Inquire

This PDF is available at http://nap.nationalacademies.
org/9596
Inquiry and the National Science

Education Standards: A Guide for
Teaching and Learning (2000)
DETAILS
222 pages | 8.5 x 11 | PAPERBACK
ISBN 978-0-309-06476-7 | DOI 10.17226/9596
CONTRIBUTORS
Committee on Development of an Addendum to the National Science Education
Standards on Scientific Inquiry; Center for Science, Mathematics, and
BUY THIS BOOK Engineering Education; National Research Council
FIND RELATED TITLES SUGGESTED CITATION

National Research Council. 2000. Inquiry and the National Science Education
Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: The National
Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9596.
Visit the National Academies Press at nap.edu and login or register to get:
– Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of publications
– 10% off the price of print publications
– Email or social media notiﬁcations of new titles related to your interests
– Special offers and discounts
All downloadable National Academies titles are free to be used for personal and/or non-commercial
academic use. Users may also freely post links to our titles on this website; non-commercial academic
users are encouraged to link to the version on this website rather than distribute a downloaded PDF
to ensure that all users are accessing the latest authoritative version of the work. All other uses require
written permission. (Request Permission)
This PDF is protected by copyright and owned by the National Academy of Sciences; unless otherwise
indicated, the National Academy of Sciences retains copyright to all materials in this PDF with all rights
reserved.
Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning
Inquiry
and the
National Science Education Standards
A Guide for
Teaching
and
Learning
Committee on Development of an
Addendum to the National Science
Education Standards on Scientific Inquiry
Center for Science, Mathematics,

and Engineering Education
National Research Council
National Academy Press

Wa s h i n g t o n , D . C .
Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS • 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW • Washington, DC 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of
the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National
Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The
members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences
and with regard for appropriate balance.
The Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education (CSMEE) was established in
1995 to provide coordination of all the National Research Council’s education activities and
reform efforts for students at all levels, specifically those in kindergarten through twelfth grade,
undergraduate institutions, school-to-work programs, and continuing education. The Center
reports directly to the Governing Board of the National Research Council.
This study by the Center’s Committee on Development of an Addendum to the National

Science Education Standards on Scientific Inquiry was developed under grants from the
National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Governing
Board Initiative of the National Academies. Any opinions, findings, or recommendations
expressed in this report are those of the members of the committee and do not necessarily reflect
the views of the funders.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards : a guide for

teaching and learning / Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering
Education, National Research Council.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-309-06476-7 (pbk.)
1. Science—Study and teaching—Standards—United States. 2. Inquiry
(Theory of knowledge) I. Center for Science, Mathematics, and
Engineering Education.
LB1585.3 .I57 2000
507.1′073—dc21
00-008103
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academy Press,
2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Lock Box 285, Washington, DC 20055. Call (800) 624-6242
or (202) 3334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area).
This report is also available online at http://www.nap.edu.
Printed in the United States of America.
Copyright 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

National Academy of Sciences

National Academy of Engineering
Institute of Medicine
National Research Council
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of

distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance
of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the
charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise
the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the
National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the
National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autono-
mous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy
of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of
Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages
education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A.
Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to
secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy
matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the
National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal govern-
ment and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr.
Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916
to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of
furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with
general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating
agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in
providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities.
The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M.
Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National
Research Council.


COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT OF AN ADDENDUM TO THE

NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION STANDARDS
ON SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY
Peter Dow (Chair), First Hand Learning, Inc.

Richard A. Duschl, School of Education, King’s College London
Hubert M. Dyasi, City College (City University of New York)
Paul J. Kuerbis, The Colorado College
Lawrence Lowery, University of California at Berkeley
Lillian C. McDermott, University of Washington
Lynn Rankin, Exploratorium Institute for Inquiry
Mary Lou Zoback, Western Earthquake Hazards Program, U.S. Geological Survey
Staff, Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education
Rodger Bybee
Kristance Coates
Linda DePugh
Jay Hackett
Susan Loucks-Horsley
Steve Olson
Harold Pratt
Lisa Vandemark
Tina Winters

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE EDUCATION K–12
Jane Butler Kahle (Chair), Miami University, Oxford, OH

J. Myron Atkin, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
Caryl Edward Buchwald, Carleton College, Northfield, MN
George Bugliarello, Polytechnic University, Brooklyn, NY
Beatriz Chu Clewell, The Urban Institute, Washington, DC
William E. Dugger, Technology for All Americans, Blacksburg, VA
Norman Hackerman, The Robert A. Welch Foundation, Houston, TX
Leroy Hood, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
William Linder-Scholer, SciMathMN, Roseville, MN
Maria Alicia Lopez Freeman, California Science Project, Monterey Park, CA
John A. Moore, University of California, Riverside, CA
Darlene Norfleet, Flynn Park Elementary School, University City, MO
Carolyn Ray, Urban Systemic Initiative, Cleveland, OH
Cary Sneider, Boston Museum of Science, Boston, MA
Rachel Wood, Delaware State Department of Public Instruction, Dover, DE
Robert Yinger, School of Education, Baylor University, Waco, TX
vi

Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in Ken Bingman, Shawnee Mission

draft form by individuals chosen for West High School
their diverse perspectives and techni- Al Janulaw, California Science
cal expertise, in accordance with Teachers Association and
procedures approved by the National Creekside Middle School
Research Council’s Report Review Dean Kamen, DEKA Research and
Committee. The purpose of this Development Corporation
independent review is to provide John Layman, University of Mary-
candid and critical comments that will land (Retired)
assist the authors and the Center for
Michael Martinez, University of
California at Irvine
Science, Mathematics, and Engineer-
Joseph Mcinerney, Johns Hopkins
ing Education in making the published
University School of Medicine
report as sound as possible and to
Gail Paulin, Tucson Unified School
ensure that the report meets institu-
District
tional standards for objectivity, evi-
Laurie Peterman, Anoka-Hennepin
dence, and responsiveness to the School District
study charge. The review comments Ursula Sexton, WestEd
and draft manuscript remain confiden-
tial to protect the integrity of the Although the individuals listed
deliberative process. The committee above have provided many construc-
wishes to thank the following individu- tive comments and suggestions,
als for their participation in the review responsibility for the final content of
of this report: this report rests solely with the
authoring committee and the National
Lloyd Barrows, University of Research Council.
Missouri
vii

Contents
FOREWORD: A SCIENTIST’S PERSPECTIVE ON INQUIRY xi
PREFACE xv
1 INQUIRY IN SCIENCE AND IN CLASSROOMS 1
2 INQUIRY IN THE NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION STANDARDS 13
3 IMAGES OF INQUIRY IN K-12 CLASSROOMS 39
4 CLASSROOM ASSESSMENT AND INQUIRY 75
viii

5 PREPARING TEACHERS FOR INQUIRY-BASED TEACHING 87
6 MAKING THE CASE FOR INQUIRY 115
7 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT INQUIRY 131
8 SUPPORTING INQUIRY-BASED TEACHING AND LEARNING 143
REFERENCES 153
APPENDIX
A EXCERPTS FROM THE NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION STANDARDS

A-1 FUNDAMENTAL ABILITIES OF INQUIRY 161
A-2 FUNDAMENTAL UNDERSTANDINGS OF INQUIRY 168
B SELECTING INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS 173
C RESOURCES FOR TEACHING SCIENCE THROUGH INQUIRY 189
INDEX 193
ix


Foreword:
A Scientist’s Perspective
on Inquiry
When I was growing up in the task was to explain why our govern-
1950s in the suburbs of Chicago, the ment was paying farmers for not
educational experiences that meant growing a crop. In the eighth grade I
the most to me were all associated had to explain to the rest of my class
with my struggling to meet a chal- how a television set works. And in the
lenge that had captured my interest ninth grade I remember poring over
and initiative. I remember writing a books on spectroscopy in the Chicago
long report on “The Farm Problem” public library to prepare a report on
in the seventh grade in which my its uses in chemistry.
xi

All three of these tasks, and many participants. They fail to see how this
others that interested me as a student, type of knowledge will be useful to
involved what we now call “inquiry.” them in the future. They therefore
Teaching science through inquiry lack motivation for this kind of “school
allows students to conceptualize a learning.”
question and then seek possible Most important, this kind of teach-
explanations that respond to that ing misses a tremendous opportunity
question. For example, in my field of to give all students the problem-
cell biology, cell membranes have to solving, communication, and thinking
be selectively permeable — they have skills that they will need to be effec-
to let foodstuffs like sugars pass tive workers and citizens in the 21st
inward and wastes like carbon dioxide century.
pass out, while holding the many big Inquiry is in part a state of mind —
molecules that form the cell inside. that of inquisitiveness. Most young
What kind of material could have children are naturally curious. They
these properties and yet be able to care enough to ask “why” and “how”
expand as the cell grows? questions. But if adults dismiss their
It is certainly easy to remember incessant questions as silly and
another and more familiar type of uninteresting, students can lose this
science teaching from my childhood. gift of curiosity. Visit any second-
In this approach — which remains grade classroom and you will gener-
depressingly common today — ally find a class bursting with energy
teachers provide their students with and excitement, where children are
sets of science facts and with technical eager to make new observations and
words to describe those facts. In the try to figure things out. What a
worst case, this type of science teach- contrast with many eighth-grade
ing assumes that education consists of classes, where the students so often
filling a student’s head with vocabu- seem bored and disengaged from
lary words and associations, such as learning and from school!
mitochondria being “the powerhouses The National Science Education
of the cell,” DNA being the “genetic Standards released by the National
material,” and motion producing Research Council in 1995 provide
“kinetic energy.” Science classes of valuable insights into the ways that
this type treat education as if it were teachers might sustain the curiosity of
preparation for a quiz show or a game students and help them develop the
of trivial pursuit. sets of abilities associated with scien-
This view of science education has tific inquiry. The Standards empha-
many problems. Most students are size that science education needs to
not interested in being quiz show give students three kinds of scientific
xii FOREWORD

skills and understandings. Students variability to differences in the lengths

need to learn the principles and of the strings. This leads to graphing
concepts of science, acquire the as a means of displaying the data for
reasoning and procedural skills of future work with pendulums. Ideally,
scientists, and understand the nature the teacher should use this particular
of science as a particular form of sequence of lessons to teach students
human endeavor. Students therefore about the history of clocks, emphasiz-
need to be able to devise and carry out ing the many changes in society that
investigations that test their ideas, and ensued once it became possible to
they need to understand why such divide the day and night into reliable
investigations are uniquely powerful. time intervals.
Studies show that students are much Contrast this science lesson with a
more likely to understand and retain more traditional lesson about pendu-
the concepts that they have learned lums. In such a lesson, the teacher
this way. does most of the talking and demon-
For example, one skill that all strating. Often, students display their
students should acquire through their knowledge about such variables as
science education is the ability to length of the pendulum, weight, and
conduct an investigation where they starting height by filling in a series of
keep everything else constant while blanks on a worksheet.
changing a single variable. This The challenge for all of us who want
ability provides a powerful general to improve education is to create an
strategy for solving many problems educational system that exploits the
encountered in the workplace and in natural curiosity of children, so that
everyday life. The Lawrence Hall of they maintain their motivation for
Science in Berkeley, California, has learning not only during their school
developed a set of fifth-grade science years but throughout life. We need to
lessons that give students extensive convince teachers and parents of the
experience in manipulating systems importance of children’s “why”
with variables. These lessons begin questions. I’m reminded of the
with the class working in groups of profound effect that Richard
four to construct different sized Feynman’s father had on his develop-
pendulums from string, tape, and ment as a scientist. One summer, in
washers. After each group counts the the Catskills Mountains of New York
number of swings of their pendulum in when Feynman was a boy, another boy
15-second intervals — yielding quite asked him, “See that bird. What kind
different results among groups — the of bird is that?” Feynman answered “I
groups conduct further trials that haven’t the slightest idea.” The other
eventually trace the source of the boy replied, “Your father doesn’t teach
FOREWORD xiii

you anything!” But his father had look at the bird and see what it’s
taught Feynman about the bird — doing — that’s what counts.”
though in his own way. As Feynman The book you are about to read
recalls his father’s words: illuminates this approach to teaching
“See that bird? It’s a Spencer’s science. It builds on the discussion of
warbler.” (I knew he didn’t know inquiry in the National Science Educa-
the real name.) “. . . You can know tion Standards to demonstrate how
the name of that bird in all the those responsible for science educa-
languages of the world, but when tion can provide young people with the
you’re finished, you’ll know opportunities they need to develop
absolutely nothing whatever about their scientific understanding and
the bird. You’ll only know about
ability to inquire. The process must
humans in different places and
begin in kindergarten and continue,
what they call the bird. So let’s
with age-appropriate challenges, at
each grade level. Students must be
challenged but also rewarded with the
joy of solving a problem with which
they have struggled. In this way,
students recognize that they are
capable of tackling harder and harder
problems. As they acquire the tools
and habits of inquiry, they see them-
selves learn. There can be nothing
more gratifying, or more important, in
science education.
Bruce Alberts
President, National Academy of
Sciences
xiv FOREWORD

Preface
In December 1995 same roles. The result

the National Research was a document that,
Council (NRC) since its release, has
released the National been a driving force
Science Education behind improvements
Standards, which, as in U.S. science educa-
stated in the “Call to tion.
Action” at the begin- A prominent feature of
ning of the Standards, the Standards is a
spell out “a vision of focus on inquiry. The
science education that term “inquiry” is used
will make scientific in two different ways in
literacy for all a reality in the 21st the Standards. First, it refers to the
century.” The release of the Standards abilities students should develop to be
was the culmination of an extensive able to design and conduct scientific
process of consensus-building. In investigations and to the understand-
1991 the President of the National ings they should gain about the nature
Science Teachers Association, among of scientific inquiry. Second, it refers
others, asked the NRC to coordinate to the teaching and learning strategies
efforts to develop national standards that enable scientific concepts to be
for science education. Between 1991 mastered through investigations. In
and 1995, groups of teachers, scien- this way, the Standards draw connec-
tists, administrators, teacher educa- tions between learning science,
tors, and others organized by the NRC learning to do science, and learning
produced several drafts of the Stan- about science.
dards and submitted those drafts to As required by the charge to its
extensive review by others in these authoring committee, Inquiry and the
FOREWORD xv

National Science Education Standards K-12 Classrooms,” examines science

has been designed to serve as a as inquiry by presenting and discuss-
practical guide for teachers, profes- ing a series of classroom vignettes at
sional developers, administrators, and the elementary school, middle school,
others who wish to respond to the and high school levels.
Standards’ call for an increased ■ Chapter 4, “Classroom Assess-
emphasis on inquiry. ment and Inquiry,” discusses the
The committee charge further varied functions of and strategies for
called for: assessment in inquiry-oriented class-
rooms.
• a background discussion of ■ Chapter 5, “Preparing Teachers
inquiry; for Inquiry-Based Teaching,” dis-
• a summary of pertinent research cusses the professional development
and scholarly writings that argue of teachers from undergraduate
convincingly for the value of inquiry in preparation to continuous learning
science education; throughout their careers.
• Actions that teachers, administra- ■ Chapter 6, “Making the Case for
tors, parents, and others need to take; Inquiry,” describes the results of
and research into inquiry-based teaching
• A bibliography of resources for and learning.
planning and implementation assis- ■ Chapter 7, “Frequently Asked
tance. Questions About Inquiry,” gives short
answers to some of the questions
In response to this charge, the frequently asked by classroom teach-
guide is divided into eight chapters ers, administrators, parents, and
and three appendices: others.
■ Chapter 8, “Supporting Inquiry-
■ Chapter 1, “Inquiry in Science Based Teaching and Learning,”
and in Classrooms,” sets the stage for describes how leadership from princi-
describing the multiple roles of pals and other administrators can
inquiry by comparing a geologist’s further the use of inquiry in teaching
scientific inquiry with that of a class of and learning.
fifth-grade students and their enter- ■ The appendices provide elabora-
prising teacher. tions of the abilities and understand-
■ Chapter 2, “Inquiry in the ings of inquiry from the Standards;
National Science Education Stan- guidelines for selecting inquiry-
dards,” clarifies the vision of scientific oriented instructional materials; and a
inquiry framed in the Standards. list of resources related to inquiry-
■ Chapter 3, “Images of Inquiry in based science education.
xvi P R E FA C E

directly to improve teaching and

A number of the chapters in the learning. School administrators and
report feature vignettes of teachers members of the public can use it to
and students engaged in using and understand and promote inquiry-
learning about inquiry. These vi- based teaching and learning. Profes-
gnettes are based on actual experi- sional developers and teacher educa-
ences witnessed by committee mem- tors can use it to improve the ways
bers and contributors to the report. they work with teachers and better to
Some details have been altered to model and design inquiry-oriented
emphasize particular points. The learning experiences for prospective
purpose of the vignettes is to illustrate and practicing teachers. University
the key ideas in the text, not to repre- science faculty can use it to rethink
sent idealized classroom and profes- the content and teaching strategies
sional development scenarios. they use in courses attended by
This guide has been produced preservice teachers. Scientists can
under the direction of the Committee use it to guide their work with teach-
on Science Education K-12 (COSE K- ers. And the many other individuals
12), a standing board within the and groups who believe that the
Center for Science, Mathematics, and process of inquiry should be part of
Engineering Education at the National every science classroom can use it to
Research Council. COSE K-12 formed spark discussion and guide their
the Committee on Development of an efforts to effect change.
Addendum to the National Science Readers who choose not to read
Education Standards on Scientific this book from cover to cover should
Inquiry and charged the committee begin with Chapters 1 and 2, which
with producing a document that would provide a foundation for the remaining
help educators improve the quality of chapters. In Chapter 3 the vignettes
teaching, learning, and assessment represent different grade spans,
through the use of inquiry. Funding depending on their grade level inter-
for the project came from the National est, so readers may want to be selec-
Science Foundation, the National tive in which vignettes they read.
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Other chapter selections will depend
and the Governing Board Initiative of on the particular role and need of the
the National Academies. reader. For example, Chapter 5
The committee has written this speaks especially to teacher educators
guide to be used in a number of ways. and professional developers and
Classroom teachers, science depart- Chapter 8 to administrators and other
ment chairs, science supervisors, and leaders of science reform initiatives.
professional developers can use it This guide is the first in a series of
P R E FA C E xvii

planned addenda to the Standards. Vasquez, and Henry Heikkinen, who

Addenda on science and technology advised us on early drafts; and the
and on classroom assessment are many teachers and teacher developers
also being prepared. The Center whose inquiry-based teaching experi-
also has produced several other ences illustrate the ideas in these
documents that support standards- pages. We especially thank Susan
based reform in science education, Loucks-Horsley and Jay Hackett, who
including publications about select- served as project directors for differ-
ing instructional materials, design- ent phases of this report; other dedi-
ing multi-year curriculum programs, cated Center staff who helped us
and using the findings of the Third conceptualize, improve, and produce
International Mathematics and this report, including Rodger Bybee,
Science Study to improve science Harold Pratt, Lisa Vandemark,
curricula and teaching. Kristance Coates, Linda DePugh, and
On behalf of the committee, I Tina Winters; writer Steve Olson
acknowledge with deep appreciation whose editing greatly improved the
the contributions of Elizabeth Stage, report; and dozens of teachers and
Ron Anderson, Jim Minstrell, Denis administrators who participated in
Goodrum, Maryellen Harmon, Doris workshops where our ideas and
Ash, Lezlie DeWater, and David frameworks were tried out, for their
Hartney, who produced written invaluable feedback.
material; Mike Atkin, Kathy DiRanna,
Sally Crissman, Kathy Stiles, JoAnne Peter Dow, Committee Chair
xviii P R E FA C E

P R E FA C E xix


1
Inquiry in Science and
in Classrooms
Scientific inquiry refers to the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural
world and propose explanations based on the evidence derived from their work.
Inquiry also refers to the activities of students in which they develop knowledge
and understanding of scientific ideas, as well as an understanding of how
scientists study the natural world. National Science Education Standards, p. 23.
As pointed out in the National A good way to begin this investiga-

Science Education Standards (National tion is to compare the methods and
Research Council, 1996), students who thinking process of a practicing
use inquiry to learn science engage in scientist with the activities of an
many of the same activities and inquiry-based science lesson. The
thinking processes as scientists who stories in this chapter set the stage for
are seeking to expand human knowl- many of the themes to follow. The
edge of the natural world. Yet the sidebars suggest some important
activities and thinking processes used aspects of the investigations of both
by scientists are not always familiar to scientists and students.
the educator seeking to introduce
inquiry into the classroom. By de-
INQUIRY IN SCIENCE
scribing inquiry in both science and in
classrooms, this volume explores the A geologist who was mapping
many facets of inquiry in science coastal deposits in the state of Wash- Makes
education. Through examples and ington was surprised to discover a observations
discussion, it shows how students and forest of dead cedar trees near the
teachers can use inquiry to learn how shore. A significant portion were still
to do science, learn about the nature standing, but they clearly had been
of science, and learn science content. dead for many years. He found similar
INQUIRY IN SCIENCE AND IN CLASSROOMS 1

stands of dead trees at other places using carbon 14 radiometric methods.

along the coast in both Oregon and He found that they all had died about
Washington. He wondered, “What 300 years ago. As for the cause Gathers
of the trees’ death, his mapping evidence using
indicated no evidence for widespread technology and
volcanic deposits in the areas of dead mathematics
forests. Furthermore, the trees were
not burned, nor did careful examina-
tion indicate any evidence of insect
infestation.
The geologist began thinking about
the possible role of salt water in killing
the trees. He recalled that a large
section of the Alaskan coast dropped Uses
below sea level in 1964 when the previous
tectonic plate that underlies much of research
the Pacific Ocean plunged beneath the
North American tectonic plate that
Alaska sits on as the result of a major
“subduction zone earthquake.” Many
square miles of coastal forests in
Alaska died when the coastline
dropped and they were submerged in
salt water following the earthquake.
could have killed so many trees over He knew that a similar subduction
so wide an area?” zone lies beneath the Washington and
Reflecting on his knowledge of Oregon coast and gives rise to the
earthquakes, crustal plate boundaries, volcanoes of the Cascade mountains.
Exhibits and subsidence along coastlines, the He wondered whether the trees in
curiosity, geologist searched for possible Washington and Oregon might have
defines explanations. “Did the trees die at the been drowned by sea water when a
questions, from same time?” “Was their death related large section of the coast subsided Propose a
knowledge to nearby volcanic activity or some during an earthquake 300 years ago. possible
background kind of biological blight?” “Given their To check this explanation, he explanation
coastal location, was there some collected more data. He examined the
relationship between the salt water sediments in the area. Well-preserved
and the destruction of the forests?” sections of sediment exposed in the
He pursued his first question by banks of streams inland from the
dating the outer rings of the trees stands of dead trees showed a clean
2 I N Q U I R Y A N D T H E N AT I O N A L S C I E N C E E D U C AT I O N S TA N D A R D S

layer of sand below the soil — unlike suggested that the source of the
any of the dark, clay-rich soil above tsunami was a large subduction zone
and below the sand. “Where did the earthquake beneath present day
white sand come from?” he wondered. Oregon and Washington (Satake et al.,
The geologist knew that subduction 1996).
zone earthquakes often produce Now the geologist had more
tsunamis — tidal waves. He thought evidence supporting his explanation
the sand layer could be sand washed that the sand layer was caused by a
ashore during a tsunami. If so, this tsunami that accompanied an earth-
would be further evidence of a major quake. Further examination of coastal
coastal earthquake. Fossils recovered sediments uncovered additional, but
from the sand layer indicated the sand older, remains of dead trees and sand
came from the ocean rather than layers. He now thinks that earth-
being washed down from inland, quakes producing very large tsuna- Adds to
supporting the tsunami hypothesis. mis, like the one he first identified, explanation
He published several articles in have repeatedly struck the Pacific
peer-reviewed scientific journals Northwest coast in the past thousand
Publishes hypothesizing that the dead trees and years, just as these large earthquakes
explanation sand layer found along the coast were strike other subduction zones beneath
based on evidence that a major earthquake Japan, the Philippines, Alaska, and
evidence occurred about 300 years ago, just much of Western South America. The
before European settlers arrived in the coastal subsidence caused by the
region (Atwater, 1987; Nelson et al., earthquake submerged the trees in
1995). salt water, which led to their death.
Several years later a Japanese As sometimes occurs with scientific
seismologist, who was studying research, the geologist’s findings
historic tide gauge records in Japan to influenced public policy. Public
document tsunamis from distant officials have revised the building
sources, identified a major earthquake codes for Washington and Oregon,
somewhere along the Pacific rim on based on the deeper understanding of Explanation
January 17, 1700, but the source of the earthquakes that grew out of this informs public
earthquake was open to debate. research. New buildings must be policy
Using historical records he was able to designed to resist earthquake forces
eliminate the possibility of a large 50 percent larger than under the old
Considers earthquake from most known earth- code.
new quake source regions around the This story illustrates several
evidence Pacific. Aware of the geologist’s work important features of scientific in-
on dead forests in the Pacific north- quiry. A scientist noticed a phenom-
west, the Japanese seismologist enon and had the curiosity to ask

questions about it. No doubt many methods to date the dead trees and
other people had also noticed the dead the gathering of available knowledge
trees, but they either did not wonder about the geology of the region. He
about the cause of death or were not developed an explanation for the death
in a position to answer the question. of the trees based on this preliminary
Using his knowledge of geology and evidence and gathered more evidence
what he learned about trees and their to test his explanation. He then
habitats, the geologist made connec- published articles in which he dis-
tions between the dead trees and cussed the relationship between the
other features of the environment, evidence he accumulated and the
such as the coastal location. Those explanation he proposed. Later, a
questions guided his investigation, scientist in another part of the world
which included the use of carbon 14 read the publications and, because
Geologist’s report of his findings published in the journal Nature

scientists use universal descriptions This complex set of thinking

and measurements, was able to abilities, which helped early humans
compare his findings with those of the gather food and escape danger,
American scientist. The Japanese constitutes the highly developed
scientist obtained separate evidence capacity we refer to as inquiry. In
— the occurrence of a tsunami on recent human history, some people
January 17, 1700 — that gave further have directed their curiosity toward
support to the hypothesis that a issues other than subsistence and
subduction zone earthquake occur- survival — for example, the movement
ring on that date led to the death of a of celestial objects, the causes of
large number of trees along the Pacific seasons, the behavior of moving
Northwest coast. objects, and the origins of organisms.
Curiosity about such issues is unique
to humans. People studied these
THE NATURE OF HUMAN
phenomena, developing hypotheses
INQUIRY
and proposing explanations. The
The geologist’s search for under- communication of hypotheses, ideas,
standing of the natural world is a good and concepts among individuals
illustration of the human characteris- shaped the strategies, rules, stan-
tics that make inquiry such a powerful dards, and knowledge that we recog-
way of learning. Humans are innately nize today as scientific.
curious, as anyone knows who has Inquiry into the natural world takes
watched a newborn. From birth, a wide variety of forms. It can range
children employ trial-and-error tech- from a child’s wondering how it is
niques to learn about the world possible for ants to live underground
around them. As children and as to the search by groups of physicists
adults, when faced with an unknown for new atomic particles. Inquiry in
situation, we try to determine what is classrooms also takes a wide variety of
happening and predict what will forms, as described later in this
happen next. We reflect on the world volume. But whatever its exact form,
around us by observing, gathering, its role in education is becoming an
assembling, and synthesizing informa- increasing focus of attention. Today
tion. We develop and use tools to the world is being profoundly influ-
measure and observe as well as to enced by scientific discoveries.
analyze information and create mod- People need to make and evaluate
els. We check and re-check what we decisions that require careful ques-
think will happen and compare results tioning, seeking of evidence, and
to what we already know. We change critical reasoning. Learning environ-
our ideas based on what we learn. ments that concentrate on conveying

to students what scientists already INQUIRY IN THE SCIENCE

know do not promote inquiry. Rather, CLASSROOM
an emphasis on inquiry asks that we
One of the best ways to under-
think about what we know, why we
stand school science as inquir y is
know, and how we have come to know.
through a visit to a classroom where
Inquiry is at the heart of the Na-
scientific inquir y is practiced. The
tional Science Education Standards.
following vignette features a particu-
The Standards seek to promote
lar grade, but, as illustrated through-
curriculum, instruction, and assess-
out this book, classroom inquir y can
ment models that enable teachers to
and does happen at all grade levels.
build on children’s natural, human
Sidebars point out some ways in-
inquisitiveness. In this way, teachers
quir y is occurring.
can help all their students understand
Several of the children in Mrs.
science as a human endeavor, acquire
Graham’s fifth grade class were
the scientific knowledge and thinking
excited when they returned to their
skills important in everyday life and, if
room after recess one fall day. They
their students so choose, in pursuing a
pulled their teacher over to a window,
scientific career.
pointed outside, and said, “We noticed
something about the trees on the
playground. What’s wrong with
them?” Mrs. Graham didn’t
know what they were
concerned about, so she
said, “Show me what you
mean.”
The students pointed
to three trees growing side
by side. One had lost all its
leaves, the middle one had
multicolored leaves —
mostly yellow — and the
third had lush, green
leaves. The children said,
“Why are those three trees
different? They used to
look the same, didn’t they?”
Mrs. Graham didn’t know
the answer.
Mrs. Graham knew

