things whereas using the WISE program she received some guidance as

to how to introduce the software to her students while also using it to monitor her students’

learning. Having gained experience and receiving assistance with implementation allowed Alice

to focus more on inquiry.

Overall, the study demonstrated that experience and professional development assisted in

providing Alice with the tools needed to have an inquiry-based classroom. Once she gained a

greater understanding of the content through reflection and guidance, her goals of using inquiry

in the classroom were more consistent with her teaching. The advantage of the technology was

that after she gained experience using it in the first year, Alice was able to let the WISE program

“take care of the logistics” (Williams, et al., 2004, p. 204) so that she could focus on her students

and move them forward in their inquiries.

My Own Classroom

Having 12 years teaching experience, I have been using technology in my classroom

since my first year. After working in a previous career for 21 years, when entering the teaching

profession I didn’t have the fear of technology that some teachers have, however, the greatest

tests that I have had over the years have been how to use the technology at the modification and

redefinition stages. Technology is one of my passions and being driven to seek out new ways to

assist my students, I am always looking for ways to improve my teaching.

While integrating technology comes more naturally, using inquiry is a greater challenge.

The school board offers some training but only for social studies and the teacher must be doing a
Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 13

specific unit of study. It was incumbent upon me to seek out my own professional development

which was one of the reasons for choosing it as the topic for this paper.

I use technology to increase motivation and creativity, ie, iMovie, but using Mindomo for

students to create mind maps is one of my first steps towards using technology and inquiry.

There is no concrete evidence from my students at this point as to its effectiveness. The students

will be using their mind maps to demonstrate their understanding in upcoming one-on-one

sessions with me.

In November, as a result of my own initiative, I attended the Science Teachers’

Association of Ontario Conference where I had the opportunity to hear Garfield Gini Newman

and Douglas Llewellyn speak about incorporating inquiry into your science program. While they

were very inspiring I continue to feel unsure about using inquiry. While I feel confident in my

knowledge of the content matter, the challenge of letting go and allowing the students to move

forward to unexpected places frightens me.

One piece of advice learned from the conference was that it is not necessary to move full

steam ahead with inquiry and taking it slowly may be the most effective way to begin. In this

vein, I presented my students with the task of creating their own solar ovens. Instead of giving

them instructions on how to the build the oven, they were asked to research how to build the

oven and what materials were required. Interestingly enough, all but two of the students ended

up building the same oven.

Because of allergy concerns, students were not allowed to cook in their ovens so we had

little choice but to use ice cubes as our test product. In order to make this a meaningful

experiment, it was important for students to come up with an evocative hypothesis. Instead of

just determining whether or not the ice cube would melt, we needed to compare it to something
Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 14

else. Using pointed guidance I was able to steer the students towards an authentic hypothesis

wherein they compared how long it would take an ice cube to melt in their solar oven, compared

to an ice cube outside of the oven. Upon completion of the experiment, students were required to

provide evidence to support their findings using their observations.

So while I am using technology at all levels of SAMR within the classroom, I am still not

using inquiry to the extent that I should be. I believe that with some guidance, like Alice, I too

would be able to make my classroom a place of inquiry.

Conclusion

In order to truly be effective at implementing inquiry-based learning using technology,

both the literature and case studies confirm the importance of professional development,

reflection, and confidence in knowledge of the content. It has also been demonstrated how

important inquiry is to increasing the effectiveness of a child’s education, so in order to move

forward, it is incumbent upon school boards to begin to provide educators with the tools required

to support teachers in this venture. While passion and interest may take a teacher to a certain

level, guidance from experts may take the classroom to heights never imagined by the teacher or

his/her students. Students are always being asked to produce level four work so as educators, we

should be providing them with a level four education.

Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 15

References

Christmann, E. (2006). Technology-Based Inquiry for Middle School : An NSTA Press Journals

Collection. Arlington, VA, USA: National Science Teachers Association. Retrieved from

http://www.ebrary.com.

Edelson, D., Gordin, D., & Pea, R. (1999). Addressing the Challenges of Inquiry-Based Learning

Through Technology and Curriculum Design. J. of the Learning Sc. HLNS Journal of the

Learning Sciences, 8(3/4), 391-450. Retrieved October 17, 2015, from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1466642.

Gini Newman, Garfield. Science Teachers’ Association of Ontario Conference. Project

Innovation. November 13, 2015.

Harris, Judith, Punya Mishra & Matthew Koehler (2009) Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical

Content Knowledge and Learning Activity Types, Journal of Research on Technology in

Education, 41:4, 393-416, DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2009.10782536.

Jimoyiannis, A. (2010). Designing and implementing an integrated technological pedagogical

science knowledge framework for science teachers professional development. Computers

& Education, 55(3), 1259-1269. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.022.

Kubicek, J. (2005) Inquiry-based learning, the nature of science, and computer technology: New

possibilities in science education. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(1).

Retrieved October 22, 2015, from http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/149/142.

Llewellyn, Douglas. Science Teachers’ Association of Ontario Conference. Project Innovation.

November 12, 2015.

Running Head: INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY 16

Owens, R. F., Hester, J. L., & Teale, W. H.. (2002). Where Do You Want to Go Today? Inquiry-

Based Learning and Technology Integration. The Reading Teacher, 55(7), 616–625.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/stable/20205108.

SAMR. (n.d.). Retrieved November 29, 2015, from http://www.schrockguide.net/samr.html.

The Ontario curriculum, grades 1-8: Science and technology. (Rev. ed.). (2007). Toronto: The

Ministry of Education.

Williams, M., Linn, M. C., Ammon, P., & Gearhart, M. (2004). Learning to teach inquiry science

in a technology-based environment: A case study. Journal of Science Education and

Technology, 13(2), 189-206. DOI:10.1023/B:JOST.0000031258.17257.48.

WNET Education. (2004). Workshop: Inquiry-based learning. Retrieved November 29, 2015,

from http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/inquiry/index.html.