Exhibit that her class was scheduled to study investigated and which were descrip-
curiosity, plants later in the year, and this was an tions. She then invited each student to
define opportunity for them to investigate pick one explanation that he or she
questions questions about plant growth that they thought might be an answer. She
from had originated and thus were espe- grouped the students by choices:
current cially motivated to answer. Although There was a “water group”, a “sea- Plan and
knowledge she was uncertain about where her sons” group, an “insects” group, and conduct
students’ questions would lead, Mrs. so on. She asked each group to plan simple
Graham chose to take the risk of and conduct a simple investigation to investigation
letting her students pursue investiga- see if they could find any evidence that
tions under her guidance. After all, answered their question. As they
they had had some experience last planned their investigations, Mrs.
year in examining how seeds grow Graham visited each group of students
under different conditions. She hung
up a large sheet of butcher paper
where all the students could see it and
said, “Let’s make a list of ideas that
might explain what’s happening to
those three trees outside.” A forest of
hands went up:
It has something to do with the

sunlight.
It must be too much water.
Propose It must not be enough water.
preliminary The trees look different. They used
explanations to look the same. and carefully listened as they formu-
or hypotheses It’s the season, some trees lose lated their plans. She then asked each
their leaves earlier than others. group to explain their ideas to their
There is poison in the ground. classmates, resulting in further
The trees have different ages. refinement. Using this quick and
Insects are eating the trees. public assessment of where they were,
One tree is older than the others. she was able to help them think about Gather evidence
the processes they were using to from
When the students were satisfied address their question and consider observation
that they had enough ideas, Mrs. whether other approaches might work
Graham encouraged them to think better.
about which of their ideas were For the next three weeks, science
possible explanations that could be periods were set aside for each group

to carry out its investigation. The phlet from a local nursery entitled
groups used a variety of sources to “Growing Healthy Plants.” The water
gather information about characteris- group read the pamphlet and found
tics of trees, their life cycles, and their that when plant roots are surrounded
environments. For example, the by water, they cannot take in air from
“different ages” group answered their the space around the roots and they
Explain based question fairly quickly. They con- essentially “drown.” Based on their
on evidence tacted the PTA members who were observations and the information they
involved in planting that part of the obtained from the pamphlet, the
playground and found the original students concluded that the leafless
receipts for the purchase of the trees. tree was drowning, the middle tree
A check with the nursery indicated was “kinda” drowning, and the third
that all three trees were identical and one was “just right.”
of approximately the same age when The water group continued its work
purchased. As some groups com- by investigating the source of the
pleted their investigations early, Mrs. water. They found that the school
Graham invited their members to join custodian turned on a lawn sprinkler
other groups still in progress. system three times a week. He left it
The water group decided to look at running longer than necessary, and
the ground around the trees every the excess water ran off the lawn and
hour that they could. They took turns collected at the base of the trees.
and jointly kept a journal of their Since the ground was sloped, most of
individual observations. Since some the water collected at one end of the
students lived near the school, their tree-growing area. Together with the
observations continued after school other groups, they reported their
hours and on weekends. They missed results to the rest of the class.
some hourly observations, but they As different groups gave their
had sufficient data to report to the reports, the class learned that some
class. “The tree without leaves is observations and information — such
almost always standing in water, the as those from the group investigating Communicate
middle tree is sometimes standing in whether the trees were different — explanation
water, and the green tree has damp did not explain the observations. The
ground but is never standing in water.” results of other investigations, such as
One of the students recalled that the idea that the trees could have a
Consider several months ago the leaves on one disease, partly supported the observa-
other of his mother’s geraniums had begun tions. But the explanation that
explanations to turn yellow. She told him that the seemed most reasonable to the
geranium was getting too much water. students, that fit all the observations
Mrs. Graham gave the group a pam- and conformed with what they had


learned from other sources, was too explanation for what he observed,
much water. After their three weeks applying his knowledge of plate
of work, the class was satisfied that tectonics. The children applied their
together they had found a reasonable knowledge to formulate several
answer to their question. At Mrs. explanations and new questions before
Graham’s suggestion, they wrote a undertaking further investigations.
letter to the custodian telling him what The scientist, knowing of investiga-
they had found. The custodian came tions by other scientists, used their
to class and thanked them. He said he findings to confirm the validity of his
would change his watering procedure original explanation. In Mrs.
and he did. Mrs. Graham then asked Graham’s class, groups whose expla-
the students how they could find out if nations were not confirmed lent
their explanation was correct. After strength to the “excess water” expla-
some discussion they decided that nation. The geologist published his
they would have to wait until next year findings. The children “published”
and see if all the trees got healthy their findings in their reports to their
again. classmates and later in a letter to the
The following year, during the same custodian. Although scientific re-
month that they had observed the search does not always influence
discrepancy, all three trees were fully public policy, the geologist’s discover-
Test clothed with green leaves. Mrs. ies resulted in building code revisions
explanation Graham’s former students were now in Washington and Oregon. The
even more convinced that what they children’s investigations led to revised
had concluded was a valid explanation lawn watering procedures at their
for their observations. school.
Inquiry in the classroom can take
many forms. Investigations can be
PARALLELS BETWEEN INQUIRY
highly structured by the teacher so
IN EDUCATION AND IN SCIENCE
that students proceed toward known
One is struck by the parallels outcomes, such as discovering regu-
between Mrs. Graham’s class and the larities in the movement of pendulums
inquiring geologist. The geologist (as noted in the Foreword and in the
began his investigation with a question classroom vignette on pages 146-147
about an unusual and intriguing of the National Science Education
observation of nature. So did Mrs. Standards). Or investigations can be
Graham’s children. The scientist then free-ranging explorations of unex-
undertook a closer examination of the plained phenomena, like the tree leaf
environment — asked new and more discrepancies in Mrs. Graham’s
focused questions — and proposed an schoolyard. The form that inquiry

takes depends largely on the educa- science as inquiry across a broad

tional goals for students, and because range of ages and scientific topics.
these goals are diverse, highly struc- The intention is to improve the quality
tured and more open-ended inquiries of student learning by enabling them
both have their place in science to acquire the abilities of inquiry,
classrooms. develop knowledge of scientific ideas,
The chapters that follow explore the and understand the work of scientists.
dimensions of teaching and learning


2
Inquiry in the National Science
Education Standards
When educators see or hear the used in a vacuum. Inquiry is inti-

word “inquir y,” many think of a mately connected to scientific ques-
particular way of teaching and tions — students must inquire using
learning science. Although this is what they already know and the
one important application for the inquiry process must add to their
word, inquir y in the Standards is far knowledge. The geologist investigat-
more fundamental. It encompasses ing the cause of the dead cedar forests
not only an ability to engage in along the Pacific Coast used his
inquir y but an understanding of scientific knowledge and inquiry
inquir y and of how inquir y results in abilities to develop an explanation for
scientific knowledge. the phenomenon. Mrs. Graham’s fifth
Because of the importance of grade students used their observa-
inquiry, the content standards describ- tions and the information they gath-
ing what all students need to know ered about plants to recognize the
and be able to do include standards on factors affecting the growth of trees in
science as inquiry. These inquiry their schoolyard and to solve the
standards specify the abilities students “three-tree problem.” For both scien-
need in order to inquire and the tist and students, inquiry and subject
knowledge that will help them under- matter were integral to the activity.
stand inquiry as the way that knowl- Their scientific knowledge deepened
edge is produced. In this way, the as they developed new understandings
Standards seek to build student through observing and manipulating
understanding of how we know what conditions in the natural world.
we know and what evidence supports What is inquiry in education? The
what we know. Standards note:
The abilities and understanding of
Inquiry is a multifaceted activity
inquiry are neither developed nor
that involves making observations;
I N Q U I R Y I N T H E N AT I O N A L S C I E N C E E D U C AT I O N S TA N D A R D S 13

posing questions; examining books of inquiry in context. It then gives the

and other sources of information to actual content standards on Science as
see what is already known; plan- Inquiry: what should students know
ning investigations; reviewing what and be able to do? A description of a
is already known in light of experi- set of elements or features essential to
mental evidence; using tools to
inquiry-oriented teaching and learning
gather, analyze, and interpret data;
sets the stage for a discussion of
proposing answers, explanations,
instructional models that can help
and predictions; and communicat-
teachers structure activities to foster
ing the results. Inquiry requires
identification of assumptions, use student inquiry. Finally, several myths
of critical and logical thinking, and that misrepresent inquiry in school
consideration of alternative science programs are described and
explanations. (p. 23) debunked.
Developing the ability to under-

stand and engage in this kind of INQUIRY IN SCHOOL SCIENCE:
activity requires direct experience and HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES
continued practice with the processes
Inquiry has had a role in school
of inquiry. Students do not come to
science programs for less than a
understand inquiry simply by learning
century (Bybee and DeBoer, 1993;
words such as “hypothesis” and
DeBoer, 1991). Before 1900, most
“inference” or by memorizing proce-
educators viewed science primarily as
dures such as “the steps of the scien-
a body of knowledge that students
tific method.” They must experience
were to learn through direct instruc-
inquiry directly to gain a deep under-
tion. One criticism of this perspective
standing of its characteristics.
came in 1909, when John Dewey, in an
Yet experience in itself is not
address to the American Association
sufficient. Experience and under-
for the Advancement of Science,
standing must go together. Teachers
contended that science teaching gave
need to introduce students to the
too much emphasis to the accumula-
fundamental elements of inquiry.
tion of information and not enough to
They must also assist students to
science as a way of thinking and an
reflect on the characteristics of the
attitude of mind. Science is more than
processes in which they are engaged.
a body of knowledge to be learned,
This chapter addresses the several
Dewey said; there is a process or
perspectives on inquiry included in
method to learn as well (Dewey,
the National Science Education
1910).
Standards. It first provides some
By the 1950s and 1960s, the
historical background to place the role
rationale for inquiry as an approach to

Science teaching and

learning should reflect
this perspective on
science, Schwab said.
The implications of
Schwab’s ideas were, for
their time, profound.
His view suggested that
teachers should present
science as inquiry and
that students should use
inquiry to learn science
subject matter. To
achieve these changes,
Schwab (1960) recom-
mended that science
teachers look first to the
laboratory and use these
experiences to lead
rather than follow the
classroom phase of
School classroom 1906 science teaching. That is, students
should work in the laboratory before
teaching science was becoming being introduced to the formal expla-
increasingly evident. If students were nation of scientific concepts and
to learn the methods of science, then principles. Evidence should build to
how better to learn than through explanations and the refinement of
active engagement in the process of explanations.
inquiry itself? The educator Joseph Schwab also suggested that science
Schwab (1960, 1966) was an influential teachers consider three possible
voice in establishing this view of approaches in their laboratories. First,
science education. Schwab argued laboratory manuals or textbook
that science should be viewed as materials could be used to pose
conceptual structures that were questions and describe methods to
revised as the result of new evidence. investigate the questions, thus allow-
For example, the geologist described ing students to discover relationships
in the previous chapter followed this they do not already know. Second,
approach in developing an explanation instructional materials could be used
for the widespread death of trees. to pose questions, but the methods

and conclusions
reached by the scien-
tists. Where possible,
students read about
alternative explana-
tions, different and
perhaps conflicting
experiments, debates
about assumptions
underlying the research
and the use of evidence,
and other issues of
scientific inquiry.
Through this approach,
students build an
understanding of what
constitutes scientific
knowledge and how scientific knowl-
School classroom 1950 edge is produced.
The work of Schwab, Dewey, and
and answers could be left open for others, including Bruner and Piaget in
students to determine on their own. the 1950s and 1960s, influenced the
Third, in the most open approach, nature of curriculum materials devel-
students could confront phenomena oped in those decades and into the
without textbook- or laboratory-based early 1970s. Russia’s launch of the
questions. Students could ask ques- Sputnik satellite in 1957 further
tions, gather evidence, and propose spurred the development of these
scientific explanations based on their materials, many of which were sup-
own investigations. ported by the National Science Foun-
Schwab proposed an additional dation and other federal agencies and
approach, which he referred to as an private foundations. Underlying many
“enquiry into enquiry.” (Schwab of these instructional materials was
chose to use this variation of the the commitment to involve students in
spelling of the word.) In this ap- doing rather than being told or only
proach, teachers provide students with reading about science. This reform
readings and reports about scientific placed as much, if not more, emphasis
research. They discuss the details of on learning the processes of science
the research: the problems, data, role as on mastering the subject matter of
of technology, interpretations of data, science alone. Teaching models were

thinking about major issues in science

education. Furthermore, and of
special significance to this volume, the
changes of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s
widely disseminated the idea of
helping students to develop the skills
of inquiry and an understanding of
science as inquiry.
INQUIRY IN THE NATIONAL

SCIENCE EDUCATION
STANDARDS
The developers of the National

Science Education Standards (National
Research Council, 1996) had this
Space flight July 19, 1946 historical perspective on which to base
their work. Studies of teaching and
learning in science classrooms had led
based on theories of learning that to two observations. First, most
emphasized the central role of stu- teachers were still using traditional,
dents’ own ideas and concrete experi- didactic methods (Stake and Easley,
ences in creating new and deepened 1978; Harms and Yager, 1981; Weiss,
understandings of scientific concepts. 1987). Examination of science class-
Throughout the country, use, or at rooms revealed that many students
least awareness, of these new curricu- were mastering disconnected facts in
lum materials prompted educators to lieu of broader understandings, critical
provide students with more laboratory reasoning, and problem-solving skills.
and other “hands-on” experiences, Some teachers, however, were using
more opportunities to pursue their the new curriculum materials, such as
own questions, and more focus on those from the Biological Sciences
understanding larger scientific con- Curriculum Study (BSCS), Science
cepts rather than disconnected facts. Curriculum Improvement Study
Although the effective use of these (SCIS), Elementary Science Study
new materials was not as widespread (ESS), Intermediate Science Curricu-
as anticipated (Weiss, 1978; Harms lum Study (ISCS), and Physical
and Kahl, 1980; Harms and Yager, Sciences Study Committee (PSSC).
1981), this new view of school science Their students were spending large
did prompt more study and careful amounts of time in inquiry-based

activities. They were making observa- Table 2-1. Content Standard for
tions, manipulating materials, and Science as Inquiry
conducting laboratory investigations.
As a result of activities in grades K-12, all students
As a result, they were developing
should develop
cognitive abilities, such as critical
thinking and reasoning, as well as ■ abilities necessary to do scientific inquiry.
learning science content ■ understandings about scientific inquiry.
(Bredderman, 1982; Shymansky et al.,
1983).
Those developing national stan-
dards were committed to including
inquiry as both science content and as Abilities Necessary to Do
a way to learn science. Therefore, Scientific Inquiry
rather than simply extolling the Table 2-2 presents the key abilities
virtues of “hands-on” or “laboratory- from the inquiry standards. These
based” teaching as the way to teach “cognitive abilities” go beyond what
“science content and process,” the have been termed science “process”
writers of the Standards treated skills, such as observation, inference,
inquiry as both a learning goal and as and experimentation (Millar and
a teaching method. The concept of Driver, 1987). Inquiry abilities require
inquiry thus appears in several differ- students to mesh these processes with
ent places in the Standards. scientific knowledge as they use
scientific reasoning and critical
INQUIRY IN THE CONTENT thinking to develop their understand-
STANDARDS ing of science.
The basis for moving away from the
The content standards for Science traditional process approach is to
as Inquiry include both abilities and encourage students to participate in
understandings of inquiry (Tables 2-1, the evaluation of scientific knowledge.
2-2 and 2-3). The general standards At each of the steps involved in
for inquiry (Table 2-1) are the same inquiry, students and teachers ought
for all three grade spans (K-4, 5-8, 9- to ask “what counts?” What data do
12). The more detailed fundamental we keep? What data do we discard?
abilities of inquiry and fundamental What patterns exist in the data? Are
understandings about inquiry increase these patterns appropriate for this
in complexity from kindergarten inquiry? What explanations account
through grade 12, reflecting the for the patterns? Is one explanation
cognitive development of students better than another?
(Tables 2-2 and 2-3). In justifying their decisions, stu-

Table 2-2. Content Standard for Science as Inquiry:

Fundamental Abilities Necessary to Do Scientific Inquiry
Grades K-4
■ Ask a question about objects, organisms, and events in the environment.

■ Plan and conduct a simple investigation.
■ Employ simple equipment and tools to gather data and extend the senses.
■ Use data to construct a reasonable explanation.
■ Communicate investigations and explanations.
Grades 5-8
■ Identify questions that can be answered through scientific investigations.

■ Design and conduct a scientific investigation.
■ Use appropriate tools and techniques to gather, analyze, and interpret data.
■ Develop descriptions, explanations, predictions, and models using evidence.
■ Think critically and logically to make the relationships between evidence and explanations.
■ Recognize and analyze alternative explanations and predictions.
■ Communicate scientific procedures and explanations.
■ Use mathematics in all aspects of scientific inquiry.
Grades 9-12
■ Identify questions and concepts that guide scientific investigations.

■ Design and conduct scientific investigations.
■ Use technology and mathematics to improve investigations and communications.
■ Formulate and revise scientific explanations and models using logic and evidence.
■ Recognize and analyze alternative explanations and models.
■ Communicate and defend a scientific argument.
dents ought to draw on evidence and but become more complex as the
analytical tools to derive a scientific grade level increases. For example, K-
claim. In turn, students should be 4 students “use data to construct a
able to assess both the strengths and reasonable explanation,” while 5-8
weaknesses of their claims. The students “recognize and analyze
development and evolution of knowl- alternative explanations and proce-
edge claims, and reflection upon those dures,” and 9-12 students analyze
claims, underlie the inquiry abilities “alternative models” as well. The
presented in Table 2-2. abilities are designed to be develop-
Note that the abilities from one mentally appropriate to the grade level
grade level to the next are very similar span.

Table 2-3. Content Standard for Science as Inquiry:

Fundamental Understandings About Scientific Inquiry
Grades K-4
■ Scientific investigations involve asking and answering a question and comparing the answer
with what scientists already know about the world.
■ Scientists use different kinds of investigations depending on the questions they are trying to
answer.
■ Simple instruments, such as magnifiers, thermometers, and rulers, provide more information
than scientists obtain using only their senses.
■ Scientists develop explanations using observations (evidence) and what they already know
about the world (scientific knowledge).
■ Scientists make the results of their investigations public; they describe the investigations in
ways that enable others to repeat the investigations.
■ Scientists review and ask questions about the results of other scientists’ work.
Grades 5-8
■ Different kinds of questions suggest different kinds of scientific investigations.

■ Current scientific knowledge and understanding guide scientific investigations.
■ Mathematics is important in all aspects of scientific inquiry.
■ Technology used to gather data enhances accuracy and allows scientists to analyze and
quantify results of investigations.
■ Scientific explanations emphasize evidence, have logically consistent arguments, and use
scientific principles, models, and theories.
■ Science advances through legitimate skepticism.
■ Scientific investigations sometimes result in new ideas and phenomena for study, generate
new methods or procedures for an investigation, or develop new technologies to improve the
collection of data.
Grades 9-12
■ Scientists usually inquire about how physical, living, or designed systems function.
■ Scientists conduct investigations for a wide variety of reasons.
■ Scientists rely on technology to enhance the gathering and manipulation of data.
■ Mathematics is essential in scientific inquiry.
■ Scientific explanations must adhere to criteria such as: a proposed explanation must be
logically consistent; it must abide by the rules of evidence; it must be open to questions an
possible modification; and it must be based on historical and current scientific knowledge.
■ Results of scientific inquiry — new knowledge and methods — emerge from different types
of investigations and public communication among scientists.

Appendix A-1, which is taken dents in grades 9-12 understand that

directly from the Standards, provides scientific explanations must abide by
more elaboration for these abilities for the rules of evidence, be open to
each grade span. possible modifications, and satisfy
other criteria.
Appendix A-2, taken directly from
Understandings About Scientific
the Standards, provides more elabora-
Inquiry
tion for these understandings for each
Table 2-3 presents the fundamental grade span.
understandings about the nature of
scientific inquiry from the Standards.
LEARNING THROUGH INQUIRY
Although in some cases these “under-
AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR
standings” appear parallel to the
TEACHING
“abilities” displayed in Table 2-2, they
actually represent much more. Under- Having defined inquiry in part as a
standings of scientific inquiry repre- set of student learning outcomes, the
sent how and why scientific knowl- next question becomes: What is
edge changes in response to new teaching through inquiry, and when
evidence, logical analysis, and modi- and how should it be done?
fied explanations debated within a The science teaching standards
community of scientists. The work of provide a comprehensive view of
the geologist described in Chapter 1, science teaching (Table 2-4). These
for example, was guided by his initial standards apply to the many teaching
question and the evidence-to-explana- strategies, including inquiry, that
tion nature of scientific inquiry. make up an effective teacher’s reper-
As with the abilities of inquiry, the toire. Although the teaching stan-
understandings of inquiry are very dards refer to inquiry, they are also
similar from one grade to the next but clear that “inquiry is not the only
increase in complexity. For example, strategy for teaching science” (p. 23).
K-4 students understand that “scien- Nevertheless, inquiry is a central part
tists develop explanations using of the teaching standards. The
observations (evidence) along with standards say, for example, that
what they already know about the teachers of science “plan an ‘inquiry-
world (scientific knowledge),” while based’ science program,” “focus and
students in grades 5-8 know that support inquiries,” and “encourage
“scientific explanations emphasize and model the skills of scientific
evidence, have logically consistent inquiry.”
arguments, and use scientific prin- Because the teaching standards are
ciples, models, and theories.” Stu- so broad, it is helpful for our purposes

Table 2-4. Science Teaching Standards
TEACHING STANDARD A:
Teachers of science plan an inquiry-based science program for their students. In doing this,
teachers
■ Develop a framework of yearlong and short-term goals for students.

■ Select science content and adapt and design curricula to meet the interests, knowledge,
understanding, abilities, and experiences of students.
■ Select teaching and assessment strategies that support the development of student under-
standing and nurture a community of science learners.
■ Work together as colleagues within and across disciplines and grade levels.
TEACHING STANDARD B:
Teachers of science guide and facilitate learning. In doing this, teachers
■ Focus and support inquiries while interacting with students.

■ Orchestrate discourse among students about scientific ideas.
■ Challenge students to accept and share responsibility for their own learning.
■ Recognize and respond to student diversity and encourage all students to participate fully in
science learning.
■ Encourage and model the skills of scientific inquiry, as well as the curiosity, openness to new
ideas and data, and skepticism that characterize science.
TEACHING STANDARD C:
Teachers of science engage in ongoing assessment of their teaching and of student learning. In
doing this, teachers
■ Use multiple methods and systematically gather data about student understanding and
ability.
■ Analyze assessment data to guide teaching.
■ Guide students in self-assessment.
■ Use student data, observations of teaching, and interactions with colleagues to reflect on
and improve teaching practice.
■ Use student data, observations of teaching, and interactions with colleagues to report
student achievement and opportunities to learn to students, teachers, parents, policymakers,
and the general public.

TEACHING STANDARD D:
Teachers of science design and manage learning environments that provide students with the time,
space, and resources needed for learning science. In doing this, teachers
■ Structure the time available so that students are able to engage in extended investigations.
■ Create a setting for student work that is flexible and supportive of science inquiry.
■ Ensure a safe working environment.
■ Make the available science tools, materials, media, and technological resources accessible
to students.
■ Identify and use resources outside the school.
■ Engage students in designing the learning environment.
TEACHING STANDARD E:
Teachers of science develop communities of science learners that reflect the intellectual rigor of
scientific inquiry and the attitudes and social values conducive to science learning. In doing this,
teachers
■ Display and demand respect for the diverse ideas, skills, and experiences of all students.
■ Enable students to have a significant voice in decisions about the content and context of
their work and require students to take responsibility for the learning of all members of the
community.
■ Nurture collaboration among students.
■ Structure and facilitate ongoing formal and informal discussion based on a shared
understanding of rules of scientific discourse.
■ Model and emphasize the skills, attitudes, and values of scientific inquiry.
TEACHING STANDARD F:
Teachers of science actively participate in the ongoing planning and development of the school
science program. In doing this, teachers
■ Plan and develop the school science program.

■ Participate in decisions concerning the allocation of time and other resources to the science
program.
■ Participate fully in planning and implementing professional growth and development
strategies for themselves and their colleagues.

recognize two primary kinds of

scientific questions (Malley, 1992).
Existence questions probe origins and
include many “why” questions. Why
do objects fall towards the earth?
Why do some rocks contain crystals?
Why do humans have chambered
hearts? Many “why” questions cannot
be addressed by science. There are
also causal/functional questions,
which probe mechanisms and include
most of the “how” questions. How
does sunlight help plants to grow?
How are crystals formed?
to focus more on inquiry in class- Students often ask “why” questions.
rooms: to propose a working defini- In the context of school science, many
tion that distinguishes inquiry-based of these questions can be changed into
teaching and learning from inquiry in “how” questions and thus lend them-
a general sense and from inquiry as selves to scientific inquiry. Such
practiced by scientists. The following change narrows and sharpens the
definition is derived in part from the inquiry and contributes to its being
abilities of inquiry, emphasizing scientific.
questions, evidence, and explanations In the classroom, a question robust
within a learning context. Inquiry and fruitful enough to drive an inquiry
teaching and learning have five generates a “need to know” in stu-
essential features that apply across all dents, stimulating additional questions
grade levels (see Table 2-5). of “how” and “why” a phenomenon
occurs. The initial question may
1. Learners are engaged by scientifi- originate from the learner, the teacher,
cally oriented questions. Scientifically the instructional materials, the Web,
oriented questions center on objects, some other source, or some combina-
organisms, and events in the natural tion. The teacher plays a critical role
world; they connect to the science in guiding the identification of ques-
concepts described in the content tions, particularly when they come
standards. They are questions that from students. Fruitful inquiries
lend themselves to empirical investiga- evolve from questions that are mean-
tion, and lead to gathering and using ingful and relevant to students, but
data to develop explanations for they also must be able to be answered
scientific phenomena. Scientists by students’ observations and scien-

Table 2-5. Essential Features of Classroom Inquiry
✐ Learners are engaged by scientifically oriented questions.
✐ Learners give priority to evidence, which allows them to develop and evaluate explanations that address
scientifically oriented questions.
✐ Learners formulate explanations from evidence to address scientifically oriented questions.
✐ Learners evaluate their explanations in light of alternative explanations, particularly those reflecting scientific
understanding
✐ Learners communicate and justify their proposed explanations.
tific knowledge they obtain from question for older students is: what
reliable sources. The knowledge and will the global climate be like in 100
procedures students use to answer the years? This question is scientific, but
questions must be accessible and it is also very complex. It requires an
manageable, as well as appropriate to answer that will almost assuredly not
the students’ developmental level. consider all the evidence and argu-
Skillful teachers help students focus ments that would go into a prediction.
their questions so that they can Students might consider individual
experience both interesting and factors, for example, how would
productive investigations. increasing cloud cover influence
An example of a question that climate change? Or they might
meets these criteria for young stu- consider causal relationships, for
dents is: how do mealworms respond example, what effect would 5 degrees
to light? One for older students is: warmer (or cooler) temperatures have
how do genes influence eye color? An on plants? currents? weather?
example of an unproductive question 2. Learners give priority to evi-
for younger students is: why do dence, which allows them to develop
people behave the way they do? This and evaluate explanations that address
question is too open, lending itself to scientifically oriented questions. As the
responses that may or may not have a Standards note, science distinguishes
scientific basis. It would be difficult to itself from other ways of knowing
gather evidence supporting such through use of empirical evidence as
proposed answers as, “it is human the basis for explanations about how
nature” or “some supernatural force the natural world works. Scientists
wills people to behave the way they concentrate on getting accurate data
do.” An example of an unproductive from observations of phenomena.

They obtain evidence from observa- materials, the Web, or elsewhere, to

tions and measurements taken in “fuel” their inquiries. As the Stan-
natural settings such as oceans, or in dards note, “explanations of how the
contrived settings such as laborato- natural world changes based on
ries. They use their senses, instru- myths, personal beliefs, religious
ments such as telescopes to enhance values, mystical inspiration, supersti-
their senses, or instruments that tion, or authority may be personally
measure characteristics that humans useful and socially relevant, but they
cannot sense, such as magnetic fields. are not scientific” (p. 201).
In some instances, scientists can 3. Learners formulate explanations
control conditions to obtain their from evidence to address scientifically
evidence; in other instances they oriented questions. Although similar to
cannot control the conditions or the previous feature, this aspect of
control would distort the phenomena, inquiry emphasizes the path from
so they gather data over a wide range evidence to explanation rather than
of naturally occurring conditions and the criteria for and characteristics of
over a long enough period of time so the evidence. Scientific explanations
that they can infer what the influence are based on reason. They provide
of different factors might be (AAAS, causes for effects and establish
1989). The accuracy of the evidence relationships based on evidence and
gathered is verified by checking logical argument. They must be
measurements, repeating the observa- consistent with experimental and
tions, or gathering different kinds of observational evidence about nature.
data related to the same phenomenon. They respect rules of evidence, are
The evidence is subject to questioning open to criticism, and require the use
and further investigation. of various cognitive processes gener-
The above paragraph explains what ally associated with science — for
counts as evidence in science. In their example, classification, analysis,
classroom inquiries, students use inference, and prediction, and general
evidence to develop explanations for processes such as critical reasoning
scientific phenomena. They observe and logic.
plants, animal, and rocks, and care- Explanations are ways to learn
fully describe their characteristics. about what is unfamiliar by relating
They take measurements of tempera- what is observed to what is already
ture, distances, and time, and carefully known. So, explanations go beyond
record them. They observe chemical current knowledge and propose some
reactions and moon phases and chart new understanding. For science, this
their progress. Or they obtain evi- means building upon the existing
dence from their teacher, instructional knowledge base. For students, this

means building new ideas upon their be consistent with currently accepted
current understandings. In both scientific knowledge.
cases, the result is proposed new 5. Learners communicate and justify
knowledge. For example, students their proposed explanations. Scientists
may use observational and other communicate their explanations in
evidence to propose an explanation for such a way that their results can be
the phases of the moon; for why plants reproduced. This requires clear
die under certain conditions and articulation of the question, proce-
thrive in others; and for the relation- dures, evidence, proposed explana-
ship of diet to health. tion, and review of alternative explana-
4. Learners evaluate their explanations. It provides for further skeptical
tions in light of alternative explana- review and the opportunity for other
tions, particularly those reflecting scientists to use the explanation in
scientific understanding. Evaluation, work on new questions.
and possible elimination or revision of Having students share their expla-
explanations, is one feature that nations provides others the opportu-
distinguishes scientific from other nity to ask questions, examine evi-
forms of inquiry and subsequent dence, identify faulty reasoning, point
explanations. One can ask questions out statements that go beyond the
such as: Does the evidence support evidence, and suggest alternative
the proposed explanation? Does the explanations for the same observa-
explanation adequately answer the tions. Sharing explanations can bring
questions? Are there any apparent into question or fortify the connec-
biases or flaws in the reasoning tions students have made among the
connecting evidence and explanation? evidence, existing scientific knowl-
Can other reasonable explanations be edge, and their proposed explanations.
derived from the evidence? As a result, students can resolve
Alternative explanations may be contradictions and solidify an empiri-
reviewed as students engage in cally based argument.
dialogues, compare results, or check
their results with those proposed by Taken as a whole, these essential
the teacher or instructional materials. features introduce students to many
An essential component of this charac- important aspects of science while
teristic is ensuring that students make helping them develop a clearer and
the connection between their results deeper knowledge of some particular
and scientific knowledge appropriate science concepts and processes. The
to their level of development. That is, path from formulating scientific
student explanations should ultimately questions, to establishing criteria for
evidence, to proposing, evaluating,

and then communicating explanations sharpen the initial question; and in

is an important set of experiences for others the students are provided the
school science programs. question. Research demonstrates the
Teaching approaches and instruc- importance of students’ taking owner-
tional materials that make full use of ship of a task, which argues for
inquiry include all five of these essen- engaging students in identifying or
tial features. Each of these essential sharpening questions for inquiry. But
features can vary, of course. These all variations appropriate for the
variations might include the amount of particular learning goal are accept-
structure a teacher builds into an able, as long as the learning experi-
activity or the extent to which students ence centers on scientifically oriented
initiate and design an investigation. questions that engage students’
For example, every inquiry engages thinking.
students in scientifically oriented Sometimes inquiries are labeled as
questions. However, in some inquiries either “full” or “partial.” These labels
students pose the initial question; in refer to the proportion of a sequence
others students choose alternatives or of learning experiences that is inquiry-
based. For example, when a teacher
or textbook does not engage students
with a question but begins by assign-
ing an experiment, an essential
element of inquiry is missing and the
inquiry is partial. Likewise, an inquiry
is partial if a teacher chooses to
demonstrate how something works
rather than have students explore it
and develop their own questions or
explanations. If all five of the essential
elements of classroom inquiry are
present, the inquiry is said to be full.
Inquiry-based teaching can also
vary in the amount of detailed guid-
ance that the teacher provides. Table
2-6 describes variations in the amount
of structure, guidance, and coaching
the teacher provides for students
engaged in inquiry, broken out for
each of the five essential features. It
could be said that most open form of

inquiry-based teaching and learning more structured type of teaching

occurs when students’ experiences are develops students’ abilities to inquire.
described by the left-hand column in It helps them learn how to determine
Table 2-6. However, students rarely what counts. The degree to which
have the abilities to begin here. They teachers structure what students do is
first have to learn to ask and evaluate sometimes referred to as “guided”
questions that can be investigated, versus “open” inquiry. (Note that this
what the difference is between evi- distinction has roots in the history
dence and opinion, how to develop a recounted earlier in the chapter as
defensible explanation, and so on. A Schwab’s three approaches to “labora-
Table 2-6. Essential Features of Classroom Inquiry and Their Variations
Essential Feature Variations
1. Learner engages in Learner poses a question Learner selects among Learner sharpens or Learner engages in
scientifically oriented questions, poses clarifies question question provided by
questions new questions provided by teacher, teacher, materials, or
materials, or other source other source
2. Learner gives priority Learner determines what Learner directed to Learner given data and Learner given data
to evidence in constitutes evidence and collect certain data asked to analyze and told how to
responding to collects it analyze
questions
3. Learner formulate Learner formulates Learner guided in Learner given possible Learner provided with
explanations from explanation after process of formulating ways to use evidence to evidence and how to
evidence summarizing evidence explanations from formulate explanation use evidence to
evidence formulate explanation
4. Learner connects Learner independently Learner directed toward Learner given possible
explanations to examines other resources areas and sources of connections
scientific knowledge and forms the links to scientific knowledge
explanations
5. Learner communicates Learner forms reasonable Learner coached in Learner provided broad Learner given steps
and justifies and logical argument to development of guidelines to use sharpen and procedures for
explanations communicate explanations communication communication communication
More ———------———---------------—Amount of Learner Self-Direction ———------——--—---------------—— Less

Less ———------—-----------------— Amount of Direction from Teacher or Material ——---—--------——-----—— More

tories” which vary in their degree of cognitive development and scientific

structure and guidance by teachers or reasoning. Students should have
materials.) Table 2-6 illustrates that opportunities to participate in all types
inquiry-based learning cannot simply of inquiries in the course of their
be characterized as one or the other. science learning.
Instead, the more responsibility How does a teacher decide how
learners have for posing and respond- much guidance to provide in an
ing to questions, designing investiga- inquiry? In making this decision, a
tions, and extracting and communicat- key element is the intended learning
ing their learning, the more “open” outcomes. Whether the teacher wants
the inquiry (that is, the closer to the students to learn a particular science
left column in Table 2-6). The more concept, acquire certain inquiry
responsibility the teacher takes, abilities, or develop understandings
the more guided the inquiry (that is, about scientific inquiry (or some
the closer to the right column on combination) influences the nature of
Table 2-6). the inquiry.
Experiences that vary in “open- Below are examples of learning
ness” are needed to develop the experiences designed to incorporate
inquiry abilities in Table 2-2. Guided some form of inquiry. (Note the
inquiry can best focus learning on the emphasis on series of lessons or
development of particular science learning experiences, rather than
concepts. More open inquiry will single lessons, illustrating that inquir-
afford the best opportunities for ies require time to unfold and for

students to learn.) Each example

considers not only the learning
outcomes and the teaching strategy
but the way the teacher will assess
whether students have achieved the
intended outcome. Assessment is a
critical aspect of inquiry because it
sharpens and defines the design of
learning experiences. When teachers
know what they want students to
demonstrate, they can better help
them learn to do so.
As one example, consider a series
of lessons in which the learning
outcome is for students to strengthen
all the fundamental abilities of inquiry.
In Chapter 1, when Mrs. Graham was
presented with an interesting question
from her students, she recognized an
opportunity for her students to engage
in a learning activity where they could
complete a full inquiry originating
with their question about the trees and
culminating in communication of
scientific explanations based on
evidence. The inquiry incorporated all evidence and explanation. As a result,
five essential features, with student the students not only learned some
engagement described by the left science subject matter related to the
column in Table 2-6. Through her growth of trees, they also developed
assistance and coaching, Mrs. Graham specific inquiry abilities.
helped the students learn how to A second example focuses on
clarify their questions and identify developing student understandings
possible explanations that could be about scientific inquiry. A high school
tested by scientific investigations. She biology teacher is planning student
helped them learn the importance of learning activities for a unit on biologi-
examining alternative explanations cal evolution. Several of the classroom
and comparing them with the evi- investigations and discussions focus
dence gathered. She helped students on factors leading to adaptation in
understand the relationship between organisms. Because of the interesting

historical development of these and modification in the account of a

scientific ideas, the teacher decides to scientific discovery. Based on read-
take advantage of the opportunity to ings about past and current investiga-
develop students’ understanding of tions of evolution on the Galapagos
how scientific inquiry works. The Islands (including Darwin’s On the
assessment for this learning outcome Origin of Species and The Beak of the
is for students to be able to describe Finch by Jonathan Weiner), students
the place of logic, evidence, criticism, discuss and answer the following

questions: What led to past and mance assessment for older elemen-
current investigation of the finches on tar y students might be to provide
the islands? How have investigations them with objects of different densi-
differed, and how have they been ties, a scale, and a water-filled flask
similar? Have the scientific explana- with volume markings on the side.
tions derived from these investigations Students would then be asked to
been logically consistent? Based on select objects and, using the scale
evidence? Open to skeptical review? and flask, determine their densities.
Built on a knowledge base of other Given this assessment, what kinds of
experiments? Following the readings inquir y learning experiences would
and discussion of the questions, the help students understand density
teacher would have student groups well enough to be successful? One
prepare oral reports on the topic “The teaching strategy would be a series
Role of Inquiry in Science.” of laborator y activities framed by
This learning activity does not questions requiring the gathering
contain all of the essential features of and use of evidence to develop
classroom inquiry, but many features explanations about mass and volume
are present. The activity engages relationships. Students would
students in scientifically oriented connect their explanations to scien-
questions. It promotes discussion of tific explanations provided by the
the priority of evidence in developing teacher and their text, so all five
scientific explanations. It connects essential features of classroom
those explanations to accepted scien- inquir y would be incorporated.
tific knowledge. And it requires
students to communicate their under-
PROVIDING COHERENT
standings of scientific inquiry to
INQUIRY-BASED INSTRUCTION
others. This activity thus could be an
— INSTRUCTIONAL MODELS
integral part of a sequence of learning
opportunities that in total contains all How can the features of inquiry be
five essential features of inquiry. combined in a series of coherent
As a final example, consider a learning experiences that help stu-
series of lessons that seeks to have dents build new understandings over
students develop an understanding time? Instructional models offer a
of the concept of density. One way particularly useful way for teachers to
to determine the best teaching improve their use of inquiry.
strategy for this particular outcome Instructional models originated in
would be to think about how stu- observations of how people learn. As
dents might demonstrate that they early as the turn of the century,
understand density. One perfor- Herbart’s (1901) ideas about teaching

included starting with students’ learning cycle has undergone elabora-

interest in the natural world and in tion and modification over time, its
interactions with others. The teacher phases and normal sequence are
crafted learning experiences that typically represented as exploration,
expanded concepts students already invention, and discovery. Exploration
knew and explained others they could refers to relatively unstructured
not be expected to discover. Students experiences when students gather
then applied the concepts to new new information. Invention refers to
situations. Later, Dewey (1910) built the formal statement of a new concept
upon the idea of reflective experience — often a definition — in which
in which students began with a students interpret newly acquired
perplexing situation, formulated a information by restructuring their
tentative interpretation or hypothesis, prior concepts. Discovery involves
tested the hypothesis to arrive at a applying the new concept to a novel
solution, and acted upon the solution. situation.
Dewey’s prior experience as a science Research on how people learn
teacher explains the obvious connec- (discussed in detail in Chapter 6)
tion between reflective thinking and suggests a dynamic and interactive
scientific inquiry (Bybee, 1997). view of human learning. Students
Piaget’s theory of development bring to a learning experience their
contributed much to the elaboration of current explanations, attitudes, and
instructional models (Piaget, 1975; abilities. Through meaningful interac-
Piaget and Inhelder, 1969). In his tions with their environment, with
view, learning begins when individuals their teachers, and among themselves,
experience disequilibrium: a discrep- they reorganize, redefine, and replace
ancy between their ideas and ideas their initial explanations, attitudes, and
they encounter in their environments abilities. An instructional model
(that is, what they think they know incorporates the features of inquiry
and what they observe or experience). into a sequence of experiences de-
To bring their understanding back signed to challenge students’ current
into equilibrium, they must adapt or conceptions and provide time and
change their cognitive structure opportunities for reconstruction, or
through interaction with the learning, to occur (Bybee, 1997).
environment. A number of different instructional
Piaget’s work was the basis for the models have been developed that can
learning cycle, an instructional model, help teachers organize and sequence
proposed by Atkin and Karplus (1962) inquiry-oriented learning experiences
and used in the SCIS elementary for their students. All can incorporate
science curriculum. Although the the essential features of inquiry. They

Table 2-7. Common Components Shared by Instructional Models
✐ Phase 1: Students engage with a scientific question, event, or phenomenon. This connects with
what they already know, creates dissonance with their own ideas, and/or motivates them to
learn more.
✐ Phase 2: Students explore ideas though hands-on experiences, formulate and test hypotheses,
solve problems, and create explanations for what they observe.
✐ Phase 3: Students analyze and interpret data, synthesize their ideas, build models, and clarify
concepts and explanations with teachers and other sources of scientific knowledge.
✐ Phase 4: Students extend their new understanding and abilities and apply what they have
learned to new situations.
✐ Phase 5: Students, with their teachers, review and assess what they have learned and how
they have learned it.
seek to engage students in important prescriptive devices — rather than as

scientific questions, give students general guides for designing instruc-
opportunities to explore and create tion that help learning to unfold
their own explanations, provide through inquiry, which must always
scientific explanations and help be adapted to the needs of particular
students connect these to their own learners, the specific learning goals,
ideas, and create opportunities for and the context for learning.
students to extend, apply, and evaluate
what they have learned. Common
SOME MYTHS ABOUT
components or phases that are shared
INQUIRY-BASED
by instructional models are shown in
LEARNING AND TEACHING
Table 2-7.
Instructional models have helped
teachers and those who support them A number of myths about inquiry-
— in particular, curriculum developers based learning and teaching have at
— to design instruction in ways that times been wrongly attributed to the
attend to how learning occurs and National Science Education Standards.
afford students opportunities to These myths threaten to inhibit
engage in scientific inquiry. The progress in science education reform
primary disadvantage of instructional either by characterizing inquiry as too
models applies to models in general: difficult to achieve or by neglecting
by definition, they simplify the world. the essential features of inquiry-based
Teachers and others can be misled learning. Listed below are responses
into thinking of them as lockstep, to five of these mistaken beliefs.

Myth 1: All science subject matter engaged in rich inquiry, nor that they
should be taught through inquiry. are learning as intended. A skilled
Teaching science effectively requires teacher remains the key to effective
a variety of approaches and strategies. instruction. He or she must pay
It is not possible in practice to teach all careful attention to whether and how
science subject matter through the materials incorporate the five
inquiry, nor is it desirable to do so. essential features of inquiry. Using
Teaching all of science using only one these five features to review materials
method would be ineffective, and it as well as to assess classroom practice
would probably become boring for should enhance the kinds and depth of
students. learning.
Myth 2: True inquiry occurs only Myth 4: Student engagement in

when students generate and pursue hands-on activities guarantees that
their own questions. For students to inquiry teaching and learning are
develop the ability to ask questions, occurring. Although participation by
they must “practice” asking questions. students in activities is desirable, it is
But if the desired outcome is learning not sufficient to guarantee their
science subject matter, the source of mental engagement in any of the
the question is less important that the essential features of inquiry.
nature of the question itself. It is
important to note, however, that in Myth 5: Inquiry can be taught
today’s science classrooms students without attention to subject matter.
rarely have opportunities to ask and Some of the rhetoric of the 1960s was
pursue their own questions. Students used to promote the idea that learning
will need some of these opportunities science processes should be the only
to develop advanced inquiry abilities meaningful outcome of science
and to understand how scientific education. Today, there are educators
knowledge is pursued. who still maintain that if students
learn the processes of science, they
Myth 3: Inquiry teaching occurs can learn any content they need by
easily through use of hands-on or kit- applying these processes. But as
based instructional materials. These stated at the beginning of this chapter,
materials can increase the probability student understanding of inquiry does
that students’ thinking will be focused not, and cannot, develop in isolation
on the right things and learning will from science subject matter. Rather,
occur in the right sequence. However, students start from what they know
the use of even the best materials does and inquire into things they do not
not guarantee that students are know. If, in some instances, a

teacher’s desired primary outcome is based teaching that undergird the

that students learn to conduct an Standards. Chapter 3 will present a
inquiry, science subject matter serves series of classroom vignettes that
as a means to that end. Scientific illustrate how elementary, middle, and
knowledge remains important. The high school teachers design different
abilities and understandings outlined kinds of inquiries to achieve diff¡erent
in the Standards extend beyond the learning outcomes. Chapter 4 will
processes of science to engage stu- look at assessment: within the context
dents in a full complement of thinking of good instruction, how can the
and learning science. achievement of different learning
outcomes best be assessed? Subse-
quent chapters then turn to how
CONCLUSION
teachers can be prepared and sup-
This chapter has provided the ported to use these strategies in their
definitions of inquiry and inquiry- classrooms.


3
Images of Inquiry in
K-12 Classrooms
From the earliest grades, students should experience science in a form that
engages them in the active construction of ideas and explanations and enhances
their opportunities to develop the abilities of doing science. (National Research
Council, 1996, p.121)
Chapter 2 introduced the funda- ing opportunities to help students

mental concepts that underlie inquiry achieve science standards that incor-
in science classrooms. It described porate the essential features of inquiry
inquiry not only as a means to learn and are supported by instructional
science content but as a set of skills models. In the first vignette, a class of
that students need to master and as a third graders learns basic ideas from
body of understanding that students the life science standards, several of
need to learn. It detailed the five the abilities of inquiry, and aspects of
essential elements of classroom technological design from a study of
inquiry, from engaging with a scientifi- earthworms. In the second vignette, a
cally oriented question to communicat- class of eighth graders learn content
ing and justifying explanations (Table from the earth and space science
2-5). And it discussed the use of standard and strengthen their inquiry
instructional models to organize and abilities through an investigation of
sequence inquiry-based experiences. the phases of the moon. In the final
This chapter looks at the concepts two vignettes, classes of high school
introduced in Chapter 2 in practice. It students engage in inquiry-based units
consists largely of classroom vignettes involving forces (included in the
that show how teachers create learn- physical science standards) and
IMAGES OF INQUIRY IN K-12 CLASSROOMS 39

environmental issues (from the life IMAGES OF INQUIRY IN K-4

science and science in personal and CLASSROOMS
social perspectives standards).
Ms. Flores’s third-grade class was
These vignettes — each of which is
engaged in a field study in a vacant lot
a composite of classroom experiences
near the school. In teams of three, the
— provide many opportunities to
students had measured off a square
reflect on the complexity inherent in
meter and marked it with popsicle
classroom teaching. In each, inquiry
sticks and string. The purpose of the
serves both as an outcome and as a
study was to recognize the diversity of
means of learning. Different teachers
organisms that occupy the same
pursue multiple outcomes depending
environment and understand how that
on the nature of the lesson and the
environment meets all of their needs.
teacher’s intentions. Analyses of these
examples demonstrate how learning
outcomes, the essential features of
classroom inquiry, and learning
models fit together in real classrooms.
The vignettes can be read in any
order, depending on a reader’s inter-
est. However, each vignette should be
read in the context of the following
three questions:
During the investigation several

• What are the outcomes that the
students found earthworms in their
teacher is striving to achieve?
square meter and became fascinated
• How are the five essential
with earthworm behavior. Some of
features of classroom inquiry incorpo-
the other students wanted to know
rated into students’ learning experi-
why they did not find earthworms in
ences?
their study areas. Others wanted to
• What is the teacher’s instruc-
know why the worms were different
tional model, and what does he or she
sizes. One student suggested that
do to help students achieve the
worms “liked” to live near some kind
desired outcomes?
of plants and not others, since when
she and her dad went fishing they
Discussions following each vignette
always dug for worms where there
address these three questions.
was grass.

Table 3-1. Excerpts from Life Science Standard, K-4
As a result of activities in grades K-4, all students should develop understanding of
The characteristics of organisms

■ Organisms have basic needs. Organisms can survive only in environments in which their needs can be met. The
world has many different environments, and distinct environments support the life of different types of organisms.
■ Each plant or animal has different structures that serve different functions in growth, survival, and reproduction.
■ The behavior of individual organisms is influenced by internal cues (such as hunger) and by external cues (such as
a change in the environment). Humans and other organisms have senses that help them detect internal and
external cues.
Life cycles of organisms
■ Plants and animals have life cycles that include being born, developing into adults, reproducing, and eventually
dying. The details of this life cycle are different for different organisms.
■ Plants and animals closely resemble their parents.
■ Many characteristics of an organism are inherited from the parents of the organism, but other characteristics
result from an individual’s interactions with the environment.
Organisms and their environments
■ All animals depend on plants. Some animals eat plants for food. Other animals eat animals that eat the plants.
■ An organism’s patterns of behavior are related to the nature of that organism’s environment, including the kinds
and numbers of other organisms present, the availability of food and resources, and the physical characteristics of
the environment. When the environment changes, some plants and animals survive and reproduce, and others
die or move to new locations.
■ All organisms cause changes in the environment where they live. Some of these changes are detrimental to the
organism or other organisms, whereas others are beneficial (p. 129).
The discussion about worms could worm’s life cycle and some of their
not have come at a better time, be- habits.
cause Mrs. Flores was anticipating a She realized that it would take
series of lessons to help her students considerable time for the earthworms
learn some of the basic ideas in the to grow, so she decided to include
life science standard: characteristics other learning outcomes as well. Her
of organisms, life cycles of organisms, assessments of her students indicated
and organisms and their environments that they needed to work on several of
(Table 3-1). Here was a context for the abilities of inquiry, such as refin-
doing so. She contacted a biological ing a question for investigation and
supply house and learned that she designing an investigation (the abili-
could order supplies of earthworms ties of inquiry are listed in Table 2-2 in
with egg cases and immature earth- the previous chapter). She also
worms. Ms. Flores was delighted decided to incorporate some abilities
because this would enable the chil- of technological design from the
dren to observe all stages in the science and technology standard,

since she thought it would be useful found worms and other places worms
for her students to think about design- might be found. Students suggested
ing “homes” for their worms (Table 3- looking in wet dirt, under logs, in the
2). And she knew that a full inquiry roots of plants, and in a compost pile.
would allow her to weave in attention Ms. Flores then asked them what
to understandings of inquiry. Perhaps these places could tell them about how
she would invite some local scientists to build a home for worms. In groups
into the classroom to point out simi- of four, the students were asked to
larities between what the students design a home for worms using an
were doing and how the scientists empty two-liter plastic soda bottle with
worked. the top section removed.
Anticipating the shipment of worms, The students presented their initial
Ms. Flores suggested to the children designs before they started building.
that they build a place for the worms to Students from other groups listened
live. They returned to the vacant lot so carefully and asked lots of questions
since they knew that they could revise
their designs after the presentations.
Some students built their worm
homes from soil and leaves and put
grass on top. Others covered the
sides with black paper “so it is like
underground.” Others used just soil
and placed their bottle sideways. One
group punched tiny holes in the side
to let air into the soil and to let extra
water out.
When the worm shipment arrived,
Ms. Flores gave each group a handful
the children could explore where they of worms and instructed them to
had originally found worms and study observe each worm carefully and draw
the nature of the soil where they lived. a picture of it. Drawing provoked
The groups returned to their square many questions, including “What kind
meter plots and made notes and draw- of an animal is a worm?” Knowing
ings of where worms were and were not that children typically have different
found. Ms. Flores also asked students conceptions of animals, Ms. Flores
to talk to their parents and relatives had them add to their drawings some
about where they thought worms lived. sentences describing what kind of
The next day in class the students animal they thought it was and why.
generated a list of places where they Some said snakes; some said insects;

Table 3-2. Excerpts from Science and Technology Standard, K-4
As a result of activities in grades K-4, all students should develop:
Abilities of technological design

■ identify a simple problem
■ propose a solution
■ implement proposed solutions
■ evaluate a product or design
■ communicate a problem, design, and solution
Understanding about science and technology
■ People have always had problems and invented tools and techniques (ways of doing something) to solve problems.
Trying to determine the effects of solutions helps people avoid some new problems.
■ Tools help scientists make better observations, measurements, and equipment for investigations. They help scientists
see, measure, and do things that they could not otherwise see, measure, and do.
Abilities to distinguish between natural objects and objects made by humans
■ Some objects occur in nature; others have been designed and made by people to solve human problems and
enhance the quality of life.
■ Objects can be categorized into two groups, natural and designed (pp. 137-138).
some had no idea; some said a worm

is a worm.
Next, Ms. Flores asked students
what questions they had about worms
and recorded their responses on a
large chart. The questions included:
“How do earthworms have babies?”
“Do they like to live in some kinds of
soil better than others?” “Do they
really like the dark?” “How do they go
through the dirt?” “How big can an
earthworm get?”
Ms. Flores divided the class into devise tests that she called “fair.” For
groups and asked each group to example, one group wanted to investi-
choose a question that they would like gate how much water worms like. Ms.
to investigate and develop a plan for Flores asked, “If you wanted to find
how to do so. The next day the out if worms like very wet, wet,
groups reported plans for their medium wet, or dry soil conditions,
investigations, which they had re- would it be a ‘fair test’ if you put a
corded in lab notebooks. Ms. Flores worm with very wet soil in a bottle,
asked the group how they could another worm with wet soil in another

bottle, and a third worm with medium Two groups were exploring how
wet soil in another bottle, then put one the worms reacted to changes in their
bottle in the sun and the other two in environment. They were struggling
the shade?” “No,” called out a student, with how to deal with moisture, light,
“because the bottles in the sun would and temperature all at once. Ms.
get hot and worms don’t like hot, Flores asked some leading questions
that’s why they live underground, and beginning with “what would happen
you couldn’t tell whether it was the hot if?” in the hope that the students
they didn’t like or how wet the soil would discover the value of studying
was.” Ms. Flores used another one variable at a time. She would
group’s design for an investigation to check on them later.
assess whether other students under- Another group wanted to know
stood this idea of a fair test. about the eating habits of worms.
Ms. Flores then asked the groups They decided to put slices of different
how they would know which place a fruits and vegetables into the soil and
worm “liked” the best. Students’ count the number of worm holes as
answers varied. One said if the worms evidence of what worms liked best.
grew bigger and had babies that was a The two other groups set up a dis-
sign they “liked” a place. Several said carded ant farm with glass sides to
that if the worms died it meant they observe the movement of worms in
didn’t like something. Another different kinds of soil.
suggested that if they set up an Through the investigations and
experiment where there were differ- discussions of their observations,
ent options for the worms, where the measurements, and library research,
worms crawled would tell you what Ms. Flores’s students came to know
they liked. more about the characteristics of
With a better understanding of what worms, for example how they move,
evidence to look for and how to their eating habits, their life cycles,
prepare a fair test, the students were the characteristics of their environ-
soon deep into their investigations. ments, and their relationship to their
One group was studying the question environments. Their observations,
of how earthworms have babies. They combined with the research they did
were busy examining the egg cases in library books, helped them under-
that they found in the soil using hand stand why worms were not snakes or
lenses and making drawings. They insects, but members of a phylum
compared their drawings to those in called annelid. They used the draw-
books the librarian had brought to ings and information in their lab
class for them and read about other notebooks to produce their own
characteristics of earthworms. books, illustrated with drawings and

diagrams. They also revisited their fair test helped them be certain that
designs for worm homes, given the the answers and explanations they
evidence they had gathered over the proposed were reasonable. They
past several weeks, and talked about reviewed how they learned to make
how they could redesign them to work obser vations and measurements
better. using hand lenses, rulers, and
During the final days of the study, balances.
Ms. Flores focused discussions on For the final section of their books,
the ways of thinking and actions Ms. Flores asked the students to write
taken during the course of their a short explanation of what they would
investigations. The students learned tell another student if that student
to limit their explanations to ones wanted to study worms. She also
that they could support with evi- asked them to write what they would
dence from their own obser vations. do differently if they had the project to
Ms. Flores demonstrated how they do over again. Finally, each group
could check their explanations assembled their drawings, photo-
against scientific reports in books graphs, data tables, and notes of their
and with the obser vations of others. observations into books and presented
They discussed how conducting a the results of their investigation to the

class. They shared the books with the of organisms, their life cycles, and
kindergarten and first-grade students living environments; abilities and
and also took them home for their understandings of scientific inquiry;
parents and others to read. Ms. and the science and technology
Flores also used their books as a form standard on technological design. Ms.
of assessment and analyzed them for Flores decided to work especially hard
the extent to which students demon- to help her students develop each of
strated understanding of the science the abilities of inquiry — from posing
concepts and their abilities to think and honing a good question, to con-
scientifically. ducting a “fair test,” to communicating
As a culminating activity, Ms. explanations in different and meaning-
Flores invited two scientists to visit ful ways. Finally, she helped her
her classroom. To prepare the visiting students understand what scientists
scientists, she loaned each several of do by linking their own inquiries to
the students’ research report books those of scientists.
and she gave them a list of the funda- In an elementary classroom such as
mental concepts for the standard on Ms. Flores’, science activities can also
understanding scientific inquiry. The help students develop language and
scientists intrigued the students with mathematics skills — an important
their personal stories of investigations concern for young children. In her
that produced evidence similar to class, students were developing
observations made by the students. abilities to communicate their obser-
Students were especially interested in vations in writing and orally, to craft
the last stage: how the scientists and share their explanations using
needed to make their results public, logical reasoning, and to measure,
which meant that they were often display, and interpret data. This
criticized and challenged as part of demonstrates the integrative potential
building a strong base of scientific of science activities for elementary
knowledge. school classrooms.
Essential Features of Classroom

ANALYSIS OF K-4 IMAGE OF
Inquir y. Ms. Flores’s unit had all of
INQUIRY
the essential features of classroom
Learning Outcomes. Ms. Flores inquiry. Her students identified a
sought to help her students achieve question of their own interest about
several abilities and understandings earthworms around which to design
specified in the National Science an investigation. The question derived
Education Standards, including from their own understanding of the
understandings of the characteristics characteristics and environments of

earthworms and their curiosity about cycles and their abilities of inquiry. As
these animals, and so the question third graders, Ms. Flores’s students
they chose engaged them thoroughly. did not begin with well-developed
As they developed answers to their inquiry abilities. But because Ms.
questions, Ms. Flores helped them Flores realized that using earthworms
understand that they needed evidence would involve an investigation extend-
and what the nature of that evidence ing over several weeks, she took
needed to be. They looked for evi- advantage of the fact that she could
dence through their careful observa- pay a great deal of attention to devel-
tions and what they read in scientific oping her students’ inquiry abilities as
books. Learning about fair tests they learned the subject matter
increased the likelihood that their content. Therefore, her students’
evidence would be sound. As they inquiry was relatively open, with as
collected their evidence, they built much coaching as necessary to make
their cases for explanations that sure that the class had many choices
addressed their questions. The group for research questions, had a variety
looking for favorable environments, of designs for their investigations, and
observed how the earthworms be- clearly communicated their results.
haved in “homes” with varying
amounts of moisture, and arrived at Instructional Model. Ms. Flores’s
their explanation of just the right unit illustrates an interesting and
amount; the group examining eating complex sequence of learning activi-
habits observed the numbers of worm ties. Early in the unit, she engaged
holes in different fruits and vegetables the students repeatedly in direct,
and explained worm “preferences” firsthand experience, first almost by
through those data. Throughout the accident as they stumbled upon the
investigations, students developed earthworms in their study of the
their own explanations using the vacant lot. Later Ms. Flores involved
evidence they collected and compared them again in examining the area
them with published scientific expla- where they originally found the worms
nations from their text books, library so that they could think about what
books, and the Web. Finally, the kind of “home” they would build for
students communicated their learning their worms.
in a variety of ways, clarifying what As Ms. Flores focused the students
they did, what results they achieved, on the questions they generated and
and how they knew the results were the ideas they had about worms, they
correct. This communication also began to explore the worms’ charac-
served Ms. Flores as an assessment of teristics, their environments, and their
her students’ understanding of life life cycles. They made observations

over days and weeks; tried out their by the impossibility of saying where
ideas; proposed explanations; and one stage of the instructional model
shared what they were learning with stopped in Ms. Flores’s unit and the
others. Ms. Flores called them other began: students were engaging,
together on a regular basis to help exploring, explaining, elaborating, and
them synthesize what they were evaluating throughout the several
learning and create explanations. She weeks they spent studying worms.
supplemented their explanations with However, her instructional model
scientific information in library books. helped Ms. Flores lay out the unit
Towards the end of the unit, Ms. initially and monitor and assess her
Flores gave her students opportunities students’ learning and development as
to elaborate on what they were learn- it proceeded.
ing. The visit from the scientists
deepened their understanding of how
IMAGES OF INQUIRY IN 5-8
their investigations resembled those
CLASSROOMS
of scientists. Finally, Ms. Flores’s
continual questioning and coaching Each year Mr. Gilbert looks for-
gave both Ms. Flores and the students ward to teaching the solar system unit,
opportunities to evaluate their especially when they get to the moon
progress in an ongoing way. The (see Table 3-3). From past experi-
assignment to speculate on what they ence, Mr. Gilbert knew that most
would do differently were they to middle school students have difficulty
repeat their investigation, with some finding an explanation for the moon’s
reasons why, allowed them to reflect phases consistent with their direct
back and assess the process and value observations, which always made the
of their work. unit challenging as well as exciting.
An instructional model must not be Further, learning about the moon’s
used as a “lockstep” device that limits phases also provided many opportuni-
the flexibility of a teacher to facilitate ties for his students to develop critical
an inquiry that is sensitive to students’ inquiry abilities: to use scientific
needs and interests. This is illustrated instrumentation to increase and
Table 3-3. Excerpts from Earth and Space Science Standard, 5-8
As a result of activities in grades 5-8, all students should develop understanding of
Earth in the solar system

■ Most objects in the solar system are in regular and predictable motion. Those motions explain
such phenomena as the day, the year, phases of the moon, and eclipses (p. 160).

evaluate the accuracy of their observa-

tions, to design and conduct investiga-
180
0
tions to test their conjectures, and to
170 1
10
20
60 1
think critically and logically about the
30
50
14
40
13
0
0 50
relationships between evidence and 120
110
100 80 7
0 60
9 0°
explanations.
Earlier in the solar system unit, Mr.
Gilbert emphasized the importance
and technique of gathering evidence
180
170 160 150 140
about the world and recording it in a
notebook. For example, when he
0
130
10
challenged the students in his science
20
12
11
0
0
100 30
40
80 70 60 50
classes several weeks ago to create 9 0°
sun clocks using sun shadows, he

encouraged them to record data about
the position, size, and orientation of
the shadows that they studied, and to In the illustration above, a simple sextant (as
note the rate at which the shadows described in the text) is being used to determine
the angle of inclination of the top of a flagpole.
moved. He also asked them to include
The student first sights the horizon, a 90° reading
a detailed description and sketches of
on the sextant. Then she sights the top of the
the way in which the shadows were
flagpole, which gives a 70° reading. To deter-
observed to change. They had
mine the angle of inclination, the student must
carefully carried out his instructions, determine the difference between the sextant
recording their results in their science reading for the top of the flagpole, 70°, and the
notebooks. reading for the horizon, 90°. Therefore, the
In earlier class sessions, Mr. angle of inclination of the top of the flagpole from
Gilbert’s students learned how to the student’s vantagepoint is 20°. The height of
construct and use several simple tools the flagpole can be determined once the distance
that helped them make their data and of the student from the flagpole is measured.
evidence gathering more accurate. When observing celestial objects, the apparent
One they would use in their study of angle of elevation above the horizon is found by
the moon was a simple sextant con- determining the difference between 90° (the
horizon) and the sextant reading when the object
structed from a protractor, a plastic
is sighted through the straw. For printed clarity,
drinking straw, and a string with a
the protractor above contains only one scale,
metal washer attached to it. They had
180°–0°, unlike a real protractor which will also
taped the string with the washer on
have a scale from 0°–180°. The difference
the end to the bottom of the protractor between 90° and the sextant reading will always
at the 90o line. Then they taped the be the same on either scale.
straw along the straight edge of the

protractor (the 0 o–180o line). When use of tools, coupled with a public
they located an object on the horizon sharing and discussion of data, was
by sighting through the straw, the extremely helpful in getting students
weighted string hung straight down to evaluate data and to improve the
the 90o line. As they rotated the straw accuracy of obtaining and reporting it.
to observe an object directly over-
head, the weighted string hung along Introductor y Lesson. Today Mr.
the 0o-180o line of the protractor. Gilbert plans to introduce his students
When the students sighted an object to the study of the phases of the moon.
in the sky through the straw, the He knows from conducting his own
string would hang straight down and observations that tracking the moon’s
hit the protractor at a point that would phases can be challenging because of
indicate at what angle the object the possibility of occasional interven-
appeared above the horizon in the sky. ing clouds, but he feels that students
For example, an object overhead will be able to learn more deeply from
would be 90o above the horizon. The the opportunity to conduct an investi-
students also learned to use a com- gation of this phenomenon firsthand.
pass to measure an object’s “azimuth” He has decided to begin this lesson
— that is, its distance along the north/ today because the moon is currently
south plane of the horizon, an orienta- two days past new and, for the next
tion such as N 30 degrees E. With two weeks, it will be visible in the
angular elevation plus azimuth, the afternoon and early evening.
students could completely describe an He begins the lesson by asking his
object’s location: azimuth told them students to write down everything
what direction to look in and angular they know about the moon, together
elevation told they how high above the with the questions that they have
horizon to look in that direction. about the moon. He then asks them to
Students had practiced using the discuss their lists with a partner,
sextant and compass by determining making note of the items that are
the angular elevation and azimuth of included on both lists. Following
trees, the school flagpole, telephone these discussions, Mr. Gilbert asks his
poles, tops of buildings, and airplanes students to compile their lists into one
in the sky. Group data had been class list of what they know about the
posted on a class data chart in order to moon, and another class list of ques-
identify outliers (data that don’t fit), as tions they have about the moon. Mr.
well as to determine the acceptable Gilbert identifies six items on the
range of values (error bars) for students’ list that he knows are crucial
measurements. Mr. Gilbert found to their understanding of the moon’s
that such inquiry lessons about the phases:

Things We Know Questions We Have

About the Moon About the Moon
The moon changes shape. How can the moon be visible
The moon is smaller during the day?
than the earth. Why don’t eclipses happen
People have walked more often?
on the moon. What causes the moon’s
phases?
He asks several students how they observation and data entry of the
know that the three items in the left moon each day and complete a chart
column are true. Their responses on which they will record the date,
include “Because I saw it on TV,” “My time, and sky conditions; measure the
mother told me,” “I read about it in a angular elevation of the moon with
book that my aunt gave me,” and “my their sextant and the moon’s azimuth
fourth grade teacher showed us a with a compass; indicate (if observed
video.” As the discussion proceeds, at night) the constellation the moon is
students recognize that these explana-
tions are shallow compared to what
they could learn from observing and
collecting data over time about the
changing shape of the moon.
Carr ying Out the Investigation.

Mr. Gilbert then invites the students
to undertake a five-week-long investi-
gation of the behavior of the moon,
which will help them answer most of
the questions they generated. They
will begin by observing the moon and
gathering evidence about its position,
shape, and motion. He asks students
to divide up the responsibilities for
data gathering among members of
their four-person groups, suggesting
that during the first week they will all
observe, and after that each student
will be responsible for one week of
observations and data gathering. The
assignment is to make at least one

closest to; and sketch the moon’s science curriculum as the data-
appearance. gathering progresses.
“But what will we do if it is cloudy?” On the last day of the five-week
asks one of the students. They observation period, the class returns
discuss this and agree that they will to the moon unit, beginning a transi-
make note of the weather conditions, tion from collecting and analyzing data
predict where the moon would have to developing new concepts about the
appeared, and what they think it might phases of the moon.
have looked like. Mr. Gilbert agrees As groups review their observa-
that, if direct observation fails, they tional data on their charts, interesting
should consult other resources, discussions begin to occur. With
including the newspaper or the some prompting from Mr. Gilbert,
Internet, to verify their predictions students begin talking about models
and to create the most accurate record that might account for the data they
possible over the next 35 consecutive have collected — an important aspect
days. of doing science. Mr. Gilbert decides
The next day Mr. Gilbert takes the to begin with a model that explains the
class outside to make their first phases of the moon recorded by
observation of the moon and to ensure students. He provides students with a
that they understand how to keep the toothpick and a small bead and then
daily record, including measuring invites them to consider this thought
angular elevation and azimuth. Each experiment: “If you were to put the
day afterwards for the next five weeks bead at the end of the toothpick and
each group posts its data on a wall then hold it up at arm’s length be-
chart similar to the one they are using tween your eye and the moon, how
for individual record keeping. The much of the moon’s surface do you
class works on other areas of the think the bead would cover?” Mr.
Gilbert asks the students to draw their
predictions. He then asks them to go
outside to test their predictions. As he
moves from group to group, he asks
the students to perform another
observation. “Try holding the tooth-
pick and bead out to the side. Now
look at the shape of the moon and
then look at the shape of sunlight you
see on the bead.” They are amazed to
discover that the moon’s appearance
and the bead’s appearance are the

same. Mr. Gilbert knows that this asks the students to work in groups of
experience will give students an three and after about 10 minutes, two
opportunity to get a sense of what different explanations emerge. Some
causes the phases of the moon. He of the students suggest that the
also knows that it will help them earth’s shadow covers different
understand something about the use amounts of the moon’s surface at
and limits of models, helping them not different times of the month, resulting
only to learn about the moon, but to in the moon’s pattern of phases.
understand that models are tools that Others propose that as the moon
scientists often use to build and test moves through its orbit around the
new knowledge. earth, we see different amounts of the
side of the moon that is lighted by the
Constructing a Model. The next sun. Next Mr. Gilbert asks the
day, the end of the observations, Mr. students to form small groups based
Gilbert asks his students to look upon the different explanations. He
closely at their posted charts of the asks each group to make a labeled
moon’s phases over the past five drawing that would support its expla-
weeks. Mr. Gilbert asks: “What do nation for why the moon changes
you think causes this repeated shape. Mr. Gilbert can tell from the
monthly pattern of moon phases?” He discussion of their drawings that many
of the students are not particularly
confident about their explanations.
For some, different explanations seem
to make sense. Before dismissing
them, Mr. Gilbert asks the students to
think about how they might use
models to test the two different
explanations.
The next day, the students design
an investigation to test each explana-
tion. Using globes for the earth,
tennis balls for the moon, and the light
from an overhead projector for the
sun, each group is ready to manipulate
the materials in a darkened room to
explore relationships between the
relative positions and motions of the
objects and the resulting pattern of
phases. The exploration gives stu-

dents opportunities to clarify the moon were positioned as you have

question about moon phases, deter- them now? Where would the moon
mine what would constitute evidence have to be in your model to result in a
to support each explanation, model quarter moon? Show me where the
each of the alternative explanations, earth’s shadow would be. What
and then determine which explanation evidence do you have that supports
for moon phases is supported by the your conclusion or causes you to
evidence they personally gathered change your mind?” He asks students
earlier in the unit. to show him the direction in which the
To assess what they already know moon moves around the earth in their
before beginning the activity, Mr. model. Then he asks: “How do you
Gilbert asks the students what they know? What evidence led you to this
think their drawings should show. conclusion?” When needed, Mr.
The students agree they should show: Gilbert reminds students to look at the
1) the position of the earth and moon class data table: “A good model will
when looking down at the North Pole, explain the data.” Listening to student
2) the source and path of sunlight conversations and coaching with
using arrows and, 3) the shadows for questions allows him to assess student
the earth/globe and moon/balls. progress in understanding the cause
They also agree that the positions of of moon phases. It also allows him to
earth and moon shadows are critical. assess how well students are using
With these consistent conditions in certain inquiry abilities such as
their drawings, it will be easier to thinking critically and logically about
compare findings and explanations for the relationship between the evidence
moon phases. Mr. Gilbert encourages they gathered in earlier lessons and
them to show the moon in many explanations.
different positions in its orbit around Mr. Gilbert begins the next class by
the earth. asking each group to post their model
Mr. Gilbert circulates among the drawings and then invites the rest of
groups, checking how they are setting the class to examine the results. Then
up their materials and listening to the Mr. Gilbert asks each group to de-
students’ conversations. He also scribe their conclusions about the
makes sure to look at their drawings. different explanations for moon
From time to time he asks questions phases. Their observations and
to probe students’ understandings and interpretations seem to support the
refocus their thinking about the explanation that, as the moon moves
relationship between evidence and in its orbit around the earth, the
explanation. “What moon shape amount of the lighted side of the moon
would you see if the earth, sun, and that can be seen from earth changes.

The students agree that comparing model decide to reject it. To check for
the order of phases in their model to understanding, Mr. Gilbert asks, “How
the order of moon phases shown on a would the sequence of moon phases
calendar helps them assess the be affected if the moon moved around
apparent relationship between the the earth in the opposite direction?”
earth, sun, and moon. Mr. Gilbert The investigations raise a problem for
asks what evidence seems to be most several groups. Students are confused
helpful in testing the different explana- because, in some of the drawings, it
tions. Some of the groups agree that looks like there should be an eclipse
the position of the earth’s shadow of the moon and an eclipse of the sun
during the month is critical evidence. every month. “Something must be
Mr. Gilbert asks them to explain why. wrong with our model because we
know that doesn’t happen.” “Good
observation,” remarks Mr. Gilbert
“What modifications would you need
to make in your models so that the
cycle of moon phases does not pro-
duce these eclipses every month?
What additional information might
help you? What reference materials
might you use?” The class decides to
consult their textbook and references
from the media resource center.
As the class discusses their read-
ings, Mr. Gilbert questions them
about the plane of the moon’s orbit
around the earth, compared to the
plane of earth’s orbit around the sun,
The students explain that the orienta- and how it changes during the year.
tion of the earth’s shadow brings it in The student teams then modify their
contact with the moon in various ways earth, sun, and moon models and alter
during the month. One team points their drawings to apply this new
out that, during the first quarter phase information. At this point Mr. Gilbert
of the moon, the earth’s shadow would asks them to step back from their
have to turn a right corner in order to work to reflect on the models of the
fall on the moon. “That is not the way balls and light source they are using,
that light and shadows work.” Based as they had with the beads on the
upon such evidence, even the students toothpicks. Again he poses the
who proposed the “earth’s shadow” questions, “What features of the

models work well? What features what they remember about the early
don’t?” Students respond that the historical explanations for the motions
model does not do a good job at of bodies in the night sky. Together,
explaining the changes in the height Mr. Gilbert and the students recall
of the moon above the horizon, but it that, prior to the time of Copernicus
does show how the phases of the and Galileo, the accepted model of the
moon occur. heavens was that all the planets and
After this discussion, Mr. Gilbert stars revolved around the earth, which
notes that, historically, models have was located in the center of the
played a role in understanding the universe. They discuss how the
“heavens.” He asks them to recall predictable patterns of stars moving
across the night sky were used as
evidence to support this early explana-
tion. “What evidence did Galileo
uncover that caused him to question
the earth-centered explanation?” Mr.
Gilbert asks. The students use this
question to focus their reading in their
reference materials. During the
ensuing discussion, Mr. Gilbert asks
the students to compare the evidence-
to-explanation thinking they used in
their testing of the two different
explanations for Moon phases to the
scientific work that Galileo conducted
– in which he observed the phases of
the moons of Jupiter and then con-
structed an explanation to account for
the evidence. For Galileo the explana-
The Copernican Universe tion required placing the sun and not
“In the midst of all dwells the sun,” said the earth to be at the center of the
Copernicus. To him, the universe was systematic, heavens. From their investigations,
mathematical, knowable, and above all, simple. readings, and discussions, the stu-
In this diagram from De revolutionibus the Earth dents begin to understand how
is number v, “Telluris,” counting from the outer- scientific explanations are formulated
most ring of stars. Copernicus was not entirely and evaluated with evidence, and to
liberated from Aristotle and Ptolemy, however, for understand that the scientific commu-
he too believed the orbits to be circular and nity accepts and uses various explana-
uniform. tions until they are displaced by better
—Bruno, L.C. (1987). The Tradition of Science.

look at all the activities the class has

completed thus far. The assignment is
to select and then record in a sum-
mary table all the evidence that
supports or refutes the class’ model of
the phases of the moon. “You should
consider each and every activity we
have completed. Your job is to
construct an argument for either the
acceptance or rejection of your model.
Pay particular attention to the data we
gathered during our observations of
the moon. What patterns in the data
support or refute your model?”
Mr. Gilbert writes the assignment
Page from Galileo’s “Starry Messenger” on the board:
Galileo’s “Starry Messenger” contained the first
telescopic drawings of the moon to be published. • Part 1: draw and label your
Galileo showed the moon to be a solid body with model.
irregular surface features. This drawing correctly • Part 2: list the evidence that
shows mountain tops catching the sunlight and casting supports your model.
shadows, the length of which Galileo used
• Part 3: list the evidence that
to estimate the mountains’ height.
refutes your model.
—Bruno, L.C. (1987). The Tradition of Science.
• Part 4: write 1) an explanation
using science concepts for the phases
of the moon; 2) a list of questions you
ones. The students recognize that now have about the motion of the
each of their explanations may have moon.
seemed plausible until all the evidence • Total: no more than 10 pages. It
was brought into play. Moreover, they will be a major part of your grade for
were not embarrassed to give up an the unit.
explanation that did not work when
the evidence pointed in another
direction. When such displacement ANALYSIS OF 5-8 IMAGE OF
occurs, scientific understanding INQUIRY
advances. This vignette illustrates how a wide
At this point in the unit, Mr. Gilbert variety of learning outcomes can
finds it very helpful to assign a take- result through different kinds of
home exam. Each student is asked to investigations by students. It also

shows how a sequence of learning their understanding of scientific inquiry,

experiences that are carefully crafted when they discussed how Galileo’s
by a teacher can build and deepen study of moon’s phases helped people
understanding gradually, through understand the configuration of differ-
motivating and engaging activities. ent bodies in the universe. This oppor-
tunity helped them to understand the
Learning Outcomes. Mr. Gilbert role that scientific inquiry has played
used students’ study of moon phases over the centuries — how scientists
to help them learn both science think and work to formulate and ad-
subject matter and inquiry — learning vance scientific knowledge, as well as
both how to conduct inquiries and how profound new understandings have
what inquiry is. His subject matter come from investigations of the natural
outcomes were drawn directly from world.
the earth and space science standards
of the National Science Education Essential Features of Classroom
Standards: the regular and predictable Inquir y. The sequence of learning
motion of objects in the solar system activities just described contained all
explains such phenomena as the five essential features of classroom
phases of the moon and eclipses. Mr. inquiry that were displayed on pages
Gilbert found he could also use the 24-27 of Chapter 2. Some of these
sequence of instructional activities to features appeared several times
help students develop many inquiry throughout the sequence of lessons.
abilities. They began by collecting Mr. Gilbert engaged the learners in
data about the moon’s phases through scientifically oriented questions about
direct observation, using some tools moon phases. Although Mr. Gilbert
to increase the precision of their proposed some of the questions, the
observations, and supplementing students became mentally engaged
direct observation with data from and took ownership of the problems
sources such as newspapers and the they posed. Assisted by Mr. Gilbert’s
Internet. Their inquiry also helped questioning, the students identified
them learn to use models to construct two different explanations for what
explanations for natural phenomena, causes moon phases. They produced
to evaluate the models they were drawings representing the relative
using for their benefits and shortcom- positions and motions of the earth,
ings, and to gather an array of evi- sun, and moon for each explanation.
dence to analyze alternative explana- Mr. Gilbert helped the students to
tions and determine which best fits determine what would constitute
the evidence. evidence to support each explanation.
Mr. Gilbert’s students also deepened The students then manipulated

models to explore each explanation, account when reflecting on what they

gathering evidence to either support learned and the confidence they have
or reject each in turn. They drew in that learning, much like scientists
liberally on the scientific literature as do. Further, Mr. Gilbert took advan-
their understanding and, conse- tage of the interesting historical
quently, their questions, became more context to broaden his students’
complicated. Each student group understanding of scientific inquiry and
presented and defended its findings, how scientists have used inquiry to
resulting in a final class consensus advance our scientific knowledge of
about which explanation for moon nature.
phases could logically be supported by
evidence. Instructional Sequence. The
It is reasonable to assume that all of example just given of Mr. Gilbert and
Mr. Gilbert’s students did not begin his students illustrates a way of
the unit of study with fully developed sequencing learning and teaching
inquiry abilities. Knowing that the activities that is consistent with the
sequence of learning activities to help features of inquiry. The unit evolved
students understand moon phases from data collection, then using those
would require them to use all of the data for concept development and the
inquiry abilities to some degree, Mr. evaluation of models and explanations.
Gilbert decided to take this opportu- And when students were asked to deal
nity to help his students reflect specifi- with eclipse frequency, they applied
cally on how one constructs and their knowledge to a new scientific
evaluates explanations from evidence. challenge. Early in the sequence Mr.
His goal was to help his students Gilbert helped his students become
improve these abilities, becoming engaged in thinking about moon
more independent and skilled in their phases by probing what they thought
use and application to learn science they knew about the moon and what
content. He introduced the important they wondered about. Their study
idea that although models can be proceeded through a long period of
helpful to both their learning and to observation and data gathering during
the development of scientific knowl- which they recorded and then ex-
edge, every model has its limits. plored the patterns they observed in
Evaluating and communicating the the moon’s behavior. Students created
advantages and disadvantages of the their own explanations of the moon’s
specific models they used in their phases and then tested their explana-
study of moon phases reinforced this tions and those of other students
need to be always critical of their tools using models that they could manipu-
and methods, and to take those into late and continue to explore.

Table 3-4. Excerpts from Physical Science Standard, 9-12
Motion and forces

■ Objects change their motion only when a net force is applied. Laws of motion are used to
calculate precisely the effects of forces on the motion of objects. The magnitude of the change
in motion can be calculated using the relationship F=ma, which is independent of the nature of
the force. Whenever one object exerts force on another, a force equal in magnitude and
opposite in direction is exerted on the first object.
■ Gravitation is a universal force that each mass exerts on any other mass. The strength of the
gravitational attractive force between two masses is proportional to the masses and inversely
proportional to the square of the distance between them (pp. 179-180).
IMAGES OF INQUIRY IN sponses were: “gravity is a force,”

9-12 CLASSROOMS “pushing, like when I push a car,” “a
push or a pull on something,” and
The lesson described in the follow-
“making somebody do something
ing vignette begins a physics unit on
they don’t want to.”
force and motion. According to
While students continued sharing
district curriculum guidelines, by the
their initial ideas, Mr. Hull wrote the
end of this high school physics unit,
ideas on the board. As he wrote, he
students should be able to use
organized the ideas into two catego-
Newton’s Laws and explain the forces
ries: kinds of forces, and definitions of
acting on objects in various states of
force (i.e.,“force is…”). Both of these
motion. In addition, the state and
categories would be important in their
district learning outcomes include
unit on Explanation of Motion.
helping students develop abilities to
Mr. Hull wanted his students to be
do scientific inquiry and to understand
able to represent their understanding of
the nature of scientific inquiry. (See
forces, so he guided them in crafting
Table 3-4.)
their representations. He said: “It
Mr. Hull begins most units with
sounds like several of you are thinking
one or more short sur vey questions
of force as a push or pull. What are
to get students to think about the
some properties of pushes and pulls?”
kinds of situations, issues, and ideas
A student noted, “They are in a certain
they will be investigating for the next
direction and they have a certain size.”
few days. Today, at the opening of
“So a force is a vector,” said another
class, he asked his students: “What
student. Vector representation had
do you think about when you hear
been part of an earlier unit on describ-
the word force?” Among the re-

ing motion, and the students recognized different conceptions of force. After
a new context in which the idea applies. the students had finished their repre-
Mr. Hull queried, “It sounds like sentations, Mr. Hull drew two books
vectors might be useful for represent- on the front blackboard. On one he
ing force? How would you use them to drew only a downward arrow. On the
represent forces?” A student re- other he drew both an upward arrow
sponded, “Well, a longer arrow would and a downward arrow. Between the
represent a bigger force, and the two diagrams he drew a large question
direction of the arrow would represent mark.
the direction of the force.” “I noticed one big difference in the
Mr. Hull waited while the students diagrams,” he said. “About half the
talked about this representation for a class had an upward force by the table
while. He then placed a book on the and half did not. That suggests a
demonstration table in the front of the difference in the ways you are concep-
room and asked students to use vector tualizing force. Since we are just
arrows to represent the forces on the beginning a unit on force, we’d better
book, while it remained at rest on the resolve this difference. So, why do
table. He also asked students to pay some of you think we need to include
attention to both the length and an upward force by the table? And,
direction aspects of the vector repre- why do others of you think we should
sentation and to add a label to each not include an upward force by the
force arrow stating what exerts it. table?”
While each student drew and labeled Some students shared their ideas,
his or her own representation of the suggesting that if the table did not
situation, Mr. Hull walked around the exert a force on the book, it would fall.
room observing to get some idea of Others said there only needed to be a
which students were suggesting what downward force in order to hold the
forces. book to the table. Still others argued
Although there were several that the table could not push or pull
variations in the students’ representa- anything because it was not alive; it
tions, there was one main difference did not have any energy. Mr. Hull
between the representations that he recognized that many of the students
knew would occur. Some students were thinking that force can be
had drawn and labeled an upward exerted only by active agents, so that
force by the table and others had not. passive agents, like tables, cannot
From his experience in the workshops exert force.
run by the local university, he had Mr. Hull asked the students to each
learned that this difference is evi- pick up a book and hold it in an
dence that the students have very outstretched hand. He then asked the

class to add a second diagram on their book?” he asked. Then, to increase

paper, a diagram of the forces acting the salience of the experience, he
on the book while the book is at rest asked students to add additional books
on the hand. to their outstretched hands. Nearly all
In this case, most of the students were willing to say there was an
who did not show an upward force in upward force by the hand. Still some
the first diagram now showed an students were concerned about the
upward force. A few students still did need to be consistent across situa-
not show an upward force. When tions, which Mr. Hull acknowledged
asked why they had not shown such a by noting on the board the “need to
force, most said that since they had have the same explanation across ‘at
not put in an upward force when the rest’ situations, if possible.” Consis-
book was on the table, they did not tency in explanations is an important
feel they needed to do so here. Mr. aspect of science that Mr. Hull wanted
Hull pointed out that their attempt to his students to incorporate into their
have consistent reasoning across thinking.
situations was commendable and Next, Mr. Hull hung a book from a
important in science and in other spring and asked students to draw a
subjects. third diagram of the book on the
“Is there an upward force on the spring and the forces that kept the

book at rest. Most of the class in- talking about horizontal forces, does
cluded an upward force by the spring that also work with vertical forces?”
in their diagrams. A few others Again, he guided his students to see
argued that because the spring was the consistency across contexts, in
not alive, it could not “exert” a force. this case, explanations of the at-rest
Mr. Hull asked, “So, how come condition should be the same whether
many of you who said the table does considering horizontal forces or
not exert a force are now saying that vertical forces. This gave some
the spring does exert an upward rational argument for an upward force.
force? The spring isn’t alive.” The Mr. Hull asked his students to think
students responded, “The spring about evidence. “What observable
moves.” “The spring compresses or evidence do you have that the table
extends.” exerts an upward force?” A few
The teacher asked the students to students suggested the table bent like
think about what was similar about the the spring. Others countered, arguing
situations in which they were willing that the table was a heavy, solid
to say there was an upward force. demonstration table, that it was rigid
They suggested that when the book and therefore could not bend. The
was on the hand, one could see or feel students suggested the need for a
the muscular activity in order to critical experiment. “How could we
support the book, and when the book see whether the table bends at all?”
was on the spring one could see the asked the teacher. Not hearing any
change in the length of the spring. suggestions, Mr. Hull proposed that
Mr. Hull pointed out that they were they use a “light lever.” Bringing out a
responding to evidence for a force by light source (in this case a laser
looking at some change in the “thing” pointer), he placed it so that the light
that is doing the supporting. He hit the shiny table top at a low glanc-
wanted his students to be seeking ing angle. With the room lights off,
observational evidence in support of one could see where the reflected
their ideas and inferences. light hit the far wall. The teacher
Mr. Hull: “How about those of you checked to be sure that the students
who suggest the table does exert an knew that if the table bends, the light
upward force. In what way does that on the wall should move. Although
make sense to you?” While gesturing the movement was not readily notice-
sideways, one student said, “When- able with one book placed on the
ever anything stays still, if there is a table, as the stack got larger and was
force on one side, there has to be a taken off and back on, the light could
force on the other side to keep it be seen to move.
stopped.” Mr. Hull: “ I see you are After exploring ideas about force

through questions, discussion, and conception of force is more like the

observations for much of the class one our class has derived. Also, we
period, the students were ready to now know that this conception has
summarize their class experience and worked well for scientists for a long
its implications for the meaning of time. Like scientists, we will take our
force. One said: “Since the table bent, present idea of force as tentative and
like a stiff spring, all things had to use it until new evidence suggests we
deform some to support the book. might need to revise it.”
Deformation was one sort of evidence The inquiry does not end here. In
we could look for when we considered subsequent lessons focusing on forces
forces.” Another added, “That meant on moving objects, students further
we could give the same explanation develop their understanding of force
[involving an upward force] across and of the nature and processes of
several different ‘at rest’ systems.” science. The preceding lesson is but
Another said: “That also meant we one short inquiry allowing students to
didn’t need to worry about whether begin to understand the complex ideas
the supporting object was alive, that science has developed related to
awake, active, or passive. We could force and motion.
just focus on the observable evidence
of deformation, although sometimes
ANALYSIS OF 9-12 IMAGE OF
we might need more sensitive instru-
INQUIRY
ments [like a light lever] to detect the
deformation.” Mr. Hull pointed out This example represents one lesson
that that was one of the “rules” of conducted in a single class period.
science: “If a simple, consistent Nevertheless, it demonstrates how a
explanation would work across several teacher can seamlessly interweave
situations, then use the simpler science subject matter, inquiry abilities,
explanation rather than needing to and understandings of scientific inquiry.
rely on use of different explanations
depending on some non-observable Learning Outcomes. Mr. Hull used
characteristic like whether the object three learning outcomes from his local
was actively or passively supporting school district curriculum and state
the book.” Mr. Hull further validated standards to help him plan what and
the work of the students, suggesting how to teach. Each of these three
“that force could have been defined by outcomes is also found in the Na-
incorporating the active/passive tional Science Education Standards.
distinction, but for reasons like First, his lesson provided opportuni-
consistency and tying our ideas to ties for his students to understand and
observable evidence, the scientists’ apply the concept from physics of

forces acting on objects in various Instructional Model. The example

states of motion. The students’ prior of Mr. Hull and his students illustrates
understandings were challenged by one way of organizing and sequencing
questions about objects and forces in learning and teaching activities
different contexts; this caused them to consistent with inquiry. Through
look for evidence to build improved questioning, Mr. Hull actively engaged
explanations. Second, he helped his his students in thinking about the
students develop abilities to do scien- existence of an upward force on an
tific inquiry, attending, in particular, to object at rest on a table. He used
determining what constituted evi- student-generated drawings to find out
dence of forces acting on objects in more about their current understand-
various conditions, and building ing of whether objects, such as a table
evidence-based explanations that or hand, can exert an upward force on
would apply across different contexts. an object at rest. Mr. Hull drew on the
Finally, Mr. Hull shared aspects of the prior knowledge of the students to
nature of scientific inquiry with the pose questions that motivated them to
students and drew on their ideas to explore whether other types of ob-
show how scientists think and work. jects, such as springs, can exert an
upward force. The students developed
Essential Features of Classroom explanations about how a stationary
Inquir y. This lesson includes a object could exert an upward force.
number of the essential features of Mr. Hull explained how scientists
classroom inquiry described in think about forces and helped the
Chapter 2. Scientific questions students elaborate their explanations
focused students’ thinking about the across different contexts. The stu-
forces acting on objects in various dents critiqued their ideas on the basis
states of motion. The students gath- of evidence. Through class discus-
ered observable evidence to develop sion, Mr. Hull was able to evaluate
explanations and gain a deeper under- student thinking and use this informa-
standing of the concept of force. They tion to help structure the flow of the
also questioned proposed explana- lesson.
tions, focusing on the search for In this vignette the teacher clearly
observable evidence. Mr. Hull guided guided the inquiry. Yet, stimulated by
the building of explanations from the an initial question from the teacher,
evidence gathered. At the conclusion students asked their own questions,
of the lesson, he helped the students voiced their concerns, and shared
make connections from their experi- their ideas. They also critiqued ideas
ences to current scientific thinking focusing on the search for evidence.
about forces and motion.

ANOTHER IMAGE OF INQUIRY for additional information, and draw

IN GRADES 9-12 definable conclusions — all of which
will be called on in the full inquiry
Every year in the spring, Ms.
they are now beginning.
Idoni’s biology class conducts a full
Before starting inquiry, Ms. Idoni
and open inquiry. The inquiry takes
makes plans for how to assess stu-
several weeks of class during the
dents’ learning on an ongoing basis.
semester, so students have ample time
She will ask each student to keep a
to conduct their investigation. Ms.
journal through the inquiry. Because
Idoni begins the inquiry by taking the
she is most interested in emphasizing
students on a field trip to an environ-
the development of inquiry abilities,
ment where she is relatively certain
Ms. Idoni will have the students
their interest will be engaged. All
organize their journals according to a
year, students look forward to this
slightly modified form of the funda-
experience. It is a tradition with Ms.
mental abilities as described in the
Idoni and the students have heard that
Standards. The categories Ms. Idoni
it is hard work, but something they
will use are:
will really find interesting.
Earlier in the school year the
• Questions and scientific ideas
students have had many opportunities
that guide the investigation
to learn and practice the inquiry skills
• Design of the investigation
they will need to conduct a full inquiry.
• Technology and mathematics for
Ms. Idoni has used a series of “invita-
the investigation
tions to inquiry” (Mayer, 1978), which
• Use of evidence to present
are short teaching units designed to
explanations
give students small samples of the
• Alternative explanations
process of inquiry. Each sample has a
• Conclusions and defense of
blank the students are invited to fill,
explanations
for example, the plan of an investiga-
tion, a way to control one factor in an
As students record their observa-
experiment, or the conclusion to be
tions, Ms. Idoni will review their
drawn from a set of data. Each “invita-
journals and ask more specific ques-
tion” focuses student learning on one
tions about scientific concepts that
or two abilities of inquiry. Participat-
underlie their explanations, how
ing in the series of invitations over the
technology helps them, what evidence
year has equipped Ms. Idoni’s stu-
they are collecting, if they have the
dents to identify questions that can be
best evidence and explanation, what
investigated, design appropriate
other ideas they have heard, and if
investigations, gather data, interpret
they have the strongest conclusions.
data, consult sources such as the Web

Ms. Idoni sets the stage for the field

trip by explaining to the students that
for most of the year their biology class
has studied ideas and conducted
laboratories that scientists and educa-
tors think that all students should
know and experience. Although these
experiences provide a foundation, now
the approach will be different. They
will have the opportunity to study
something about the environment that
they find interesting. “The field trip
will help you decide what question you
want to pursue.” This year, Ms. Idoni current concepts of the aquatic
has decided to take the students to a environment will shape, and may limit,
lake in the city park. When they their questions and ultimately their
arrive at the lake, Ms. Idoni asks the inquiry. So, after an initial class
students to simply walk around the discussion, Ms. Idoni knows she will
lake, to observe the lake, and to think rely on small groups, brief reports on
about questions that they may be progress, and cooperative learning for
interested in answering. She asks the investigations.
them to record the observations and Student questions begin with issues
questions in their journal. such as: Is the lake water safe to
The next day’s activity centers on drink? Can people swim in the lake?
the students’ observations and ques- What kinds of plants and animals live
tions. Ms. Idoni approaches these in the lake? How have humans
discussions with caution. She is changed the lake? As the discussion
sensitive to the balance between continues, it becomes clear to Ms.
sustaining the students’ interest and Idoni that the students are most
enthusiasm and the critical elements interested in change and stability in
of a successful scientific inquiry for the lake and, in particular, the influ-
10th graders. A critical aspect of ence humans have had on this envi-
successful inquiry is having students ronment. It also is clear that students
reflect on the ideas and scientific have ideas about how the lake
concepts that guide the inquiry. Also changes: the temperature changes
important is a knowledge base to daily and with seasons; there was
support the investigation and help more dirt since a recent rain; some
students to formulate an appropriate small organisms could be seen; and, in
scientific explanation. Students’ some places, there were different

possible human influences. Ms. Idoni

lets the students grapple with these
issues, which seem to center on one
major idea: as living and non-living
elements of an ecosystem interact,
they change. Any study of changes in
an environment, such as the city lake,
must begin with an analysis of the
patterns of change under normal
circumstances. Students realize they
have to understand the natural func-
tions of the interactive system before
tackling the more complex question of
the impact of human actions, in
particular, their notion of pollution. At
this point Ms. Idoni realizes she
already has her final assessment: she
will suggest that something has
polluted the lake and the students will
have to apply what they have learned
smells associated with the water. Ms. to this new problem. But, for the time
Idoni probes the students about their being, she must wait and let the
observations and reminds them to students pursue their questions and
make entries in their journals. What investigations.
important aspect of the lake do they After hearing the results of small
want to investigate? What kinds of group discussions, Ms. Idoni facili-
human influences are of most interest? tates a large group review of ideas and
“Pollution” is the term Ms. Idoni hears helps students identify an overarching
first and most consistently. She thinks question for the class to pursue in the
it is essential to clarify the students’ investigation. The class decides on a
understanding of pollution and in general question: Is city park lake
particular the possible sources of polluted? If so, how have humans
human pollution in the city lake. She influenced the pollution? The class
asks the students to discuss in small decides to approach the inquiry by
groups what they mean by pollution first establishing a baseline of data
for the city lake. about city lake and then determine if
Over several class periods, they the lake is polluted. Students realize
struggle with the issue of normal that many factors affect water quality.
change, what counts as pollution, and With help from Ms. Idoni, they decide

to organize their work, and so them- mental list of the inquiry abilities for
selves, to focus on three kinds of grades 9-12 and notes which abilities
factors: physical, chemical, and the students are engaged in as the
biological. The group investigating inquiry progresses. Second, she
physical factors is interested in recognizes that students are using
temperature, color, limits of light what they have learned of physical and
penetration, and amounts and types of life sciences earlier in the year, espe-
suspended particles. The chemical cially the fundamental understandings
factors group wants to learn about pH associated with the life science stan-
(which they have measured in various dard on the interdependence of
classes in past years and suspect organisms (see Table 3-5). Finally,
might have something to do with a Ms. Idoni sees that this entire inquiry
lake’s “condition”), and amounts of is providing ample opportunities for all
oxygen, carbon dioxide, phosphates, students to understand several parts
and nitrates. The biological group of the standard on science in personal
wants to investigate the numbers and and social perspectives, especially
kinds of organisms. those associated with natural re-
Students decide to design the sources and environmental quality
inquiry as follows. Each group will (see Table 3-6).
gather data for a period of two months, As the students begin organizing
reporting all results to the other their group investigations, they easily
groups on a regular basis. Each group and quickly recognize that the use of
also will report about their ideas and various technologies will improve data
what their library and computer gathering and mathematics will
searches suggest about the potential improve the summary and presenta-
influence of the factors they are tion of data. For example, they decide
studying on the quality of city lake. to set up temperature probes and
Ms. Idoni is very pleased with the record data directly into computers,
way the class investigation is taking and to use Hach oxygen test kits, a pH
shape. Although she knows the meter, a Millipore environmental
students will still struggle with the microbiology kit, and common items
question of how to determine what that help them gather samples for
counts as pollution, and especially the examination in the science classroom.
human influence, she lets this issue Ms. Idoni schedules periodic
remain unresolved. In fact, knowing it meetings in which the students share
will emerge on its own, she doesn’t data they have collected and present
bring it up. what they understand about the
Ms. Idoni is especially aware of influence of various factors. With
three things. First, she keeps a time, students begin to realize that the

Table 3-5. Excerpt from Life Science Standard, 9-12
As a result of activities in grades 9-12, all students should develop understanding of:
Interdependence of organisms
■ Energy flows through ecosystems in one direction, from photosynthetic organisms to herbivores
to carnivores and decomposers.
■ Organisms both cooperate and compete in ecosystems.
■ Living organisms have the capacity to produce populations of infinite size, but environments
and resources are finite. This fundamental tension has profound effects on the interactions
between organisms.
■ Human beings live within the world’s ecosystems. Increasingly, humans modify ecosystems as
a result of population growth, technology, and consumption. Human destruction of habitats
through direct harvesting, pollution, atmospheric changes, and other factors is threatening
current global stability, and if not addressed, ecosystems will be irreversibly affected.
Matter, energy, and organization in living systems
■ The distribution and abundance of organisms and populations in ecosystems are limited by the
availability of matter and energy and the ability of the ecosystem to recycle materials (p. 186).
Table 3-6. Excerpt from Science in Personal and Social Perspectives

Standard, 9-12
Environmental quality
■ Natural ecosystems provide an array of basic processes that affect humans. Those processes
include maintenance of the quality of the atmosphere, generation of soils, control of the
hydrologic cycle, disposal of wastes, and recycling of nutrients. Humans are changing many
of these basic processes, and the changes may be detrimental to humans.
■ Materials from human societies affect both physical and chemical cycles of the earth.
■ Many factors influence environmental quality, including population growth, resource use,
population distribution, overconsumption, the capacity of technology to solve problems,
poverty, the roles of economic, political, and religious views, and different ways humans view
the earth (p. 198).
factors interact. In one discussion, for isms influence how much oxygen and
example, the physical factors team carbon dioxide are present. In one
suggests that temperature determines highly energized session, the students
the number and kinds of organisms. realize that an investigation of water
The chemical factors team reports quality is a search for relationships
that the numbers and kinds of organ-

among physical, chemical, and biologi- formulate an answer to their guiding

cal factors. question. Their observations and
In the process of data analysis, explanations continually expand; they
student teams review their findings, find they have to consider factors they
look at ranges of data and trends over did not originally think were impor-
the period of study (it is spring), and tant, such as season, rainfall, and the
determine what is appropriate to activities of domestic animals.
consider and how to deal with anoma- As they compile all of the evidence
lous data. During their group work, Ms. and begin the difficult task of answer-
Idoni moves from group to group and ing their question, they realize they
asks questions, such as “What explana- must first address the question:
tion did you expect to develop from the “What counts as pollution?” The
data?” “Where there any surprises in students decide that they will use
the data?” “How confident do you feel coliform bacteria because of what they
about the accuracy of the data?” learn in their reading. The literature
After two months, the groups points out that water can look, taste,
present their data and their explana- and smell perfectly clean and yet be
tion of the specific effect the factors unsafe to drink because it contains
they studied have on the lake and if bacteria. This eventually becomes the
the effect would count as pollution. As students’ operational definition of
students listen to the different groups, pollution. They learn that coliform
they recognize and analyze alternative bacteria live longer and are easier to
explanations and models for under- detect in water than bacteria that
standing stability, change, and the cause disease. Their presence is
potential of pollution in the city lake. considered a real warning signal of
They review what they know, weigh sewage pollution. If coliform bacteria
the evidence for different explana- are not present in city lake, then, the
tions, and examine the logic of the students reason, the answer to their
different group presentations. They question is that the lake is free of
challenge each others’ findings, pollution — at least by their opera-
elaborating on their own knowledge as tional definition of human pollution.
they help each other learn more about Working across groups, the class
their particular factors. Slowly, they compiles their respective reports and
form the view that all factors have to prepares one major summary of their
be considered in any explanation for inquiry. They also include summaries
pollution of the lake. of their respective results. The
To Ms. Idoni’s surprise and plea- reports are excellent. Students
sure, the students decide that they capably describe procedures, express
want to synthesize the data and scientific concepts, review informa-

tion, summarize data, develop charts full inquiry. She also realizes that the
and data, explain statistical procedures experiences provided students with
they used, and construct a reasonable the background they need to develop
and logical argument for their answer deeper understanding of many science
to the question, “Is city park lake concepts and the connections between
polluted?” “And, if so, what is the science and personal and social issues.
human influence on the pollution?” Finally, Ms. Idoni uses the experience
The class concludes that, even though of doing a full inquiry to review and
city park lake experiences variations strengthen students’ understandings
and changes in many factors, it is not about scientific inquiry.
polluted. Ms. Idoni thinks the experience is
For the final assessment, Ms. Idoni important because it provides students
presents a new problem and asks each with an understanding of the ways that
student to prepare a report describing scientists pursue questions that they
how he or she would investigate the identify as important. It also gives
problem. Here is the problem: over students one opportunity to use all of
several weeks there is a massive fish the abilities described for the Science
kill in the lake. Everyone suspects as Inquiry standard in the National
pollution — of some sort. But, no one Science Education Standards. She
knows exactly how to investigate the knows that for students to develop
problem. The one thing they have these abilities, they must actively
discovered is that coliform bacteria participate in scientific investigations
have not been found in the lake. and use the cognitive and manipulative
Students are to propose an inquiry skills associated with the formulation
that might be used by the City Council of scientific explanations.
to address this problem. As she initiates the activity, Ms.
Idoni knows that some students will
have trouble with variables and
ANALYSIS OF ANOTHER 9-12
controls in experiments. Further,
IMAGE OF INQUIRY
students often have trouble with data
Ms. Idoni is pleased with the that seem anomalous and in proposing
student work and certain that it explanations based on evidence and
demonstrates significant learning. logic rather than on their beliefs about
Their work has provided opportunities the natural world.
for all students to develop the abilities Ms. Idoni uses the initial field
of scientific inquiry described in the experience as a way to make the
National Science Education Standards investigation meaningful to students.
— her primary learning goal for the She understands there are several

ways that students may find meaning- CONCLUSION

ful topics to pursue, for example,
current topics in the media, local Inquiry-based teaching requires
problems, and personal experiences. careful attention to creating learning
She also knows that initially some environments and experiences where
experiences may not be highly engag- students can confront new ideas,
ing, but active involvement by its very deepen their understandings, and
nature has some meaning. Over learn to think logically and critically
several years of teaching experience, about the world around them. This
Ms. Idoni has decided that for a chapter has suggested some ways to
majority of students an initial field trip “see” inquiry in classrooms. The next
provides the most meaningful context chapter turns to how teachers learn to
for beginning the inquiry. achieve and assess the wide range of
outcomes they strive for in their use of
inquiry.


4
Classroom Assessment
and Inquiry
The National Science Education comes to measuring outcomes like

Standards point out that “assessments “understanding the nature of science
provide an operational definition of and the work of scientists.” These
standards, in that they define in tests are more likely to require recog-
measurable terms what teachers nition and recall rather than in-depth
should teach and students should reasoning and application of underly-
learn” (NRC, 1996, pp. 5-6). In the ing concepts. As such, they can pose a
context of inquiry, assessments serious obstacle to inquiry-based
therefore need to gauge the progress science teaching. Teachers are less
of students in achieving the three likely to focus on the goals of inquiry
major learning outcomes of inquiry- if their students’ performance is
based science teaching: conceptual evaluated on district or state-wide tests
understandings in science, abilities to that assess isolated facts (Neill and
perform scientific inquiry, and under- Medina, 1989). Furthermore, when
standings about inquiry. large-scale external examinations take
Just as these objectives differ from these forms, teachers tend to create
those of other approaches to science similar assessments for their classes
education, so assessments of inquiry- (Raizen and Kaser, 1989; Baron, 1990).
based science education differ from Assessment in inquiry-based
more traditional assessments. Con- classrooms takes a broader perspec-
ventional multiple-choice or short- tive on the rich learning called for by
answer questions typically ask stu- the Standards. It asks what each
dents to identify facts, concepts, or student knows and understands, what
vocabulary. Such tests have proven is fuzzy or missing, and what students
too broad in their coverage, too can do with what they know. Assess-
shallow in the depth of reasoning ment determines whether students
required, and too narrow when it can generate or clarify questions,
CLASSROOM ASSESSMENT AND INQUIRY 75

develop possible explanations, design formative assessments. For example,

and conduct investigations, and use Ms. Flores asked her students where
data as evidence to support or reject they might find worms and how they
their own explanations. At the broad- could build homes for their worms.
est level, it measures the capacity of Mr. Gilbert listened as his students
students to evaluate the kinds of constructed their models of the earth-
questions that scientists investigate, moon-sun system and asked questions
understand the purposes of investiga- to assess and further their understand-
tions, and assess the qualities of data, ing. Similarly, Mr. Hull observed his
explanations, and arguments. students’ drawings of forces to gauge
Assessment can take many forms in their understanding. In general,
inquiry-based classrooms, and it teachers in inquiry-based classrooms
serves many purposes. Assessments are continually assessing to know
can range from the questions teachers what to do next, what abilities are
ask during a lesson to end-of-unit tests developing, which are still underdevel-
and statewide and national examina- oped, and whether the objectives of a
tions. Assessment data can be used to particular lesson or unit are being
plan a lesson, guide a student’s achieved.
learning, calculate grades, determine Formative assessments are impor-
access to special programs, inform tant for general planning and guid-
policy, allocate resources, or evaluate ance, but they generally are too
the quality of a curriculum or instruc- informal and insufficiently docu-
tion. In the breadth of its application, mented to answer many of the hard
assessment merges seamlessly into questions posed by parents, principals,
considerations of the curriculum and and teachers: What have students
teaching. actually learned? What evidence
An important distinction needs to demonstrates that they are learning?
be made between formative assess- How well are they learning it, and at
ment and summative assessment. what level of competence?
Formative assessments can occur at Formative assessments also are not
any time and are used to influence a sufficient to support high-stakes
teacher’s plans to meet specific decisions about an individual or
student learning experiences and changes in policy or professional
needs. Summative assessments development designs. Such decisions
typically occur at the end of a learning require summative assessments that
activity to determine its impact on provide evidence to parents, teachers,
student learning. and policy-makers that a student or
The vignettes in the previous class is progressing toward meeting
chapter included many examples of the standards for inquiry or falling

behind. Such assessments require aspects of assessment activities, with a

more standardized instruments and a particular focus on students. Finally, it
way of recording student responses, looks at “how”— the formats and
whether a test, interview protocol, or procedures of assessment.
observation guide for a performance
assessment. Stable, quantifiable ways
WHAT SHOULD BE ASSESSED?
of converting student responses to
numbers and averages can better The three learning outcomes of
support accountability decisions. inquiry-based education involve both
The results of summative assess- knowledge and understanding. The
ments of student learning can take Standards define these two terms as
many forms, from descriptions of follows:
individual achievement to formal
comparisons across time or with other
students. For example, Mr. Gilbert
assigned a take-home exam at the end
of his session on phases of the moon
in which he asked students to summa-
rize all of their evidence that sup-
ported or refuted their understanding
of the phases of the moon. Ms. Idoni
assigned as a final assessment a report
describing how each student would
investigate an unexpected phenom-
enon in the lake they had studied. In
general, the results of such assess-
ments need to be presented in such a
way that they can be summarized and
compared with other evidence so that
judgments can be made.
This chapter describes features of
classroom assessments that support
inquiry and the National Science
Education Standards. It first discusses
the “what” — what are students
supposed to know, understand, and be
able to do as a result of their education
in science. It then discusses “who”
should be responsible for various

Scientific knowledge refers to facts, determine whether they can “use data
concepts, principles, laws, theories, to construct a reasonable explanation”
and models. . . . Understanding (as specified in the K-4 standard),
science requires that an individual “develop descriptions, explanations,
integrate a complex structure of and models using evidence” (5-8), and
many types of knowledge, includ-
“formulate and revise scientific
ing the ideas of science, relation-
explanations and models using logic
ships between ideas, reasons for
and evidence” (9-12).
these relationships, ways to use the
Other inquiry abilities, such as
ideas to explain and predict other
natural phenomena, and ways to designing and conducting a scientific
apply them to many events. investigation, are more complex
Understanding encompasses the assessment challenges. Champagne,
ability to use knowledge, and it Kouba, and Hurley (in press) have
entails the ability to distinguish proposed that teachers assess student
between what is and what is not a inquiry by examining four phases of
scientific idea (NRC, 1996, p. 23). student investigations: precursor,
planning, implementation, and clo-
Although understanding has a
sure/extension. For each phase, the
higher status in science education
teacher should delineate the expected
than knowledge, it is a mistake to
products, abilities, and information.
think that all instruction or assess-
For example, in the planning phase
ments should aim for the higher level
the products include the plan, its
of outcome. Indeed, when students
rationale, and critiques of peers’ plans;
fail at complex tasks, one never knows
abilities include developing a plan,
whether they are lacking specific skills
explaining it, and revising it; and the
or the knowledge needed for success
information includes descriptions of
unless one also has examined these
characteristics of investigations whose
requisites. For example, at the
methods are well matched to the
beginning of their units on the phases
question under investigation.
of the moon and static forces, Mr.
DeJong and Van Joolingen (1998)
Gilbert and Mr. Hull probed their
have summarized a parallel body of
students’ knowledge of the phenom-
research done on inquiry abilities and
ena being investigated to establish a
understandings. Students often are
foundation on which to build more
unfamiliar with what a hypothesis
complex ideas.
should look like (i.e., variables and the
Some of the abilities of inquiry can
relationships between them), are not
be assessed in a relatively straightfor-
able to state or adapt hypotheses on
ward way. For example, teachers can
the basis of data gathered, and avoid
observe and listen to students to
hypotheses that have a high chance of

being rejected. In designing experi- meet this standard (New Stan-

ments, they tend to seek information dards, 1997, p. 133).
that confirms a hypothesis, change too
Similarly, the AAAS Assessment
many variables at one time, or manipu-
Blueprint (AAAS, 1998) suggests
late variables irrelevant to the hypoth-
posing questions that stress reflective
esis. Frequent problems in the
thinking, requiring the integration of
interpretation of data include confirm-
information, rather than reflexive
ing the hypothesis regardless of what
thinking, where a memorized re-
the data indicate and difficulty in
sponse is called for. As the Blueprint
interpreting graphs (Roberts et al.,
puts it, “Students should be asked to
1997). Teachers benefit from assess-
address questions such as, ‘How do
ing their students’ initial ideas about
we know this?’ and ‘What difference
what it means to conduct an investiga-
does it make?’ rather than being asked
tion and think scientifically and how
to reproduce memorized vocabulary
these ideas and their skills change
items or the like.”
over time.
Again, many of these strategies
It is easy to say that students should
were apparent in the vignettes in
not simply learn isolated facts or
Chapter 3. For example, when Mrs.
definitions without understanding. It
Flores wanted to assess her students’
is harder to say what the understand-
understanding of the idea of a fair test,
ing of a concept looks like or how
she had them evaluate whether a
students should produce evidence of
design they had not previously en-
their understanding. In the New
countered was fair. Ms. Flores also
Standards Project, in which several
gave her students rich and open tasks
states and urban districts are working
such as designing soda bottle homes
together to develop an assessment
for their worms based on their obser-
system based on the Standards,
vations of the places where they found
conceptual understanding is described
worms naturally.
as follows:
However, many of the assessments
The student demonstrates concep- in Chapter 3 guided the actual day-to-
tual understanding by using a day evolution of lessons, making those
concept accurately to explain assessments susceptible to general
observations and make predictions judgments and off-the-top evaluations
and by representing a concept in of competence. For assessments that
multiple ways (through words, carry stakes, whether of passing
diagrams, graphs, or charts, as
courses or assigning grades, “stan-
appropriate). Both aspects of
dardized” ways of evaluating knowl-
understanding — explaining and
edge and abilities are needed, prefer-
representing — are required to

ably ways that can be systematically benefit from better formative assess-
and reliably reduced to quantitative ment. This approach to assessment
form. Knowledge and understanding therefore narrows the gap in perfor-
also need to be probed in multiple mance between the highest and lowest
ways, thus ensuring that a memorized achievers.
definition does not mask misinforma- Involving students in assessment
tion or misunderstanding. both reduces the burden on teachers
and lets students know what’s ex-
pected of them. Unless students can
WHO SHOULD DO THE
see the criteria by which they will be
ASSESSING?
judged and examples of successful
Assessments originate from differ- performance, assessment becomes a
ent parts of the educational system, game of guessing what’s in the
including administrators and teachers. teacher’s head. Students frequently
But a particularly important form of fail to make explicit the connection
assessment is students’ self-assess- between what they have just done and
ment. Engaging students in assess- the question or problem posed. In this
ment of their own thinking and respect, it is not surprising that lower-
performance allows them to be more achieving students benefit the most
self-directive in planning, pursuing, from learning the criteria for success
monitoring, and correcting the course and being shown examples of how to
of their own learning. Self-assess- achieve these criteria.
ment nurtures discovery, teamwork, One way of involving students in
communication, and conceptual assessment is to engage them in
connections. devising the scoring guide for a task
In a review of more than 580 or project. Their first person state-
articles on formative assessment, ments, “I explain my ideas clearly and
Black and Wiliam (1998a) point out in detail,” and “I used words, numbers,
that “students should be trained in drawings, tables, diagrams, or graphs
self-assessment, so that they can to show my ideas,” are the students’
understand the main purposes of their translations of the performance
learning and thus what they need to standards for inquiry abilities. Giving
achieve.” Black and Wiliam also found students the rubric before they start
that improved formative assessment does not mean giving them the “cor-
— including self-assessment — was rect answer” to their investigation.
most effective in raising the perfor- Rather, it is giving them the criteria by
mance of students at the low end of which the quality of their conclusions
the performance scale, although will be judged.
students who perform well also An example of such criteria can be

seen in the Chapter 3 vignettes in the to have conversations instead of

journals Ms. Idoni has her students inquisitions is a very powerful way of
keep as they conduct their field work. starting to get data into context”
By having her students organize their (Rowe, 1991, p. 91).
journals according to the inquiry Gallas (1995) also emphasizes the
abilities described in the Standards, value of listening to students; she
Ms. Idoni provides them with a way of reports gathering her elementary
monitoring their own progress in students for open-ended discussions
achieving the standards. The concep- around a particular topic or question
tual organization of the journals also
provides a framework that students
can use in their final project at the end
of the course.
HOW SHOULD STUDENT

LEARNING BE ASSESSED?
Educators long have known that an

effective teacher learns a great deal
about what students know and do not
know, and how they think about
scientific ideas, simply by listening to
them. A number of years ago, Rowe that she calls “Science Talks.” She
(1974) identified the very effective allows her students to explore their
instructional strategy of “wait time,” own ideas, which may or may not be
where teachers’ silence allows stu- related to the experiences she has
dents to pose and answer more planned for them. “Children know
thoughtful questions than they do when we are ‘taking over’ their
when teachers quickly break a silence. agenda. They can sense when the ‘I
She suggested thinking in terms of wonder’ in their questions is absorbed
questions that individual students into a teacher’s ‘let’s find out and
bring with them — for example, show’ agenda” (Gallas, 1995, p. 71).
questions of values (e.g., “Who She always asks students to draw,
cares?”), ways of knowing (e.g., “What right after the talk, an idea or ideas
is the evidence?”), actions (e.g., “What that they felt answered the question
must I do with what I know?”), and best, which she uses to follow and
consequences (e.g., “Do I know what document the progress of their
would happen?”). In writing about learning.
assessment, she noted that, “Learning Several important dimensions of the

Table 4-1. Assessment Formats and Procedures
On demand Over time
Formats multiple choice, constructed investigations, portfolios,

true/false, response, research reports, journals, lab
matching essays projects notebooks
Amount of time typically ~1 min 1-2 min short answers days, weeks, or months or even
2-3 min with 5-15 min open-ended months years
justifications responses
Whose questions? anonymous or anonymous or the teacher’s or the teacher’s or

(audience for the the teacher’s the teacher’s the student’s the student’s
answer)
What kind of posed narrowly posed narrowly posed more varies

questions? openly
Source of anonymous or the student’s the student’s the student’s

answer the teacher’s
What kind of right/wrong extent of correctness standards or standards or

answers? criteria for quality criteria for
quality
Resources usually none none or some equipment, equipment,

available during equipment references references
assessment
Opportunity for none usually none usually some from usually some
feedback, revision teachers and peers from teachers
and peers
familiar formats of multiple choice, science community’s criteria for an

constructed response, projects, and excellent response to a particular
portfolios, are displayed in Table 4-1. question?
The challenge for teachers increases Discussions among teachers at a
from the left side of the table to the school or district level, calibrated with
right, as the products of assessment the participation of outsiders, are a
go from being right or wrong to component of most effective assess-
having qualities that must be negoti- ment systems. As Daro (1996, p. 260)
ated with other members of the school puts it:
community. In other words, what are
If standards are to have any real
the teacher’s, the school’s, or the
consequence, it will have to be

through the engagement of of how much each student had

teachers in a professional commu- learned from the lessons.
nity holding each other to a Sometimes teachers, like commer-
mutually accountable standard. cial publishers and district officials,
They can only hold each other to rely on multiple choice formats
standards they understand in
because they are easy to score accu-
terms of their own students’ work.
rately, or because teachers are encour-
Thus, deliberating upon their
aged to prepare students for state or
students’ work with their col-
district tests that are in that format.
leagues in open but moderated
scoring discussions will be needed However, it can be difficult to assess
to make standards a reality for understandings, inquiry abilities, or
teachers and thereby for students. inquiry understandings using just a
multiple choice format. One way to
In choosing the appropriate format make multiple choice questions more
for an assessment, the nature of the meaningful is to ask students to justify
standard needs to be examined. Is it their selections, both by saying why
something that can and should be they think their choice is best and why
assessed “on demand,” with little time the others are not satisfactory.
for reflection or revision? Multiple An additional consideration involves
choice and short-answer responses students with limited proficiency in
are convenient for assessing the the language of the assessment.
things that students should know “at Students who are still acquiring basic
the drop of a hat” or “cold.” Many of knowledge of English vocabulary,
the things valued in the Standards, syntax, and semantics can have
however, require at least the time for problems both understanding and
reflection (more than a couple of responding to language-based assess-
minutes). Consequently, many ment items. It therefore is important
assessments require formats that take to distinguish between what students
more time. know in a subject area and how well
The vignettes in Chapter 3 empha- they can interpret and respond to
size assessments on the right side of specific questions.
Table 4-1, in part to demonstrate the The State Collaborative on Assess-
varied uses of assessments. But the ment and Student Standards under the
full range of assessment formats and Council of Chief State School Officers
procedures could be used in any of the (1999) has developed procedures and
lessons described in Chapter 3. In materials designed to produce more
particular, a combination of evaluative appropriate assessment of English
tools likely would be needed to language learning students. These
conduct the summative assessments materials point out that assessments

can be affected by linguistic issues (4) life, earth, and physical sciences.
(such as the omission of certain The portfolio system includes exhibits
letters or sounds that are unknown in for conceptual understanding, scien-
a native language), cultural influences tific thinking, tools and communica-
(different ways of interpreting a tion, and investigation. Having differ-
question), and the degree of familiar- ent exhibits highlights the different
ity with English (whether at a social or types of evidence that need to be
academic level). Certain patterns of presented for these qualitatively
difficulties emerge among students different types of standards.
who are learning English, and a The expectation for quality in the
knowledge of these patterns can help portfolio is higher than the expecta-
make assessments more accurate. tion on the exam, as adequate time,
The most comprehensive assess- feedback, and opportunity for revision
ment systems include a variety of are in place for the former. Some of
instruments. For example, the system the performance standards, such as
developed by the New Standards working productively in a group, can
Project has three interrelated compo- best be assessed by teacher observa-
nents: performance standards, tion, so certification forms for such
examinations, and portfolios (New expectations are included in the
Standards, 1997). The performance portfolio. Successful implementation
standards translate the National depends on the development of a
Science Education Standards into cadre of teachers who are experienced
statements that indicate the kinds of in scoring against a standards-based
activities through which students rubric and on an abundance of ex-
could demonstrate competence in a amples of standards-setting work from
standard. These standards also a diverse range of students.
include examples of student work with A similar system of multiple formats
commentary that explains what has been employed in California for
aspects of the work illustrate the several years by the Golden State
standard and why it is appropriate for Exam in High School Biology, Chemis-
that grade level. The examinations try, and Integrated Science. The
use a combination of selected and examination includes multiple choice
constructed response items, including items, constructed response items,
hands-on performance tasks, to yield and laboratory performance tasks.
scores in (1) conceptual understand- The portfolio is optional and thus is
ing, (2) scientific thinking: design and used only to improve a student’s
acquisition of knowledge, (3) scientific score, not to lower it.
thinking: analysis and evidence, and

CONCLUSION measure learning, including large-

scale (district-wide, state, national, or
This chapter has demonstrated that
international) assessments. Summa-
assessment for inquiry-based science
tive assessments also must meet a
education differs from more familiar,
number of additional criteria: they
traditional assessments for a number
should be systematic, replicable,
of reasons: the nature of inquiry, the
reliable, equitable for all students,
goals of inquiry-based instruction, the
comparable across classes and
alignment of inquiry with the Stan-
schools, and interpretable. By meet-
dards, and the capacity of a particular
ing these criteria, summative assess-
assessment to measure actual
ments can provide evidence needed to
progress toward the Standards.
make fair high-stakes decisions —
These differences in assessment
whether about an individual student’s
extend both to formative assessments
grades or a system’s need to redesign
done to guide learning and to
professional development approaches
summative assessments designed to
for its teachers.


5
Preparing Teachers for
Inquiry-Based Teaching
For students to understand inquiry In the context of inquiry, these profes-

and use it to learn science, their sional development standards can be
teachers need to be well-versed in organized into four categories:
inquiry and inquiry-based methods.
Yet most teachers have not had • Standard A: Learning Science
opportunities to learn science through through Inquiry
inquiry or to conduct scientific inquir- • Standard B: Learning to Teach
ies themselves. Nor do many teachers Science through Inquiry
have the understanding and skills they • Standard C: Becoming Lifelong
need to use inquiry thoughtfully and “Inquirers”
appropriately in their classrooms. • Standard D: Building Profes-
What do teachers need to know and sional Development Programs for
be able to do to use inquiry effec- Inquiry-Based Learning and Teaching
tively? What kinds of professional
development can help prospective and The latter part of this chapter is
practicing teachers both develop and organized around these four themes.
use inquiry-based strategies? The chapter begins, however, with a
The National Science Education broad overview of the role profes-
Standards — and particularly the sional development can play in redi-
standards for the professional develop- recting teaching and learning toward
ment of science teachers — are a inquiry.
useful organizer for these questions.
P R E PA R I N G T E A C H E R S F O R I N Q U I R Y- B A S E D T E A C H I N G 87

THROUGH A TEACHER’S EYES: ment program that led to his Master of

A VIEW OF PROFESSIONAL Arts in Teaching Integrated Sciences.
DEVELOPMENT FOR INQUIRY- His story raises important issues
BASED TEACHING about teachers’ motivations, values,
understandings, and experiences as
In the following vignette, Steve, a
they learn about inquiry and about
high school physics teacher, reflects
how to teach science using inquiry.
on the three-year professional develop-
A Teacher Discusses Professional Development for

Inquiry-Based Teaching:
Steve’s Story
When I began my three-year masters program, I had several reservations about

teaching through inquiry. I thought it would require more time than my typical lecture
and laboratory teaching. I also thought it would conflict with the demand for “cover-
age” of science content. And I didn’t want to leave my “comfort zone” where my
students and I generally knew what was expected.
At the same time, I felt that I was not exposing my students to enough of the impor-
tant and interesting ideas of physics. I had known for years, based on the questions I
asked on tests and during classes, that my students weren’t retaining much of anything I
“taught.” They seemed to know a lot and understand very little. It was obvious to me
that the students were memorizing the terms and equations only long enough to answer
questions on a test and then the information vanished.
I gained a number of insights as I tried and refined various methods introduced
during my masters program. The program consisted of six-week full-time summer
institutes and seminars during the academic year. My first important insight occurred
when I was involved in a long-term inquiry at the beginning of the first summer. Being

challenged to ask good questions, to design effective investigations, and to carefully

craft our explanations of what we found as we explored the watershed in southern
Colorado—these experiences demonstrated the complexity and importance of learning
to do science as well as learning about science. Another important step forward
came when I appreciated the significance of focusing on the “big ideas” in physics.
For example, I had planned to teach a physics unit on energy, and I decided to look
more deeply into the subject. In the course of the reading I did as part of the program,
I gained a much deeper understanding of the relationships among the storage, transfer,
transformations, and conservation of energy. As I reflected on my past teaching, I
realized that I had taught this subject in a piecemeal manner, jumping from one topic
to the next. I never gave my students this broad vision of physics because I never had it
myself.
My greater understanding of energy became the basis for a unit that was, without
question, the most effective I had ever taught up to that time. I sought to have my
students use inquiry to understand about energy conservation, different kinds of
energy, and energy transformation. For example, I used a relatively open-ended
laboratory in which I brought in a large “Rube Goldberg” contraption in which various
bells and whistles were activated as balls and other devices were in motion. I asked
the students to identify some questions they had about what was going on in the
contraption related to energy, thinking about ideas of energy conservation, different
kinds of energy, and energy transformation that we had been studying. They also
identified how they thought they could answer their questions, what experiments they
could design, and data they could collect that would provide sufficient evidence to
explain what was happening. It was obvious from the high level of student engage-
ment in their investigations and from their performance and feedback that they were
making sense of the physics concepts and building their inquiry skills simultaneously.
Teaching to the “big ideas” of physics through inquiry also helped me implement my

state’s science content standards, which had been developed to be consistent with the
National Science Education Standards. Furthermore, the assessments I gave students
at the end of the unit demonstrated to me that they had learned more about energy
than when I had taught it in earlier classes.
One of my previous ideas about inquiry was that it consisted mainly of doing
laboratory activities. I discovered that, although labs can aid in the process of sense-
making, they often don’t because they are either “cookbook” (they don’t allow the
students to make choices or judgments) or “confirmatory” (they follow lectures or
students’ reading). What I have realized is that the essence of inquiry does not lie in
any elaborate, equipment-intensive laboratory exercise. It lies, rather, in the interac-
tions between the student and the materials, as well as in the teacher-student and
student-student interactions that occur dozens of times each and every class period.
One way that we learned about student-teacher interactions in my program was
through a series of videotapes of teachers. We also were encouraged to try our hand
at such behaviors as listening, clarifying statements, and open-ended questioning. I
found myself responding to students with statements like, “Tell me more about Y,” “What
is the evidence for that conclusion?” and “How did you decide on that explanation over
the one you were convinced of yesterday?”
I tried more small-group activities that were structured to encourage the team mem-
bers to talk, debate, and come up with predictions based on initial observations and
with explanations based on evidence. I informally assessed my students’ knowledge
almost daily. Frequently, I began lessons with activities to set the context for helping
students discuss conceptual ideas and make my presentations more meaningful.
Another major step I took in my growth as a teacher was to begin allowing student
questions to influence the curriculum. Instead of always framing the questions myself, I
encouraged the students to pose questions that arose in their minds. This idea was a
revelation! Listening to the students’ questions has uncovered countless points of
confusion that otherwise would have gone completely unrecognized.
As part of my masters program, I decided to monitor how much I was listening. I
recorded the amount of time I was talking and the amount of time my students were
talking. At first, the proportion of teacher/student talk time was approximately 80/20.
By midway through the first semester, this proportion had been exactly reversed. This
small piece of research was a turning point in my appreciating the value of teaching
through inquiry.
Our professional development program allowed ample time during each of our
classes for us to talk with each other about our recent “experiments” in our classrooms.
Although the group was quite diverse in backgrounds and grades taught, those
conversations were important to my growth and encouraged me to keep trying inquiry
approaches. As I reflect on the three years I spent in the program, I know I gained
immensely from the other teachers and from the education faculty and scientists with
whom we worked closely.

Steve’s account reflects some attention to student questions and

concerns that are common among creating opportunities for them to
teachers early in their exploration of collect evidence and use it as the basis
inquiry. Initially he perceived that his for explanations, and he is doing this
teaching was already successful and before he presents material to them
that an important part of his role as rather than after.
science teacher was to help students Steve’s reflections also point out
become familiar with the myriad facts some important features of profes-
and concepts of science. Yet he also sional development for inquiry-based
suspected that his students were not teaching. One is the need for teachers
really learning (and retaining) what he to do inquiry to learn its meaning, its
wanted them to know. And he knew value, and how to use it to help stu-
he was neglecting the need to help his dents learn. Another is the impor-
students learn inquiry skills and tance of a community of teacher-
understand how scientists used those learners that mirrors scientific com-
skills to produce knowledge. munities. According to the Standards,
Steve came to see that moving such communities both challenge and
toward inquiry-based teaching meant support the development of knowl-
adopting a different role as a teacher. edge by scientists, students, and, in
He created more opportunities for his this case, teachers.
students to explore ideas alone, with Steve’s reflections also demonstrate
materials, and with each other. He that it can take a significant amount of
listened more so he could learn what time to make transformational
they understood and misunderstood, changes in teaching. Steve’s program
what they were thinking, and what included six-week-long summer
they were learning. And he learned to institutes and monthly academic-year
structure his lessons around “big seminars. By his own account, Steve
ideas” rather than around the facts was able to make headway on his
and formulas that he had previously journey to inquiry-based teaching but
seen as central to the discipline of by no means reach a final destination.
physics. Finally, the professional development
Steve’s reflections demonstrate in which Steve engaged gave him a
many of the changes that can reorient wide range of opportunities with
teaching toward inquiry. He is using inquiry, from field work to inquiries
inquiry in all three of the ways speci- fed by the literature to inquiries into
fied by the Standards by teaching his own classroom behaviors, such as
inquiry abilities, an understanding of his research on teacher-student talk
inquiry, and science subject matter time.
through inquiry. He is paying more Steve’s experiences provide a basis

from which to explore the four main through inquiry, teachers need to
topics discussed in the professional understand the important content
development standards, beginning ideas in science — as outlined, for
with how teachers learn the science example, in the Standards. They need
they need to know to do inquiry-based to know how the facts, principles,
teaching. laws, and formulas that they have
learned in their own science courses
are subsumed by and linked to those
LEARNING SCIENCE THROUGH
important ideas. They also need to
INQUIRY
know the evidence for the content
Teachers have very different levels they teach — how we know what we
of knowledge and skills in science. know. In addition, they need to learn
Prospective teachers in colleges and the “process” of science: what scien-
universities may have only high school tific inquiry is and how to do it.
science courses behind them. Experi- But how can teachers learn the
enced teachers who are certified in major ideas in the scientific disci-
other fields may find themselves plines? There are many possibilities,
teaching science. Veteran science from formal preservice or in-service
teachers or scientists who aspire to classes, to independent programs of
study, to serious reflection on their
interactions with students in their
inquiry-based classrooms. The next
three vignettes in this chapter de-
scribe a range of science courses and
professional development experiences
that give teachers an opportunity to
learn the major ideas of science
disciplines through inquiry. The first
vignette tells the story of a university-
based physicist who teaches teachers
within the structure of a university
course. The second describes the
teach may have a strong but tradi- experiences of a teacher taking part in
tional science background or may be that same course. And the third tells
teaching a science different from their of a kindergarten teacher who is
background. All may find themselves immersed in science at a program in a
challenged by the need to learn more science museum.
or a different kind of science. Besides changing the traditional
To teach their students science lecture approach in a science course,

some college professors have devel- laboratory-based modules that have

oped special science courses for K-12 been developed on the basis of re-
teachers. The Physics Education search on the learning and teaching of
Group in the Department of Physics at physics. (References to relevant
the University of Washington offers research can be found in McDermott
special courses for both preservice and Redish, 1999.) The courses help
and inservice teachers. The curricu- teachers develop a functional under-
lum is based on Physics by Inquiry standing of important physical con-
(McDermott et al., 1996), a set of cepts. This level of understanding
A University-Based Physicist Discusses

Concept Formation in the Laboratory:
Lillian’s Story
The curriculum used in physics courses for teachers should be in accord with the
instructional objectives. If the capacity to teach “hands-on” science is a goal, then
teachers need to work through a substantial amount of content in a way that reflects
this spirit. However, there is another compelling reason why the choice of curriculum is
critical. Teachers often try to implement instructional materials in their classrooms that
are very similar to those that they have used in their college courses. Whether intended
or not, teaching methods are learned by example. The common tendency to teach
physics from the top down, and to teach by telling in lectures, runs counter to the way
precollege students (and many university students) learn best. Therefore, courses for
precollege teachers should be laboratory-based.
In the curriculum that we have developed and use in our courses for preservice and
inservice teachers, all instruction takes place in the laboratory. The students work in
small groups with equipment similar to that used in precollege programs. The ap-
proach differs from the customary practice of introducing a new topic by stating
definitions and assertions. Instead, students are presented with a situation in which the
need for a new concept becomes apparent. Starting with their observations, they
begin the process of constructing a conceptual model that can account for the phenom-
enon of interest. Carefully structured questions guide them in formulating operational
definitions of important concepts. They begin to think critically about what they
observe and learn to ask appropriate questions of their own. As they encounter new
situations, the students test their model and find some instances in which their initial
model is inadequate and that additional concepts are needed. The students continue
testing, extending, and refining the model to the point that they can predict and explain
a range of phenomena. This is the heart of the scientific method, a process that must
be experienced to be understood.
To illustrate the type of instruction summarized above, here is a specific example
based on a topic included in many precollege programs. It describes how we guide

students to develop a conceptual model for a simple dc (direct current) circuit. Math-
ematics is not necessary; qualitative reasoning is sufficient.
The students begin the process of model-building by trying to light a small bulb with
a battery and a single wire. They develop an operational definition for the concept of
a complete circuit. Exploring the effect of adding additional bulbs and wires to the
circuit, they find that their observations are consistent with the following assumptions:
a current exists in a complete circuit and the relative brightness of identical bulbs
indicates the magnitude of the current. As the students conduct further experiments
(some suggested, some of their own devising), they find that the brightness of individual
bulbs depends both on how many are in the circuit and on how they are connected to
the battery and to one another. The students are led to construct the concept of electri-
cal resistance and find that they can predict the behavior of many, but not all, simple
circuits of identical bulbs. They recognize the need to extend their model beyond the
concepts of current and resistance to include the concept of voltage (which will later be
refined to potential difference). As bulbs of different resistance and additional batteries
are added, the students find that they need additional concepts to account for the
behavior of more complicated circuits. They are guided in developing more complex
concepts, such as electrical power and energy. Proceeding step-by-step through
deductive and inductive reasoning, the students construct a conceptual model that they
can apply to predict relative brightness in any circuit consisting of batteries and bulbs.
We have used this guided-inquiry approach with teachers at all educational levels,
from elementary through high school. Having become aware of the intellectual
demands through their own experience, the teachers recognize that developmental
level will determine the amount of model-building that is appropriate for their students.
For the teachers, however, the sense of empowerment that results from in-depth under-
standing generates confidence that they can deal with unexpected classroom situations.

connotes the ability to do the reason- the staff — activities they know will
ing necessary to apply the concepts to cause the students to confront their
new situations. Lillian’s story tells existing beliefs about physics. This
how the program is structured. guided inquiry is essential at the
In Lillian’s story, we see the instruc- introductory level so that the students
tors’ decision to guide the learning can later use their developing knowl-
process so that the college students edge and conceptual understanding to
are forced to confront difficult concep- dig more deeply into the key ideas of
tual ideas and to go through the physical science. The University of
reasoning necessary to reach their Washington program is based on the
own understanding. Generalizations belief that both lecturing on basic
and elucidation of general principles principles and providing unstructured
come after experience and in iterative lab time are less effective strategies
fashion. They are not presented first for bringing about student growth in
as a base for students’ investigative conceptual understanding and reason-
work. The guided activities are ing skills.
purposely selected by the instructors Below, in Lezlie’s Story, we see the
based on years of prior experience impact of this type of instruction on an
with college students (including elementary school teacher. Lezlie was
teachers) and extensive knowledge of at the beginning of her career when
students’ typical thinking about key she first participated in the NSF
ideas in physics. Carefully chosen Summer Institute for Inservice Teach-
questions are designed to elicit ers at the University of Washington.
debates and hard thinking about these Today, more than 25 years later, she
ideas based on guided investigations, reflects on how her experience in the
related readings, and small group and program has affected her professional
individual work. Specific laboratory development as a teacher.
investigations have been selected by
An Elementary School Teacher Reflects

on her Learning and Teaching Through Inquiry:
Lezlie’s Story
In late spring of my first year of teaching, I was informed that a drop in enrollment
would result in the elimination of the 2nd grade position that I held. The good news,
however, was that I was welcome to take a newly-created position as the science
specialist for grades K-4. Not wanting to relocate and not stopping to consider that my
major in French might not have appropriately prepared me for this new position, I

quickly agreed to take it for the following year. The district science supervisor sug-
gested that we start with a couple of Elementary Science Study units, Clay Boats and
Primary Balancing. The unit guides and equipment were ordered. I was all set to
begin my new teaching role.
Never having had a science lesson in elementary school, I was not predisposed, as I
had been with the other subjects, to teach it as I had been taught. In fact, without any
real textbook to guide the students, I was left with the materials and a few general
instructions in the teacher’s guide. And so it was that my students and I became
“explorers of materials.” We had a great time. The students were engaged. They
talked a lot about what they were doing and we all asked a lot of questions. But I
wanted to do more than just explore and ask questions. I wanted to learn some basic
principles and have a clear vision of where we were going. I wanted to lead my
students to discover and understand something. But what was it that we should under-
stand? I hadn’t a clue. This is when I first came to recognize that if I were to become a
truly effective teacher, I would need scientific skills and understandings that I had not
been required to develop during my undergraduate years.
Not long after this recognition of my deficiencies, I happened to glance through the
school district’s newsletter, and came across a notice for a Summer Institute in Physics
and Physical Science for Elementary Teachers. I applied and was accepted.
The professional development provided by that first summer’s intense coursework
was the first meaningful education I had experienced since high school. Nothing I had
been exposed to in college had really addressed what I needed to know to guide my
students to develop the conceptual understanding and thinking and reasoning skills
needed to make sense of the world around them.
I walked away from that summer feeling that my brain had been to boot camp. No
course of study, no one teacher had ever demanded so much of me. I had never
before been asked to explain my reasoning. A simple answer was no longer sufficient.
I had been expected to think about how I came to that answer and what that answer
meant. It had been excruciating at times, extricating the complicated and detailed
thought processes that brought me to a conclusion, but I found it became easier to do
as the summer progressed. I also began to realize that just as important as what I
came to understand, was how I came to understand it. Through the process of inquiry,
I had come to an understanding of content that I had always felt was beyond me. I
wanted to be able to ask the questions that would lead my students to the same kind of
understanding. The key to the questions was first understanding the content.
The content had been the focus of the summer institute and as a result I had devel-
oped a conceptual understanding of several basic science concepts including balance,
mass, and volume. Along with these concepts I had discovered an appreciation for the
need to control variables in an experiment. I was now better equipped to take a more
critical look at the science units I had used the previous year. I recognized that Clay
Boats had probably not been the best choice for a teacher with only a budding under-
standing of sinking and floating, but Primary Balance seemed to be an appropriate
choice since I had explored very similar materials and had some ideas of how I could
lead students to discover, through experiments in which they would come to understand
the need to control variables, which factors seem to influence balance and which do not.

Now, after many years of professional development in the UW summer institutes,

both as a participant and as an instructor, I feel comfortable teaching most, if not all, of
the science concepts covered in elementary and middle school. It is an understanding
of the content that allows me to teach with confidence units such as electric circuits,
magnetism, heat and temperature, and sinking and floating. And although this content
knowledge was essential, simply understanding the content did not assure that I could
bring my students to an understanding appropriate for them.
How does one begin to develop some expertise in these strategies we call inquiry?
For me, I can only suppose that it began by reflecting upon my personal experiences. I
don’t believe that this was ever a deliberate exercise on my part until recently. How-
ever, in subtle ways, over a period of many years, I began to teach in the way in which
I had been taught in the summer institutes.
I know that early on I began to pay attention to the questions that I asked, for the
questions stood out in my mind as the tools that, when deftly wielded, resulted in the
desired state of understanding in me. I knew, too, that questions would help me to
discover the intellectual status of my students. In other words, where they were. Armed
with the necessary conceptual understanding, aware of several “pitfalls” (misconcep-
tions) that I had personally encountered, I was prepared to think about questions that
would help me find out where I needed to start. I envisioned the terrain between the
students and their conceptual understanding. I liken the terrain to an aerial photo-
graph that clearly details all the various roads that lead to the designated destination.
It also indicates the “dead ends” and the hazards from which I want to steer my
cover me with white

students clear. I am well acquainted with this terrain, because I have traversed it on
more than one occasion myself, and have conversed with others who have, perhaps,
taken a different path to the same destination. It is in this way that I can offer guidance
to my students, so that they may not wander too far from a fruitful path. I want them to
encounter some difficulties and to resolve conflicts and inconsistencies, and to grow
intellectually from these experiences. But I do not want them to wander aimlessly or to
plunge headlong over a cliff. I want them to arrive at the destination relatively un-
scathed. For this reason it is crucial, that like a vigilant parent, I continue to offer
support in their intellectual insecurity. I question and listen carefully. I scan the territory
to find where the explanations and responses to my questions place them, and then
plan my next strategy to keep them moving ahead. I recall from my own experience as
a learner that sometimes this next strategy is a question such as, “What would you
need to do to find out?” Sometimes it is a suggestion of some experiment to try. And
sometimes it is a comment such as, “Why don’t you think about that for a bit.” It has
only been through many years of trying these strategies out that I have learned to
gauge which tactic is appropriate at what time and with which student.
There are, of course, other considerations in the teaching of inquiry-based science to
elementary students. Engagement has never been a problem for the students with
whom I have worked. Science is naturally engaging. Developmental appropriateness
is another matter. I have come to a much clearer recognition of what will “fly” and
what will not as a result of the research-based curriculum I worked through in the
summer institutes. These materials were carefully designed to build conceptual under-
standing in logical, sequential steps. You do not, for instance, begin to think about why
things sink or float without first developing an understanding of what we mean by
mass, and what we mean by volume, in terms of concrete operational definitions. Only
then can one begin to think about how these two variables may influence sinking and
floating.
In summary, the most important step for me in becoming a more effective teacher of
science was gaining a sound understanding of the subject matter content. It was
equally important that this content was learned in an environment of inquiry-based
instruction. It was then necessary to reflect on my experience as a learner so that I
could put into practice what had been modeled for me. Finally, I must add that it is
essential to take a critical look at what we are doing and to evaluate what is working
and what is not. If what we are doing does not result in a better understanding of the
content by our students, it could be that the problem lies with us and not with them.

This description illustrates a change strongly recommend that every

in college science coursework toward undergraduate preparing to teach
a more inquiry-based format and its have as part of their coursework the
impact on a teacher’s knowledge and experience of engaging in original
skills. University coursework, which research under the supervision of a
traditionally has been didactic with research scientist (NRC, 1990).
hands-on activity relegated to labs that The above description also illustrates
confirm the lectures or reading, has a change in college science
been a source of concern to many coursework toward an instructional
involved in K-12 teaching and learn- sequence that is inquiry-based. It
ing. Numerous reports emphasize the demonstrates the important features
necessity of changing the way science of beginning with exploration of a
courses are taught to teachers (AAAS, phenomenon, delaying the teaching of
1990; Project Kaleidoscope, 1991; terms and principles until they are
NRC, 1996). Some provide examples needed, emphasizing the formation of
of inquiry-based teaching at the concepts, and applying newly learned
university level and strategies for concepts to other situations. The
doing so (NRC, 1997). Still others result is mastery of subject matter
A Kindergarten Teacher Learns

Inquiry at a Science Museum:
Joanna’s Story
How do I design a classroom environment that facilitates children’s efforts to conduct

investigations? How do I behave to promote, support, and observe inquiry?
I had been teaching kindergarten for many years before coming to a two-week
workshop on light and color at a prominent science museum. I was ready to learn a
new way to teach science. I was convinced that traditional approaches were not giving
my students a sense of the skills they would need to succeed in later science courses
and in a technologically advanced world.
But instead of learning about teaching, we began as learners of science. First the
instructors set the stage for a long-term inquiry. We played with different ways to mix
colored pigments and colored light. I had always believed in hands-on activities for my
students, but I had never had the opportunity to engage in a long term investigation of
my own — I had only taken high school laboratory classes where you filled in the
blanks on worksheets. What a surprise doing an inquiry turned out to be! I thought I
knew about hands-on science, but I discovered that there is big difference between
inquiry and hands-on.
From the starting points provided to us by the staff, we came up with a series of
questions that would guide our investigations. The staff told us that, like scientists, we
might take some twists and turns, but that the time spent on our investigation would

lead us to new understandings about light

and color and also about the process of
inquiry.
In partnership with two other
teachers from my district, we choose our
own question to investigate. We all had
been intrigued with an exhibit called
colored shadows; it didn’t make sense to us
that colored lights (red, blue, green, etc.)
could cast different colored shadows
(yellow, magenta, cyan, etc.). We figured
that if we could explain it to ourselves, then
we could explain it to others and really
understand the phenomenon.
At first we re-created all the colors
of the light spectrum and then determined what shadows each created. As predicted,
our investigation took many twists and turns, but each gave us a new piece of the
puzzle. For example, with staff assistance, we made visits to other exhibits, one of
which was color removal, a demonstration of how removing colors (by putting colored
filters in front of a light source) changed the light that reached our eye. We also read
about the frequencies of visible light and about how the eye perceives those frequen-
cies. If we had more time we could have gone in many more directions. As it was, we
felt we had learned a tremendous amount of science content and also how to go about
answering our own questions.
As we worked, we talked with other investigators, shared ideas, and began to
understand how important it is to collaborate. When the time came to share our
inquiries, we were amazed to see how far our group had come in a few short days
and how well our investigation meshed with the other inquiries into light and color.
As elementary school teachers, most of us had never undertaken independent
investigations in any of the sciences. We felt proud of our ability to pick a question
and pursue it to some conclusions. In addition, by experiencing inquiry firsthand we
came to appreciate some of its critical pieces, such as the power of questioning at
every stage. Establishing a question to pursue at first was important, but so were other
questions, such as, how can you explain what you observe? What evidence do you
have that your explanation is a good one? Is there an alternative explanation you can
think of and why is your other one more credible? We were given models, materials,
and subtle guidance for how to inquire. We learned important scientific content by
experimenting, interacting with scientists, and consulting a variety of resources, includ-
ing the exhibits at the museum. We gained an understanding about the complex
interplay of color addition (light) and color subtraction (pigment) and about what
causes the colors that we see. We tasted firsthand the sense of competence and
confidence that comes with being a self-reliant learner.

with deep understanding through discussion and the formulation of

inquiry. This form of teaching also productive questions.
enhances students’ understanding of • How the essential features of
the process of scientific inquiry itself. classroom inquiry can be woven into a
Joanna’s experiences illustrate the learning experience.
explicit teaching of inquiry to teachers • What it feels like to learn this
as learners. As she and other partici- way, complete with frustrations and
pants explored light and color, they struggles.
came to understand inquiry as a long- • What roles and behaviors in-
term and often unpredictable process. structors can use that promote and
They learned how to learn with and support learning.
from others pursuing similar scientific
questions, the importance of models
LEARNING TO TEACH SCIENCE
and materials, and how to communi-
THROUGH INQUIRY
cate their findings to others. The
workshop gave them an opportunity to As important as it is for teachers to
“immerse” themselves in the essential understand inquiry, develop their
features of classroom inquiry and to skills of inquiry, and learn science
learn many important scientific concepts through inquiry, teachers
concepts related to light. also need to learn how to teach this
As illustrated by the three vignettes way. This can be done through
in this section, learning science professional development that extends
through inquiry gives teachers their own inquiries to the implications
opportunities to learn firsthand for their teaching. Or it can be done
several essential aspects of inquiry- through professional development
based teaching: designed especially to help teachers
teach through inquiry. The following
• How both science subject matter vignette illustrates the former through
and inquiry outcomes can be built into the continuation of Joanna’s story:
learning experiences. how this kindergarten teacher carried
• How a deeper understanding of her learnings back into her classroom.
scientific concepts can promote

A Kindergarten Teacher Applies

What She Learned Through Inquiry:
Joanna’s Story Continues
After my investigation into colored light at the science museum, I began to consider
seriously how I might begin to create a classroom environment focused on inquiry for
my kindergarten class. I began to understand that inquiry has a structure that I could
use to enable my students to ask and answer their own questions about light and color.
That was four years ago, and each year I get a little better at understanding how
kindergartners do inquiry.
I now have several light sources and lenses that can be tinted different colors as
regular learning stations. Students investigate light and color all year long, with many
opportunities to revisit their work. Some years the students call themselves the “Rain-
bow Kids” because we typically start our work with light using prisms. The National
Science Education Standards call for young children to gain an understanding of the
properties of objects and materials as well as of light. We pursue these understandings
in part through our mixing of different colored paints and then the mixing of colored
lights. Each year the students make books of their experiences.
One of my particular interests in the past four years has been to encourage my
students to develop their language skills using science as the subject of talk. At the
workshop I learned the importance of learning how to ask questions, work with materi-
als, and listen. I begin each year by modeling these skills. For example, I show them
how to ask questions using prisms and shadows as a starting point.

I have noticed that many kindergartners do not have the language skills to express
their questions, but that they often ask questions with their bodies by moving objects
around. I help this ability along. I model the beginning of questions by saying: “I’m
going to think out loud now — I’m wondering how I can find out if this prism will work
if I move it to this side of the window — that’s asking a question.” As students are
working with the mirrors and light, I model how to ask their questions. For example, I’ll
say: “I see by the way you are moving that mirror that you are wondering, ‘Can I
bend the light?’” I copy down students’ questions and post them for all to see.
I allow time for free exploration with materials in a safe environment, so that mirrors
and prisms are as much regular parts of the classroom as are paints and sand. Now
that I have learned how to set up the classroom environment, I am trying harder to
listen to their questions, watch their actions, and gently guide small groups into plan-
ning and conducting longer investigations.
Looking back, I can see how my own experience with inquiry has shaped how I
work with my students. I want them to experience the curiosity, success, and persever-
ance that I felt. I know that they can accomplish much with the right kind of teaching
and that their feelings of competence grow with each step along the way. I feel that I
am helping students to learn for themselves to become independent thinkers, a skill that
will serve them well in their future schooling. And they will never look at light, shadow,
and color the same way again.
Joanna’s story demonstrates her the most regularly taught topics in

continuing development of “pedagogi- one’s subject area, the most useful
cal content knowledge,” a term coined forms of representation of those
by Lee Shulman (1986) to represent a ideas, the most powerful analogies,
third component of teaching expertise illustrations, examples, explana-
tions, and demonstrations — in a
that is unique to teachers. Pedagogi-
word, the ways of representing and
cal content knowledge is the integra-
formulating the subject that make
tion or synthesis of teacher’ pedagogi-
it comprehensible to others. . . [It]
cal knowledge (what they know about
also includes an understanding of
teaching) and their subject matter what makes the learning of specific
knowledge (what they know about concepts easy or difficult: the
what they teach) (Cochran, 1992). As conceptions and preconceptions
Shulman (1986) notes, pedagogical that students of different ages and
content knowledge backgrounds bring with them to
the learning (p. 9).
. . . embodies the aspects of content
most germane to its teachability. As an example, experienced
Within the category of pedagogical biology teachers planning a unit on
content knowledge I include, for photosynthesis draw on their peda-

gogical content knowledge when questions about scientific phenom-

they know the specific ideas stu- ena and how she can help them do
dents are likely to bring to the so. She obser ves how they combine
classroom (such as the idea that their developing language skills with
plants get their food from the soil), use of their bodies. She is learning
the ideas most likely to be difficult what materials stimulate her chil-
(such as how ATP-ADP transforma- dren and help them develop explana-
tions occur), and how to best deal tions of light and color. She has
with these difficult concepts using arranged the learning environment
examples, analogies, models, and to reflect all of the essential features
demonstrations (Hashweh, 1987). In of classroom inquir y.
Joanna’s case, her experiences with Joanna’s professional development
inquir y learning and teaching are program emphasized her experiences
building her pedagogical content with inquiry and focused less on how
knowledge. Her understanding and she could bring these into her class-
abilities of inquir y were sharpened room. Other kinds of professional
in the museum program where she development programs focus more
learned to ask good questions and directly on inquiry-based teaching.
design investigations to gather They help teachers think in new ways
evidence she could use to explain about what they want their students to
learn, how they can help them learn it,
and how they will know whether and
what students have learned. They
focus more directly on strengthening
teachers’ pedagogical content knowl-
edge in science.
Preservice or graduate courses and
in-service workshops are still the most
prevalent formats for teachers to
develop and improve their inquiry
teaching. But many other strategies
also are being used throughout the
country to help both prospective and
practicing teachers learn more about
teaching science through inquiry.
the obser vations that piqued her Loucks-Horsley et al. (1998) have
interest. As she engages her own identified 15 different strategies for
students in inquir y, she has become professional development, including
conscious of how they learn to ask case discussions, examining student

work, action research, study groups, results of a performance assessment,

technology-based learning, curriculum can be a valuable process for teachers.
implementation, coaching and A number of questions can be asked
mentoring, and immersion in scientific and discussed about the student’s
inquiry (the approach taken in inquiry abilities. Has the student
Joanna’s workshop). Their research asked a question that can be ad-
suggests that strategies in which dressed? Does the design of the
teachers study their own or others’ investigation demonstrate that the
practice are especially powerful in student understands how to control
building their knowledge of how variables? How elaborate is this
students learn most effectively. Some student’s explanation? Is it based on
examples of this kind of professional evidence? Has the student applied his
development are the study of videos of or her new knowledge appropriately to
classroom teaching; discussion of this new situation?
written cases of teaching dilemmas; Working with curriculum materials
and study of curriculum materials and can take many forms. Teachers can
related student work (assignments, work through lessons to learn inquiry
lab reports, assessments, etc.). and science subject matter as well as
Written teaching cases and video- to analyze what students will learn,
tapes of teaching are especially useful where they might have trouble, and
in allowing teachers to examine many how teachers might help at those
aspects of inquiry-based teaching and points. Teachers can try out a “re-
learning. Student thinking can be placement unit,” substituting an
analyzed as students respond to inquiry-oriented unit for one in their
problems or questions posed by the current curriculum. Or teachers can
teacher or to those that they them- analyze how students are learning a
selves have posed. Teachers can particular set of outcomes from a unit
study the responses given by the that the teachers are all teaching at
teacher in the video or case study and the same time.
the effect of those responses on the The following vignette illustrates
students. They also can consider the several of the ways teachers can
teaching decisions that were or could learn and practice their teaching of
be made to help the students learn. inquir y using a new set of curricu-
Looking at student work, such as lum materials.
the write-up of an inquiry or the

A Fifth-Grade Teacher Learns to Teach Through

Inquiry as She Works with New Curriculum Materials:
Sandy’s Story
I used to lack confidence about teaching science, largely because my own science
background was limited. I tended to put my efforts into teaching literacy and
numeracy. So when our school decided to adopt a new “hands-on inquiry” science
program, I was anxious.
All teachers, plus the principal and librarian, were expected to participate in four
professional development sessions: two days at the beginning and midway through
term one, and a half day at the beginnings of terms two and three. Between sessions,
we would teach one assigned unit (there were three per grade level) with the support of
colleagues in the building.
Jenny, the district professional developer, had organized my school and three other
schools to do the course together. She began the first session with an overview of the
course and the curriculum materials. For each grade level there was a teacher’s book
(and a student book) that focused a series of units, each on a major concept and a
major skill. We participated in a number of activities that helped us see what was in
the materials and experience some of the active investigations on which they were
based.
In the afternoon, all of the fifth-grade teachers met together. We reviewed the first
lesson for the unit on animal behavior that we would be teaching that term, viewed and
discussed a video of a few minutes of teacher-student interactions during the lesson,
and looked at some student papers in which they responded to the question about the
topic of the unit, which focused on the behavior of mealworms: “What do you know
and what questions do you have about mealworms?” We had a wonderful discussion
about what the unit was designed to teach students and how the combination of
materials, student activities, and teacher-student interactions could best help them
achieve the goals. Then we were each asked to choose a lesson that interested us from
early in the unit and come prepared after teaching it to lead an in-depth discussion
among the teachers at our next session three weeks later. We were to bring some
“artifact” to focus discussion — for example, some student work, a video or audiotape
of a teaching episode, or some student assessments. For example, I chose the lesson
on how mealworms behave toward light — whether they move toward it, away from it,
or are neutral to it. I brought in an audiotape of a small group discussion in which the
students were puzzling over the mealworms’ behavior when they were placed different
distances from a bright lamp. The students’ data indicated that the mealworms closest
to the lamp moved away from it, but those within about a meter moved towards it.
One student noted that it may be the heat that was influencing the mealworms’ behav-
ior, not the light: another student said that they had too many things in the experiment
that were varying and asked how they could determine the influence of light only, if
lights were always hot. Another student looked around the room and located a
relatively cool light and so they together devised a way to distinguish between the
influences of light and heat on the mealworm behavior. It was a remarkable example

of students solving a problem and in the process learning not only about the behavior
of mealworms but also developing an appreciation for controlling variables in an
investigation. We teachers talked about whether I could have done anything differently
in both setting up the activity for the students or in my questioning of them during their
investigation. It was very stimulating to be able to “stop action” on a lesson, to clarify
learning goals, and to examine the different possible consequences of different teach-
ing behaviors.
We learned a lot from the experience of sharing our work with students. Working
together, we figured out how to use the set of lessons to stimulate, respond to, and
draw out the students’ thinking. By the end of the session, we had a good idea about
how to complete the unit in the next few weeks, how to teach the full unit next time, and
also how to teach the other two units.
While we were teaching, we had support from our school’s science coordinator, who
had taken an in-depth one-week summer session on the curriculum and participated in
monthly follow-up seminars with the other coordinators. Jenny had a strong science
background and had previously pilot tested the curriculum materials we were learning
to use. She had release time to help with the equipment or any problems we were
having.
When we met at the beginning of term two, we again had much to share. Although
each of us had some problems, we all were fortified by the positive way our students
had responded to the activities. I know that I learned even more science that term than
my students. I also adapted cooperative learning to use in my mathematics program,
with much success.
In the third professional development session that preceded our second unit, we
divided responsibility for studying and presenting to other teachers one lesson from the

new unit that we would teach that term. The unit was about density and focused on
sinking and floating objects. As we shared our thinking about each of the lessons and
developed our plans, we realized how much more careful we were being to identify the
outcomes we wanted for our students. In some cases, we needed to problem-solve with
Jenny about how to be certain that our students had learned these outcomes. The
materials addressed both inquiry outcomes as well as science subject matter, so we
paid attention to both.
For the final session of the year, Jenny brought in a videotape of part of her lesson
on sinking and floating. The students were investigating which objects sank and which
floated, and they were developing their explanations of why. They seemed to have
concluded that when air is inside an object (e.g., a boat or holes in a log) it would float
and when there’s no air (e.g., a penny, a chunk of clay), it wouldn’t. Jenny was stuck.
She didn’t know what to do next. She wondered how she could help her students get to
the “right” explanation when their explanations were all over the map.
We had a long and thoughtful discussion of this problem. We needed to consult our
teacher’s guide to understand density better. We also needed to determine what the
students’ observations and explanations told us about what they knew and where they
needed to go. We asked, Are these students old enough to explain something they
can’t really see? Are they really basing their explanations on the evidence they have?
Have they considered enough of the explanations being posed by others? Have they
listened and tried to understand how those explanations differ from their own? Can
they explain in turn why they weren’t swayed to other explanations? At what point
should I as the teacher come in and tell them which is the scientifically correct explana-
tion, and what might be the consequences of doing so?
It was a terrific discussion and emphasized for us how important it is to consider
our students’ thinking, our role as teachers in building on their ideas and helping
them to learn, and how important it is to increase their inquiry abilities so they can
investigate more carefully and discover important science ideas from the National
Science Education Standards.
Sandy’s story illustrates how the teacher to seek more knowledge

use of a new curriculum can provide a about science content and teaching
vehicle for students to learn, at the approaches.
same time as it helps teachers learn. Sandy’s story is likely to continue
Study and use of strong, inquiry-based as she and her colleagues repeat the
curriculum materials can sharpen a same units with new students the next
teacher’s understanding of inquiry and year. As they increase their comfort
the science students are learning with the materials, they will be able to
through inquiry. It can create situa- focus on student thinking and learning
tions that stretch the teacher’s knowl- and adjust their questioning, probing,
edge, stimulate focused discussions and elaborating to deepen students’
with colleagues, and motivate the understanding. Ongoing collaboration

with other teachers, and with others tunities that teachers have to learn at
with more expertise in science and all stages of their careers. It thus
student learning, helps teachers such encompasses learning experiences for
as Sandy continue to learn science prospective, beginning, and experi-
concepts, inquiry abilities, and how enced teachers through preservice,
scientific knowledge advances. induction, and in-service programs,
Professional development that respectively. This chapter also empha-
focuses on improving teaching sizes the importance of thinking about
through inquiry achieves several professional development as a con-
simultaneous objectives: tinuum. Teachers at any level may
know an enormous amount about
• It provides teachers with learn- some things but not others, and the
ing experiences different from the stage of their careers should not
more traditional college course or in- dictate what they will learn and in
service workshop to include one-on- what depth they will learn it.
one experiences such as coaching, The Standards emphasize the
collaborative work such as study importance of lifelong learning by
groups, and “job-embedded” learning making it one of four professional
such as action research. development standards. Professional
• It focuses on important aspects development must satisfy the ongoing
of teachers’ practice, including the need of all prospective and practicing
organization and presentation of teachers to continue to grow, to
curriculum, student work, and teach- increase their knowledge and skills,
ing dilemmas. and to improve their value to their
• It helps teachers think carefully students. A commitment to inquiry —
about how their students come to as something that all humans must do
understand important science con- to improve their lives and those of
cepts through inquiry, what help their others — is an important theme for
students need in developing the professional development, in addition
specific abilities of inquiry, and what to its other goals.
learning experiences can make the The most effective professional
work of scientists “real” to their development not only stimulates the
students. need to continue to learn. It also
provides knowledge about where to
look for information, it provides oppor-
BECOMING LIFE-LONG
tunities to improve teaching and learn-
“INQUIRERS”
ing, and it introduces teachers to tools
This chapter uses the term “profes- for continuous improvement. These
sional development” to refer to oppor- tools include strategies to analyze

classroom experiences; to observe and as a tool for self-reflection and as a

provide useful feedback to others; to way to take time to understand their
record and document observations and activities and experiments.
important information from other Several of the vignettes also illus-
sources; and to search databases for trate ongoing learning through
useful guidance and material. inquiry. Steve describes a component
The vignettes in this chapter show of his program in which he was asked
several of these tools in action. Sev- to define a research question about his
eral of these stories were drawn from teaching, design and use a data
collection and analysis scheme to
address the question, and then report
the results to his colleagues. Such
action research projects are important
sources of information for teachers.
They organize what might otherwise
be random impressions, unsystematic
observations, and unconscious behav-
iors into a frame that can inform
teachers’ practice. They give teachers
a tool that they can use to pursue
questions about teaching throughout
their careers.
In Joanna’s case, a teacher who had
not previously experienced inquiry
had her eyes opened to its possibilities
as a source of ongoing learning.
Through professional development,
she acquired the confidence to con-
tinue to inquire into science concepts.
Joanna’s motivation to think deeply
about how her students were learning
and what abilities they needed to keep
learning produced continual refine-
ments in her teaching and the learn-
ing environment she established for
the journals of teachers. Some journal her students.
writing was required by the teacher’s The following vignette demon-
professional development experience. strates many of these aspects of
Other teachers simply keep journals becoming a life-long inquirer.

A Ninth-Grade Teacher Learns Geology in the Field:

Gabe’s Story
Last summer I had my first experience in doing real scientific inquiry. I signed up for
a three-week institute sponsored by a nearby federal energy laboratory because I had
been assigned to teach environmental science and had never done so before. It gave
me the opportunity to learn more science as well as how to teach science.
Over the three-week period, we were immersed in four “scenarios”— problems that
required us to use a wide variety of investigative skills and integrate knowledge from a
number of scientific disciplines. I’ll describe just one of those scenarios here: the
environmental geology scenario. The program staff loaded us into two field vehicles,
with one geologist per vehicle, and we drove to a ravine where a farmer had dumped
many kinds of waste, from diapers to leftover herbicide. The question posed to us was:
what is the impact of this kind of dumping? A geologist asked: “What do you think
you would need to know to address the question?” We suggested many questions
about the soil, water, the underlying rock, the nature of the waste material, and so on.
We then got back into the vehicles to do a thorough tour of the land.
We began 38 miles from the dump site and learned — through several stops and
through reading materials provided to us — about the economy of the area, the rock
deposits, and the water diverted for agriculture from the Grand Coulee Dam. We
stopped near a roadcut and were given a handout with a cross-section of the area. A
geologist asked: “Why is water seeping out between the two formations that we can
observe in this roadcut?” We discussed possible explanations, and then the geologist
talked about the difference in “hydraulic conductivity” between the two formations. We
went on to another roadcut through the same formation and the geologist asked us to
predict how water applied at the surface might move through the deposits. We came
up with a couple of explanations and argued about the nature of evidence for each.
We decided not to try to resolve our differences until we had more data.
After several more stops, we began to
observe differences in the soils around the
formations. We decided to take soil
samples that we could analyze back in the
laboratory. When we reached the dump
site again, the geologists asked us to
describe the general topography of the
land and compare it to the contour lines
on a topographic map. We investigated
vegetation changes, what these changes
suggest about water movement in the
area, and the kinds of sediment predicted
to occur in this location. We then scat-
tered around the dump site and took both
soil and water samples, marking clearly on
the map where they were taken from.

We spent the next day in the laboratory testing water and soil samples and working
with our descriptions, maps, and calculations to address the primary question (as well
as many other questions that arose over the course of the day in the field). With input
from the geologists and a laboratory chemist, we formulated answers to the question
about the impact of dumping. We made predictions about where runoff from the site
would go, how fast it would move, and how we could test our predictions. In this way,
I feel that we developed a keen understanding of the scientific ideas behind our
observations, analyses, and conclusions.
Gabe was introduced to a nearby Great rifts exist between science

resource, a federal energy research courses and education courses and
laboratory, where scientists cared between courses within both science
about education and made it possible and education. New teachers are
for teachers (and, in other programs, often placed in the least desirable
students) to participate in the actual teaching positions, with full teaching
research being conducted. The loads, many preparations, difficult-to-
professional development gave him an teach students, and little or no support
opportunity to actually “do” science, to ease the challenging transition from
which neither his preservice program student to full-time professional.
nor previous inservice programs had Similarly, professional development
given him. In this situation, he was for in-service teachers is generally
introduced to his local environment in fragmented, consisting primarily of
a way that he had not known it before. short workshops that are neither
It also taught him a variety of ways to connected to each other nor to the
inquire about this environment. In teachers’ classroom work (National
sum, it equipped him to think about Commission for Teaching & America’s
how the inquiry process and inquiry Future, 1996).
abilities could interweave with science Professional development that is
subject matter and how he could use supposed to improve inquiry-based
the local environment as a primary teaching can have all these ills, and in
locale for his students’ learning. addition, it often does not explicitly help
teachers learn inquiry abilities and
understandings. Programs are needed
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
that explicitly attend to inquiry — both
PROGRAMS FOR INQUIRY-
as a learning outcome for teachers and
BASED TEACHING
as a way for teachers to learn science
Professional development often subject matter. Furthermore, these
suffers from being piecemeal and programs need to help teachers learn
fragmented. Preservice programs are how to teach through inquiry.
often simply a collection of courses. The vignettes in this chapter

research — an activity so critical to

their teaching that it merits inclusion
in both preservice and inservice
programs. Finally, all of the programs
illustrated here had a clear commit-
ment to the vision of the National
Science Education Standards, which
call for giving teachers the knowledge
and abilities they need to address the
science literacy needs of all their
students. All of the programs viewed
inquiry as a set of abilities and under-
standings that teachers themselves
needed to have, and their students
needed to learn — as well as being a
vehicle through which subject matter
could be learned, and learned well.
describe very different professional
This lies at the heart of the Standards’
development programs, from Lillian’s
view of inquiry. All of the programs
university courses for prospective
helped teachers learn science subject
teachers, to immersion in inquiry in a
matter, develop inquiry abilities, and
science museum, to a three-year
do so through their own opportunities
masters program. Yet all share some
to inquire.
attributes of effective professional
Professional development for
development programs.
inquiry-based teaching and learning is
First, they offer coherent opportuni-
critical to the future of science educa-
ties for teachers to learn over time.
tion as envisioned in the Standards,
Three-year masters programs and
which note:
long-term curriculum implementation
help teachers to gain new knowledge The current reform effort requires a
and apply it to their teaching with substantive change in how science is
support by colleagues, their schools, taught; an equally substantive
and districts. Second, many of these change is needed in professional
professional development programs development practices (National
were the product of a collaboration of Research Council, 1996, p. 56).
many people and organizations. Long-term, comprehensive, inquiry-
Partnerships between educators, based professional development is an
universities, and research institutions absolute requirement for the success
involved scientists in creating opportu- of standards-based reform.
nities for teachers to conduct scientific


Making the Case for Inquiry
Educators need evidence drawn from For example, there are times when
research to help them implement and explicit or direct instruction is a more
justify inquiry-based approaches to appropriate choice and will comple-
teaching and learning science. Many ment inquiry-based teaching, espe-
science teachers, for example, question cially when students have already had
why they should reorient their teaching a great deal of direct experience with a
toward inquiry-based methods. School particular phenomenon.
boards may want to know why they This chapter closely examines the
should support inquiry-based curricula research base for inquiry-based
and professional development. teaching. It begins by looking at the
Preservice teachers may question the research on learning and the kinds of
need for an inquiry approach in their learning environments that promote
courses. Parents may want to know learning. This research is of particu-
why their sons and daughters need to lar interest because of the strong
learn so differently from the way they parallels between how research says
did. Indeed, everyone should want to students learn important science
know the basis for choices about concepts and the processes of scien-
teaching and learning. tific inquiry that are used in inquiry-
Chapter 2 defined inquiry-based based teaching. The chapter then
teaching as experiences that help addresses research that is specifically
students acquire concepts of science, focused on inquiry-based science
skills and abilities of scientific inquiry, teaching. Throughout, connections
and understandings about scientific are made with the images and ideas
inquiry. That chapter also pointed out, discussed in previous chapters.
as does the National Science Educa- Finally, the chapter describes the
tion Standards, that effective science limitations of educational research in
teachers use many teaching strategies. general.
MAKING THE CASE FOR INQUIRY 115

Taken together, the research findings that allow for retrieval and application
presented in this chapter build a power- (Donovan et al., 1999). They also have
ful argument for inquiry-based teaching inquiry procedures available that help
and learning of science. them solve new problems efficiently
and effectively. Their extensive and
well-organized bodies of knowledge
HOW STUDENTS LEARN SCIENCE
affect what they notice and how they
A recent report of the National organize, represent, and interpret the
Research Council entitled How People information in their environments. In
Learn (Bransford et al., 1999) demon- turn, this interaction with their envi-
strates a broad consensus about how ronments affects their abilities to
learning occurs. The report synthe- remember, reason, and solve prob-
sized research from a variety of fields,
including cognition, child develop-
ment, and brain functioning. It also
drew from research across content
areas, with important contributions
from the research on science learning.
Several general findings from the
study are presented below, with
illustrations drawn from research on
science learning. These findings are
in turn connected to the definition of
inquiry introduced in Chapter 2 and
used throughout this volume.
Research Finding 1: Understand-

ing science is more than knowing
facts. The emphasis of recent re-
search has been on learning for
understanding, which means gaining
knowledge that can be used and
applied to novel situations. Research lems. For their knowledge to be
on people who have expertise in a usable in these ways, it must be
field demonstrates that they (a) have a connected and organized through
deep foundation of factual knowledge, important concepts. Experts must
(b) understand facts and ideas in the know the contexts in which knowl-
context of a conceptual framework, edge is applicable and must be able to
and (c) organize knowledge in ways transfer that knowledge from one

context to another. What this means Research Finding 2: Students

for science teaching is that for stu- build new knowledge and under-
dents to be able to use what they standing on what they already
learn, they must understand the major know and believe. Students have
concepts, build a strong base of conceptions about natural phenom-
supporting factual information, and ena, and those conceptions influence
know how to apply their knowledge their learning. When consistent with
effectively (Bransford et al., 1999). ideas accepted by the scientific
Knowing science, however, is not community, this “prior” or “informal”
only knowing scientific concepts and knowledge forms a strong base on
information. The research on which to build deeper understand-
learning indicates that students need ings. Many learners’ preconcep-
to develop abilities to inquire similar tions, however, are inconsistent with
to those in the Standards (and accepted, extant science knowledge.
discussed in Chapter 2). All stu- These preconceptions are generally
dents need to learn strategies for ideas that are reasonable and appro-
scientific thinking (Linn et al., 1989). priate in a limited context, but
They should be able to describe a students inappropriately apply them
problem in detail before attempting a to situations where they do not work
solution, determine what relevant (Anderson and Smith, 1987; Driver
information should enter the analy- et al., 1985; 1994). Students often
sis of a problem, and decide which hold tenaciously to these ideas, and
procedures can be used to generate their preconceptions can be resistant
descriptions and analyses of the to change, particularly using conven-
problem (Glaser, 1992). Through tional teaching strategies
scientific inquir y, students can gain (Wandersee et al., 1994). For ex-
new data to change their ideas or ample, many students continue to
deepen their understanding of believe that the earth is hotter in the
important scientific principles. They summer because it is closer to the
also develop important abilities such sun, even after being “taught” the
as reasoning, careful obser ving, and correct reason. In Chapter 3, Mr.
logical analysis (Minstrell, 1989; Gilbert uncovered and worked with
Roseber y et al., 1992). Thus the his students’ preconceived ideas
research on expertise confirms the about the moon’s phases as did Mr.
importance of helping students Hull with his students’ conceptions
understand major scientific concepts of forces on stationar y objects. In
and related factual information, and Chapter 5, Lezlie comments about
develop a variety of inquir y abilities. recognizing her own “misconcep-

tions” about physics, which made relates to students’ views of science

her pay more attention to those of and scientific explanations. Students
her students. The research on often think of science as a collection of
students’ conceptions of science facts to be memorized and explana-
principles is substantial, addressing tions as reports of isolated events.
a wide range of scientific areas When this is true, there is less
(Driver et al., 1985; 1994; Minstrell, likelihood that students will actively
1989; 1992; Novak, 1987).
Research Finding 3: Students

formulate new knowledge by
modifying and refining their cur-
rent concepts and by adding new
concepts to what they already
know (Driver et al., 1985; 1994). The
research on conceptual change
indicates that students change their
ideas when they find these ideas to be
unsatisfactory, that is, when their
present ideas do not sufficiently
describe or explain an event or obser-
vation. Further, they change their
ideas when they discover alternatives
that seem plausible and appear to be
more useful (Hewson and Thorley,
1989). This is what happened with
students in Ms. Flores’s elementary seek evidence for different explana-
classroom as they considered why the tions, think about why one set of
trees grow differently, illustrated in evidence is stronger than another, and
Chapter 3, and Lillian’s college stu- make good decisions about which
dents, whose understanding of electri- explanation has the most support.
cal circuits grew substantially as they Their ideas about natural phenomena
were challenged with more complex are unlikely to change on the basis of
phenomena, described in Chapter 5. sound scientific reasoning (Songer
Other research suggests that whether and Linn, 1991).
and how learners change their ideas
depends on what they view as evi- Research Finding 4: Learning is
dence for or against a competing idea mediated by the social environ-
(Duschl and Gitomer, 1991). This ment in which learners interact

with others. Saying that learners can Psychological Association, 1993).

construct their own knowledge does Students in all four Chapter 3 vi-
not imply that they do so alone. gnettes worked hard to devise clear
Research indicates that learners arguments for their conclusions; Mr.
benefit from opportunities to articu- Gilbert’s students went further by
late their ideas to others, challenge reflecting on how good the models
each others’ ideas, and, in doing so, were that they used to explain moon
reconstruct their ideas (Roseber y et phases and how they needed to
al., 1992). Students in ever y vignette account for the models’ deficiencies.
in Chapter 3 had all these opportuni- In Chapter 5, Sandy and her teacher
ties as they developed explanations colleagues shared student work and
for basic obser vations like dying videos of their teaching to reflect on
trees, moon phases, and murkiness how what they were doing did or did
of lake water. Teachers in Chapter 5 not help their students learn. Re-
similarly experienced and then search underscores the value of
recognized the benefits of collabora- student self-assessment in developing
tion to their learning of both science their understanding of science con-
and pedagogy. cepts, as well as their abilities to
reason and think critically (Black and
Research Finding 5: Effective Wiliam, 1998b; Duschl and Gitomer,
learning requires that students 1997). As Black and Wiliam (1998b)
take control of their own learning. note, it is only when students are
Students need to learn to recognize trained in and given opportunities for
when they understand and when they self-assessment that “they can under-
need more information. They need to stand the main purposes of their
be able and know when to ask: What learning and thereby grasp what they
kinds of evidence do I need in order to need to do to achieve.” (p. 143)
believe particular claims? How can I
build my own theories of phenomena Research Finding 6: The ability to
and test them effectively (White and apply knowledge to novel situa-
Frederiksen, in press)? Good learners tions, that is, transfer of learning,
articulate their own ideas, compare is affected by the degree to which
and contrast them with those of students learn with understand-
others, and provide reasons why they ing. In order to use what they learn,
accept one point of view rather than learners must achieve an initial
another. They are “metacognitive,” threshold of knowledge, practice
that is, they are aware and capable of using the knowledge in a variety of
monitoring and regulating their contexts, and then get feedback on
thoughts and their knowledge (Ameri- how well they did. To be able to use

their learning in the future, people understanding of the major ideas in

need time during their learning to their field and inquiry abilities that
grapple with specific information, help them solve new problems effi-
explore underlying concepts, and ciently and effectively (Finding 1).
make connections to what they The research suggests that to develop
already know. They need tasks that expertise requires achieving both
are challenging but not frustrating and kinds of outcomes specified in the
social opportunities to see the useful- Standards: learning subject matter as
ness of what they are learning and to well as the thinking strategies needed
see its impact on others. Finally, they to use and inquire more deeply into
are more apt to apply what they know those concepts.
to novel situations if they have learned Inquiry focuses on a scientifically-
to extract the underlying themes and oriented question, problem, or phe-
principles from their learning experi- nomenon, beginning with what the
ences (Bransford et al., 1999; Bruer, learner knows and actively engaging
1993; Byrnes, 1996). Students in Ms. him or her in the search for answers
Idoni’s class, for example, were called and explanations (Findings 2, 3). This
on to apply their learning to a hypo- search involves gathering and analyz-
thetical situation of a fish kill, which ing information; making inferences
was quite different from what they had and predictions; and actively creating,
observed in the lake. They needed to modifying, and discarding some
apply their understanding of the explanations (Finding 3). As students
nature and consequences of pollution work together to discuss the evidence,
to this new challenge. Several teach- compare results, and, with teacher
ers in Chapter 5, for example, Steve in guidance, connect their results with
his physics teaching and Lezlie with scientific knowledge, their under-
her kindergarten classes, took the standing broadens (Findings 3, 4). As
ideas they learned through profes- they develop their abilities to question,
sional development directly into their reason, and think critically about
classrooms. scientific phenomena, they take
increasing control of their own learn-
These findings from research into ing (Finding 5). They can use their
learning connect in important ways broadened science knowledge and
with the definition of inquiry pre- inquiry abilities to address other
sented earlier. The Standards stress questions and problems and to de-
understanding major science concepts velop or test explanations for other
and building abilities to “do” science. phenomena of interest (Finding 6). In
These are the capacities recognized in this way, effective learning involves
experts, who have a well-structured the reorganization of the deep struc-

ture of one’s thought processes. The at the science museum were carefully
learner comes to own a new idea or supported to begin with what they
new way of thinking. Without this, knew and pursue questions of interest
school learning becomes a transitory in order to deepen and broaden their
experience with little application to understandings.
future thought and action. Research on students who are
learning English as a second language
points clearly to the need for teachers’
EFFECTIVE LEARNING
attention to what these students bring
ENVIRONMENTS AND
to the science classroom (Fradd and
EXPERIENCES
Lee, 1999; Rosebery et al., 1992).
Research on student learning leads
to a question of great practical impor-
tance: What kinds of learning experi-
ences and learning environments
promote science learning? The
research synthesized in How People
Learn (Bransford et al., 1999) sug-
gests that effective teachers employ
strategies that attend to four elements:
learners, knowledge, assessment, and
community.
Learner-centered environments
pay careful attention to the knowledge,
skills, attitudes, and beliefs that
learners bring to the educational Students from diverse language
setting. Accomplished teachers backgrounds vary greatly in their
respect and understand their students’ abilities to express, communicate,
prior experiences and understandings discuss, and demonstrate their under-
and use these as a foundation on standings of science and of scientific
which to build new understandings concepts by virtue of their developing
(Duckworth, 1987; American Psycho- language abilities (CCSSO, 1999).
logical Association, 1993). For ex- Further, like all students, they vary in
ample, in Chapter 3, Ms. Flores and what they understand of science; this
Mr. Gilbert both elicited students’ is complicated by the fact that their
knowledge before launching into their home cultures may not have exposed
new topics and used what they learned them to science as generally taught in
to focus student inquiries. In Chapter schools. As Fradd and Lee (1999)
5, Joanna and her teacher colleagues note, “the norms and values of science

are more familiar to students from the opportunities to learn science through
mainstream middle-class than to firsthand observations gained from
students from diverse languages and “doing” science.
cultures (p. 15).” Therefore, learner- Assessment-centered environ-
centered environments in which ments help students learn to monitor
teachers build new learning on the and regulate their own learning. They
knowledge, skills, attitudes, and learn to question why they believe
beliefs that students bring to the what they believe and whether there is
classroom, are critical to science sufficient evidence for their beliefs
learning of English language learners. (White and Frederiksen, in press).
Knowledge-centered environ- These environments provide students
ments help students develop well- with opportunities for feedback and
organized bodies of knowledge and revision. Assessment-centered
organize that knowledge so that it environments also help teachers shape
supports planning and strategic classroom activities, diagnose stu-
thinking. In these kinds of environ- dents’ ideas and products, and guide
ments, students “learn their way teachers’ decisions (Duschl and
around” a discipline. Like experts, Gitomer, 1997; Gitomer and Duschl,
they are able to make connections 1995). As Black and Wiliam (1998b)
among ideas. In these kinds of note from their extensive review of the
learning environments, teachers help research on classroom assessment,
students think about the general “there is a body of firm evidence that
principles or “big” ideas in a subject. formative assessment is an essential
When they learn new knowledge, component of classroom work, and
students also learn where it applies that its development can raise stan-
and how. They have opportunities to dards of achievement.” (p. 148)
practice using it in novel situations. Assessment plays a major role in the
Their learning environments promote classrooms depicted in Chapter 3, as
the sort of problem-solving behavior elaborated in Chapter 4.
observed in experts (Bransford et al., Community-centered environ-
1999). All of the Chapter 3 vignettes ments require students to articulate
showed students attacking problems their ideas, challenge those of others,
using their firsthand observations and and negotiate deeper meaning along
science knowledge from other sources with other learners. Such environ-
to build new general ideas. In Chapter ments encourage people to learn from
5, Gabe’s and Steve’s field experi- one another. They value the search
ences, Joanna’s experience in the for understanding and acknowledge
science museum, and Lezlie’s experi- that mistakes are a necessary ingredi-
ence in the physics laboratory created ent if learning is to occur. Studies of

effective environments for learning in physics such as force and motion,

science “emphasize the importance of rather than as a dispenser of facts.
class discussions for developing a In their studies of young Haitian
language for talking about scientific students’ development of scientific
ideas, for making students’ thinking ideas, Rosebery et al. (1992) describe
explicit to the teacher and the rest of classrooms in which students explore
the class, and for learning to develop a their own questions, design studies,
line of argumentation that uses what collect information, analyze data and
one has learned to solve problems and
explain phenomena and observations.”
(Bransford et al., 1999, p. 171) Fur-
ther, such environments are open to
new ideas and ways of thinking, as the
community members are both encour-
aged and expected to provide each
other with feedback and work to
incorporate new ideas into their
thinking. The development of commu-
nity and use of community as both
stimulus and context for learning is
well illustrated in the Chapter 3
vignettes and in the teachers’ stories construct evidence, consult experts
of their own collaborative learning in and literature to help them interpret
Chapter 5. their test results, and debate the
A number of studies have examined conclusions they derive. The
learning environments that incorpo- teacher’s role is to guide and support
rate all four of these elements. In them as they explore problems, define
their studies of high school physics questions, and build and argue about
teaching and learning, Minstrell theories. The learning environment
(1982, 1989, 1992) assessed the these researchers describe incorpo-
following research-based instructional rates all the features discussed above.
techniques: making students’ think- Many research studies of environ-
ing visible; bridging from students’ ments in which students learn for
preconceptions to scientifically-based understanding use standardized
conceptions; and facilitating students’ measures of student achievement,
ability to restructure their own knowl- although these measures do not
edge. The approach depicts the emphasize the kinds of deep under-
teacher’s role as coach in developing standing on which the research is
student understanding of major ideas focused. According to the National

Research Council (Bransford et al., learning involves the study of specific

1999), “in some cases there is evi- science programs. In the 1960s and
dence that teaching for understanding 1970s, a number of curriculum
can increase scores on standardized projects, including the Biological
measures (e.g., Resnick et al., 1991); Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS)
in other cases, scores on standardized programs in biology, the Physical
tests are unaffected, but the students Sciences Study Committee (PSSC)
show sizable advantages on assess- materials in physics, and the Science
ments that are sensitive to their Curriculum Improvement Study
comprehension and understanding (SCIS) and Elementary Science Study
rather than reflecting sheer memoriza- (ESS) units for elementary school
tion (e.g., Carpenter et al., 1996; science, incorporated approaches to
Secules et al., 1997)” (p. 177). teaching and learning that today
Research on effective learning and would fall, at least in part, under the
learning environments has interesting heading of inquiry. The term “in-
parallels to the process of scientific quiry” was used explicitly in studies of
inquiry itself (Duschl, 1992). Both various NSF-funded curriculum
learner and scientist actively construct projects (Shymansky et al., 1983).
knowledge through confrontation with These studies examined teaching
a new question, problem, or phenom- techniques such as “inquiry-discov-
enon, gathering information, and ery” (Wise and Okey, 1983), project-
creating explanations. Throughout based science instruction
the process of inquiry, both constantly (Blumenfeld, 1994; Krajcik et al., 1994;
evaluate and reevaluate the nature and Ladewski et al., 1994; Marx et al.,
strength of evidence and share and 1994), and newer technology-en-
then critique their explanations and hanced curriculum (White and
those of others. A classroom in which Frederiksen, in press). Although this
students use scientific inquiry to learn research suffers from the lack of a
is one that resembles those that shared, precise definition of inquiry, it
research has found the most effective is possible to look for patterns that
for learning for understanding. This show up across studies.
consequence strengthens the argu- In the 1980s, several meta-analyses
ment for inquiry-based teaching. were done of the original research
projects, in which the individual
projects are re-analyzed as a whole to
RESEARCH ON INQUIRY-BASED
yield broader results than any one
SCIENCE TEACHING
study alone can produce. In general,
The final line of research support- these meta-analyses show that inquiry-
ing the use of inquiry in teaching and based teaching produces positive,

although in some cases modest, (White and Frederiksen, in press),

results across a variety of indicators. and positive attitudes toward science
For example, studies of inquiry- (Shymansky et al., 1983). In studies of
oriented curriculum programs underrepresented and underserved
(Shymansky et al., 1983; Shymansky populations, inquiry-oriented strate-
et al., 1990; Mechling and Oliver, gies enhanced scientific ways of
1983) demonstrated significant posi- thinking, talking, and writing for
tive effects on various quantitative language learners and helped them to
measures, including cognitive achieve- acquire English and reasoning skills
ment, process skills, and attitudes (Rosebery et al., 1992).
toward science. (However, there was David Haury (1993) has provided a
essentially no correlation between brief, but thorough, summary of the
positive results and expert ratings of above research. His review concludes
the degree of inquiry in the materials.) that inquiry-oriented teaching can
Wise and Okey (1983) showed a result in outcomes that include scien-
positive effect for what they called tific literacy, familiarity with science
inquiry-discovery teaching for cogni- processes, vocabulary knowledge,
tive outcomes. Although Lott (1983)
found only small differences between
inductive and deductive approaches,
the differences were in favor of the
inductive approach, which incorpo-
rates elements of inquiry teaching and
learning. Other meta-analyses con-
ducted independently at approxi-
mately the same time, such as those
by Weinstein et al. (1982) and
Bredderman (1982), produced similar
positive results. Studies in particular
subject areas, such as biology (Hurd,
1998), also generally favored inquiry-
based approaches.
Other studies have demonstrated a
range of other specific outcomes from
inquiry-based teaching, including
vocabulary knowledge and conceptual
understanding (Lloyd, 1988), critical
thinking (Narode, 1987), inquiry
abilities and physics understanding

conceptual understanding, critical diverse language backgrounds,

thinking, and positive attitudes toward although in its infancy, has pointed to
science. Another review from Flick the need to consider carefully how
(1995) addresses research on explicit best to design and structure inquiries
instruction as well as inquiry-oriented for these students (Fradd and Lee,
instruction. He notes that explicit 1999). Research by Delpit (1995)
teaching can produce major gains in suggests the importance of students
student achievement on selected kinds receiving explicit instruction in the
of instructional objectives, but goes on skills they need to engage in science
to point out that “The high levels of inquiry and learn from inquiry experi-
teacher supervision implied by explicit ences. Other research by Rosebery et
teaching models may not foster the al. (1992), as noted earlier, indicates
kinds of thinking required for instruc- that students learning English can
tion with complex and more ill-struc- successfully engage in science inquiry
tured tasks” (p. 17). and learn science concepts as well as
In the final analysis, review of the the language in culture of science.
research on the effectiveness of In their research on students with
inquiry-based teaching and learning learning disabilities, Scruggs et al.
leads to a discussion of one’s objec- (1993) found significantly higher
tives for science education. If one learning with an inquiry-oriented
accepts the full sweep of content in the approach. Studies continue in other
National Science Education Standards, countries as well. A study in univer-
including conceptual understanding of sity-level biochemistry in Turkey
science principles, comprehension of (Basaga et al., 1994) found higher
the nature of scientific inquiry, devel- achievement for students using an
opment of the abilities for inquiry, and inquiry-oriented approach than those
a grasp of applications of science in a traditional approach. Another
knowledge to societal and personal university-level study in Ireland
issues, this body of research clearly (Heywood and Heywood, 1992) found
suggests that teaching through similar results on pupil tests for
inquiry is effective. students in discovery and expository
Research on inquiry is continuing. approaches, but greater student
Some studies are directed at special motivation with discovery approaches.
student populations. For example, A pattern of general support for
research on teachers’ roles in promot- inquiry-based teaching continues to
ing science inquiry with students from emerge from the research.

THE LIMITATIONS AND projects may not be most appropriate

CONTRIBUTIONS OF if the goal is for students to memorize
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH information.
REGARDING DECISIONS ABOUT Second, research alone cannot
POLICY establish what is best. Education is a
very complicated enterprise, and most
In addition to examining the re-
outcomes are influenced by more
search base for inquiry, it is important
factors than can be identified, let alone
to understand what research can and
controlled.
cannot provide. As Hiebert (1999)
Third, research cannot prescribe a
points out in his discussions of the
curriculum or pedagogical approach
research support for the national
for all students and for all times. Such
mathematics standards, the question
decisions must always be made within
about the strength of that research is
a given context, and the level of
fair, even though it does not have a
confidence with which they are made
simple answer. Simple answers, in
changes with new information and
fact, do not provide the credibility
new conditions.
necessary to support a substantially
This said, there are several things
different approach to teaching and
that research can do (Hiebert, 1999).
learning.
It can be used to make decisions that
Research has several limitations.
are based on probabilities that a
First, research cannot determine goals
certain outcome will ensue. Thus,
or standards, which are primarily a
research can inform decisions but not
reflection of values (Hiebert, 1999).
guarantee that they are right for all
The standards being written by some
circumstances. By reviewing many
states and districts are largely lists of
studies done under a variety of condi-
factual information to be memorized.
tions and looking for patterns in the
These reflect a different set of values
results, decision-makers can increase
than those behind the National
the possibility of success. Indeed,
Science Education Standards, which
looking at a variety of studies can
focus on major concepts in science
sensitize decision-makers to the
and on learning for understanding.
complexities involved in a decision
The methods of teaching most appro-
and to the crucial issues involved.
priate for these different kinds of
Research also can help prevent
standards vary as well. Inquiry-based
mistakes. It can show that some
teaching that encourages questioning,
goals, however lofty, are unattainable.
developing alternative explanations,
And it can probe below the surface to
challenging each others’ ideas, and
indicate why certain results occur:
conducting open-ended, long-term
why certain programs do not work as

expected or certain goals are not THE CASE FOR STANDARDS-

achieved. Of particular interest when BASED INQUIRY
student learning is being assessed is
The research on inquiry-based
the nature of the opportunities stu-
teaching and learning comes from a
dents had to learn and achieve the
number of sources. The research
outcomes.
base on learning and on effective
Research can also show what is
learning environments makes a strong
possible and what looks promising. It
case for inquiry-based approaches.
can illuminate what students are
Research on programs and materials
capable of, what improvements are
that incorporate inquiry also shows
feasible, and what parts of reform
positive influences on many critical
visions are reasonable. In this re-
dimensions of student learning.
spect, research can suggest what is
Although the research demands a
not known and could benefit from
clearer definition of terms and falls
some additional examination. For
short of illuminating all the complexi-
example, given the importance of
ties of teaching for understanding,
formative assessment established in
the evidence from several streams
Chapter 4, research has begun to
of research is both positive and
focus on listening and feedback in
promising.
science classrooms.
Effective science teachers take a
number of approaches to teaching.
However, as this chapter has argued,
their use of inquiry can have a power-
ful influence on their students’ science
learning.



7
Frequently Asked Questions
About Inquiry
Science teachers, administrators, Decisions about how to respond to

and teacher educators (both students’ questions depend on the
preservice and inservice) often face teacher’s goals and the context of the
difficult questions about inquiry-based discussion. For example, a student
teaching and learning. Many of these may pose the question “What is the
questions they raise themselves. boiling point of water at sea level?”
Others come from teachers, adminis- One way to respond to that question
trators, preservice teachers, students, would be to set up a simple investiga-
and parents who are unfamiliar with tion to find out. The investigation
this perspective on learning and could set the stage for more complex
teaching science. This chapter inquiries. If learning to use reference
presents answers to some of the most material is important, a teacher might
commonly asked questions. Other have the student look up the informa-
chapters respond to additional question. Or, if there is a higher priority
tions that may be asked. for how the student spends his or her
time, the teacher could simply provide
the answer.
Q
In inquiry-based teaching, is it
The important point is that investiga-
ever okay to tell students the
tions lead to deeper understanding and
answers to their questions?
greater transfer of knowledge. Deci-
sions about responding to students’
A
Yes. Understanding requires knowl-
questions should reflect that fact.
edge, and not all the knowledge that is
needed can be acquired by inquiry.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT INQUIRY 131

Q
Should a teacher ever say “no” to But not all investigations that students
an investigation that students propose will be worth pursuing.
propose themselves?
Q
Is it more important for students
A
Yes. As noted in the previous answer,
to learn the abilities of scientific
a teacher’s response should depend on
inquiry or scientific concepts
his or her goals for the students.
and principles?
What might they learn if they con-
ducted the inquiry? Are there cost or
A
They need to learn both. Further-
safety concerns that might weigh
more, as the National Science Educa-
against doing a particular investiga-
tion Standards make clear, these are
tion? What topics and approaches are
equally important learning outcomes
most feasible in light of the school
that support each other.
science curriculum and guiding
In many teaching and learning
standards? Would it be best for
sequences, students employ inquiry
students to design their own investiga-
abilities to develop understanding of
tions or conduct investigations pro-
scientific concepts. Sometimes
posed either by the teacher or pro-
teachers assume that students develop
vided by the instructional materials?
inquiry abilities just because they use
A large number of learning out-
them. However, there is no guarantee
comes, particularly inquiry abilities,
of this. Instead, teachers have to work
are best learned through investiga-
to ensure a proper balance between
tions, and those motivated by stu-
learning scientific concepts and
dents’ own questions can be invaluable
inquiry abilities.
learning opportunities. Students also
The development of inquiry abilities
learn the characteristics of questions
should be an explicit student learning
that can be properly investigated if
outcome. Teachers can select specific
they have opportunities to pose and
abilities on which to focus and develop
investigate questions. One approach
strategies to achieve those outcomes.
might be for teachers to ask students
The vignettes in Chapter 3 demon-
(or help them determine) what
strate how the learning of science
learning goals they will achieve by
content and improving inquiry abili-
pursuing their questions and which
ties can be symbiotic. Scientific
goals they will not achieve.
concepts and inquiry abilities switch
The fact that students are motivated
from primary to secondary focus and
to ask questions and inquire into them
back again as needed to promote the
is an indication that the teacher is
effective integration of both. Also, as
making science relevant and exciting.
pointed out in Chapter 6, research

describes expertise as knowing both students begin to build and under-

the subject matter content (the “big stand explanations for their observa-
ideas” of the disciplines) and the ways tions, the proper names and defini-
of inquiring into new questions — and tions associated with those events
it makes the case for teaching both. become useful and meaningful. In
essence, words become symbols for
their understanding of the phenom-
Q
How can students do a science
ena. As a result, definitions based on
investigation before they have
direct experience more often result in
learned the vocabulary words
understanding than just memorizing
with which to describe the
words.
results?
The issue of vocabulary develop-
ment is particularly relevant to work-
A
Scientific investigations, whether
ing with students who are English-
conducted by students or scientists,
language learners. As noted in
begin with observations of something
interesting or perplexing, which lead
to scientific questions, and then to
reflections on what the person already
knows about the question. It may
seem that students need some con-
cepts and vocabulary to begin, but
investigations can be designed and
carried out without knowing all the
specific terms and definitions in-
volved. In fact, the observations, data
collection, and analysis involved in an
investigation generally provide the
context for developing operational
Chapters 4 and 6, teachers of these
definitions, science concepts, inquiry
students need to pay special attention
abilities, and an understanding of
to whether assessment of students’
scientific inquiry, which can later be
science knowledge is confounded by
associated with names or “vocabu-
their use of the language, and to how
lary.” This is well illustrated in the
student learning is supported when
vignettes in earlier chapters, and is
their language skills are just develop-
advocated in the Foreword.
ing. As noted in research synthesized
Knowing vocabulary does not
by Fradd and Lee (1999), when
necessarily help students develop or
formulating their teaching strategies,
understand explanations. Rather, once
teachers need to consider how stu-

A
The “process skills” emphasized in
earlier science education reforms may
appear to be missing from the Stan-
dards, but they are not. Rather, they
are integrated into the broader abili-
ties of scientific inquiry. As the
Standards point out, “The standards
on inquiry highlight the abilities of
inquiry and the development of an
understanding about scientific inquiry.
Students at all grade levels and in
every domain of science should have
the opportunity to use scientific
inquiry and develop the ability to think
and act in ways associated with
inquiry, including asking questions,
planning and conducting investiga-
tions, using appropriate tools and
dents of diverse cultures and lan-
techniques to gather data, thinking
guages think about science, the
critically and logically about relation-
experiences they have had in learning
ships between evidence and explana-
science, and, ultimately, how to
tions, constructing and analyzing
structure new science learning
alternative explanations, and commu-
experiences to optimize students’
nicating scientific arguments” (Na-
opportunities to learn important
tional Research Council, 1996, p. 105).
science concepts and inquiry abilities.
The Standards thus include the
The degree of structure given to
“processes of science” and require
lessons and the amount of direct
that students combine those processes
“teaching” of inquiry skills need to
and scientific knowledge to develop
depend on teachers’ keen assessment
their understanding of science.
of students’ language development,
current science knowledge, skills, and
Q
beliefs, and cultural orientations Do the Standards imply that
(Fradd and Lee, 1999). teachers should use inquiry in
every lesson?
Q Why did the Standards choose to

leave out the science process skills
such as observing, classifying,
predicting, and hypothesizing?
No. In fact, the Standards emphasize
that many teaching approaches can
serve the goal of learning science: A

“Although the Standards emphasize promote deep understanding of

inquiry, this should not be interpreted science content and the only way to
as recommending a single approach to help students practice inquiry abili-
science teaching. Teachers should ties. So there is still the issue of
use different strategies to develop the coverage vs. learning strategy to
knowledge, understandings, and address.
abilities described in the content Analysis of data collected in the
standards. Conducting hands-on Third International Mathematics and
science activities does not guarantee Science Study (TIMSS) reveals that
inquiry, nor is reading about science the typical U.S. eighth-grade science
incompatible with inquiry” (National textbook includes about 65 topics. A
Research Council, 1996, p. 23). similarly large number of science
Everyone knows that investigations topics appears yearly in state and local
often take longer than other ways of science standards and curriculum
learning, and there are simply not guides. Teachers, understandably,
enough hours or days in the school feel obligated to teach all of the topics
year to learn everything through called for in their local science cur-
inquiry. The challenge to the teacher riculum. The result can be the “mile
is to make the most judicious choices wide and an inch deep” curriculum
about which learning goals can be often decried in U.S. education.
best reached through inquiry (remem- Furthermore, research shows that
bering that deep understanding is this “cover everything” approach
most likely to result from inquiry), provides few opportunities for stu-
and what the nature of that inquiry dents to acquire anything but surface
should be (see Chapter 2 for some knowledge on any topic (Schmidt et
variations). Other teaching strategies al., 1997).
can come into play for other learning There are several steps that teach-
goals. ers and administrators can take to deal
with this problem. They can renegoti-
ate the expectations embodied in the
Q
How can teachers cover every-
curriculum. They can carefully select
thing in the curriculum if they
a few areas to emphasize, spending
use inquiry-oriented materials
more time teaching those areas
and teaching methods?
though inquiry. They can carefully
analyze the curriculum expectations
A
As noted above, the Standards do not
and combine several learning out-
suggest that all science should be
comes in lessons and units. They can
learned through inquiry. However,
work with other grade-level teachers
investigations are important ways to
to eliminate the redundancies that

often exist in a curriculum, but rarely a teacher might want to select the
deepen understanding. If they teach question driving an investigation. She
subjects other than science, they can or he also might decide to provide a
integrate science outcomes into other series of steps and procedures for the
subject areas (for example, presenting students guided by specific questions
the findings of an investigation in a and group discussion. The instruc-
language arts lesson). tional materials themselves often
Teachers and administrators can be provide questions, suggestions,
helped by district and state decision- procedures, and data tables to guide
makers who can reduce the number of student inquiry.
topics that teachers are required to As students mature and gain
teach. experience with inquiry, they will
become adept at clarifying good
Q
questions, designing investigations to
How much structure and how
test ideas, interpreting data, and
much freedom should teachers
forming explanations based on data.
provide in inquiry-oriented
With such students, the teacher still
science lessons?
should monitor by observation, ask
questions for clarification, and make
A
The type and amount of structure can
suggestions when needed. Often,
vary depending on what is needed to
teachers begin the school year provid-
keep students productively engaged in
ing considerable structure and then
pursuit of a learning outcome. Stu-
gradually provide more opportunities
dents with little experience in conduct-
for student-centered investigations.
ing scientific inquiries will probably
Many teachers in the primary grades
require more structure. For example,
have considerable success with whole
class projects. An example is a class
experiment to answer the question:
“What is the ‘black stuff’ on the bottom
of the aquarium?” Guided by the
teacher, the students can focus and
clarify the question. They can ponder
where the “black stuff” came from
based on their prior knowledge of
goldfish, snails, and plants. Using their
prior knowledge, the students then can
propose explanations and decide what
they need to set up a fair test. How
many aquariums will they need? What

Q
will be in each aquarium? What are they How much do teachers need to
looking for? How will they know when know about inquiry and about
they have answered the question? After science subject matter to teach
a number of well-structured whole-class science through inquiry?
inquiries with ample time to discuss
A
procedures and process as well as The more teachers know about
conclusions and explanations, students inquiry and about science subject
are more prepared to design and matter, and the more they themselves
conduct their own inquires such as the are effective inquirers, the better
“tree problem” conducted by Mrs. equipped they are to engage their
Graham’s fifth-grade class described in students in inquiries that will help
Chapter 1. them understand scientific concepts
and inquiry. It generally does not
work for teachers to stay one step
ahead of the students when using an
Q
How can teachers use inquiry
inquiry-oriented program.
and maintain control of their
However, to a certain extent,
students?
teachers can develop their own
understanding through inquiry as
To have productive experiences, inquiry
they investigate with their students
A
requires considerable planning and
and participate in professional devel-
organization on the part of both teach-
opment programs. Teachers also can
ers and students. Teachers need to
consult with other teachers to learn
create systems for organization and
more about a topic, refer to science
management of materials and guidelines
background material printed in
for student use of materials and conver-
teachers guides, participate in profes-
sation. Students need to learn how to
sional development, and invite into the
work with materials in an organized
classroom parents, scientists, and
fashion, communicate their ideas with
others who have expertise to help in
one another, listen to each other’s ideas
learning about the topic. Like their
with respect, and accept responsibility
students, teachers should view them-
for their own learning. In addition, it
selves as learners, being eager to try
always is helpful when students know
new ways of teaching and extend and
what is expected of them in terms of
sharpen their subject matter knowl-
behavior and performance. As students
edge. And they should use their own
become collaborators, they recognize
teaching to inquire about how to
the conditions for progress themselves
improve it, so that their ability to teach
and need less external control, as noted
through inquiry increases in each
in Chapter 4.
successive year.

Q
What can teachers do who are their students and decide which pieces
provided only traditional in- of their materials they can use to help
structional materials? students reach those goals. They can
consider decreasing the “cookbook”
A
Teachers who want their students to nature of whatever “labs” or hands-on
learn to inquire and to learn through activities are included with their
inquiry are hampered if their materi- materials and resequencing them to
als are text-based and focus students come before the readings or lectures
on memorizing scientific laws and so students can explore in a concrete
terminology. However, a teacher’s may before learning the concepts and
curriculum is not defined by the terms. Teachers can emphasize
materials alone, but more broadly by learning the major concepts and
what students focus their attention on, downplay the vocabulary. They can
how they learn, and how and on what reconstruct test items to assess major
they are assessed. Teachers can use science concepts, inquiry abilities, and
the Standards to determine goals for understandings about inquiry; they
can create one full and open inquiry
for students to conduct for several
weeks of class. And they can supple-
ment the materials they are given
with other materials they receive in
professional development or from
colleagues, or locate on the Web.
The important thing is to determine
a set of learning goals for students
that reflect the Standards and let
those guide how and what students
learn. The next question provides
ideas about non-text materials.
Q
Where can teachers get the
equipment, materials, and
supplies they need to teach
through inquiry?
A
The National Science Foundation
(NSF) has supported the develop-
ment and field testing of a number of

inquiry-oriented science curriculum ter 8 discusses strategies for support-

programs (see Appendix C). These ing an inquiry-oriented program in
science programs, complete with more detail.
student and teacher guides and
materials for student activities or
Q
Where can teacher educators
laboratories, are now available
obtain inquiry-oriented pro-
through commercial publishers. [See
grams to use in preparing
Appendix B for guide to materials
teachers?
selection or Selecting Instructional
Materials: A Guide for K-12 Science
A
Many teacher educators use curricu-
(NRC, 1999b).] Many districts that
lum materials developed for use in K-
have adopted these programs operate
12 classrooms to help prospective
a centralized district materials center
students experience and learn to use
and loan the materials to teachers.
inquiry-based materials. In addition,
Some districts supply a certain num-
there are materials that can be used
ber of kits per grade level that are
by teacher educators, at both the
housed at school sites, with consum-
preservice and inservice levels, that
able supplies being replenished as
are designed to use for teacher
needed by the district. Where dis-
learning. Appendix C contains lists of
tricts have not adopted such pro-
inquiry-based materials for K-12
grams, individual teachers and schools
students and for use with teachers,
have developed a variety of mecha-
both prospective and practicing.
nisms to provide needed materials and
supplies. Some teachers develop a list
Q
of common household materials and What barriers are encountered
supplies and have students collect when implementing inquiry-
them from home and bring them to oriented approaches?
school. Often, a group of teachers at a
A
school will collaborate on a project so In addition to the external barriers
they can share materials. teachers face, their beliefs and values
If inquiry is to be the norm rather about students, teaching, and the
than an exception, schools must purposes of education can impose
realize that materials are an essential obstacles to inquiry-oriented ap-
element of teaching and should devote proaches. Research demonstrates many
adequate resources and organizational of the predicaments that teachers face
structures to purchase and support when considering new approaches. In a
use of appropriate materials. Teachers cross-site analysis of schools that had
should not be expected to supply the successfully initiated new approaches to
essential supplies of teaching. Chap- science and mathematics instruction,

A
three kinds of problems were noted: Research indicates that teachers have
technical, political, and cultural (Ander- a fairly pragmatic approach to teach-
son, 1996). Technical problems in- ing. They tend to focus on what works
cluded limited teaching abilities, prior to involve students or manage their
commitments (for example, to a text- classrooms, rather than on melding
book), the challenges of assessment, theory and practice (Blumenfeld,
difficulties of group work, the chal- 1994). Teachers anchor their under-
lenges of new teacher roles, the chal- standing in classroom events and base
lenges of new student roles, and inad- their actions on stories and narratives
equate in-service education. Political more than on theories and proposi-
problems included limited in-service tional knowledge (Krajcik et al., 1994).
education (i.e., not sustained for a Thus, theory, beliefs, values, and
sufficient number of years), parental understandings are important as
resistance, resistance from principals teachers acquire an inquiry approach,
and superintendents, unresolved but teachers should not be expected to
conflicts among teachers, lack of address such mental constructs in
resources, and differing judgments isolation from their teaching context.
about justice and fairness. Cultural Collaboration can be an important
problems — possibly the most impor- catalyst of change. New understand-
tant because beliefs and values are ings develop and new classroom
central to them — included the textbook practices emerge when teachers
issue, views of assessment, and the collaborate with peers and experts.
“preparation ethic” (i.e., an overriding Collaboration addresses not only the
commitment to “coverage” because of a technical problems of reform but
perceived need to prepare students for cultural issues as well. As Anderson
the next level of schooling). In addition (1996) says, “Collaborative working
to this study’s findings, barriers experi- relationships among teachers pro-
enced currently include the widespread vide a ver y important context for the
attitude that science is not a “basic” and re-assessment of educational values
the lack of appropriate instructional and beliefs. In this context — where
materials, both print and hands-on. the focus is the actual work of each
teachers’ own students — one’s
values and beliefs are encountered at
Q
How can teachers improve
ever y turn. It is a powerful influ-
their use of inquiry in science
ence. The reforming teachers in our
teaching?
cases did not do their work in isola-

tion; they worked together with improve their use of inquiry, as long as
fellow teachers in their team or it is viewed as support for ongoing
department. Crucial reform work learning that is apt to take many years to
takes place in this context.” Collabo- change teaching practice significantly.
ration stimulates the reflection that Teachers can become wise consumers
is fundamental to changing beliefs, of professional development as they
values, and understandings. broaden their images and sources of
The appropriate professional develop- learning, as well illustrated in Chapter 5.
ment is a powerful way for teachers to


8
Supporting Inquiry-Based
Teaching and Learning
School principals, district adminis- Support for inquiry-based teaching

trators, and teacher leaders (including and learning must encompass several
department chairs) are essential links different elements:
in the adoption of inquiry as a way of
teaching and learning. Extensive • Understanding what is meant by
research evidence gathered over inquiry-based teaching and learning
many years points to the importance and knowing the advantages docu-
of leadership from principals and mented for inquiry by research;
other building level administrators in • Understanding the change
improving the quality of teaching and process that occurs when teachers are
learning in their schools (Fullan, 1991; learning to teach through inquiry and
Prather, 1996). Support, guidance, students are learning to learn through
and leadership are vital if teachers are inquiry so that all of their concerns
to make major shifts from a traditional can be anticipated and support can be
didactic style of teaching to one that tailored to meet their evolving needs;
emphasizes inquiry. and
This support needs to have many • Providing a coordinated support
dimensions, be on-going, and be system that maximizes the staff’s
tailored to meet the changing needs of opportunity to grow and succeed in
the science staff as their teaching teaching through inquiry.
changes. Furthermore, it won’t be
just the science teachers who will be The coordinated support system
changing; if inquiry-based teaching is likewise has a number of dimensions:
to succeed, students, parents, adminis-
trators, and teachers of other subjects • Professional development
will be changing as well. • Administrative assistance and
support
S U P P O RT I N G I N Q U I RY- B A S E D T E A C H I I N G A N D L E A R N I N G 143

• Providing instructional materials, documents some of the benefits

kits, and equipment students will gain from the experience.
• Communication with parents and Not only will they learn the science
the public they need in a deeper way, but the
• Student assessment procedures process of developing the abilities of
aligned with the outcomes of inquiry inquiry will help them “learn how to
• Promoting inquiry and problem learn,” a valuable tool for all students.
solving in other subject areas
• Teacher evaluation consistent
UNDERSTANDING THE CHANGE
with inquiry teaching
PROCESS
There is no magic formula or recipe Teaching and learning through

to follow in incorporating inquiry into inquiry is a new experience for most
classrooms and schools. Success faculty members, administrators,
requires creativity and sensitivity to a parents, and students. It therefore
particular context and set of goals. requires a significant change in
attitude and behavior on the part of all
groups. As indicated in the previous
UNDERSTANDING INQUIRY
section, inquiry has been a part of
Providing leadership and support education for many years but in a form
for inquiry-based teaching and learn- somewhat different than the specific
ing requires a working knowledge of outcomes described in the Standards.
the topic. It will be necessary to For example, inquiry-based teaching
interpret and, at times, defend the is not the same as teaching the pro-
practice with other administrators, cesses of science or the “discovery
parents, and staff members not learning” of 25 years ago because it
engaged in inquiry-based teaching. places more emphasis on helping
Comparisons of inquiry as it is carried students develop the cognitive abilities
out by scientist and by students — scientists use to build scientific
such as the comparison in Chapter 1 knowledge. Even for many teachers
— can begin to build a case for teach- who are using kits or programs that
ing and learning through inquiry. claim to be inquiry-based, the ap-
The short history of inquiry pre- proach to inquiry described in this
sented in Chapter 2 underscores that report and in the Standards, if taken
it is not a new idea or fad. It is a seriously, will be a significant change.
powerful way to engage with the Fortunately, an extensive body of
content of many disciples, not just knowledge is available about how
science. In addition, the research change can occur effectively in educa-
evidence described in Chapter 6 tional settings (Fullan, l991, 1993).

Much of the recent literature on Teaching through inquiry requires

change recognizes that it is both an teachers to think and act in new ways,
individual and an organizational which takes the form of new skills,
phenomenon. Change affects every behaviors, instructional activities,
educator, administrator, and parent as assessment procedures, and so on.
well as the school or school system of The conventional wisdom has been
which they are a part. This research that changing teachers’ thinking or
also observes that change has a beliefs will produce new behaviors.
number of inherent features: Research on teacher change, however,
indicates that the process often works
• Change is a process that takes the other way around: changes in
time and persistence. Early in a attitudes or belief patterns often result
change, people often feel awkward, when teachers use a new practice and
frustrated, and clumsy as they try to see their students benefiting from it
use new behaviors and coordinate new (Guskey, 1986). Thus, changes in
materials, activities, and relationships. teaching often result in new attitudes
A significant change in teaching often and commitment to the new approach.
takes several years to master. In addition, how teachers think and
• As individuals progress through feel about change appears to be
a change process, their needs for developmental. Many studies of
support and assistance change. individuals who have changed their
• Change efforts are effective practice over time — both on their
when the change to be made is clearly own initiative and when decisions to
defined, assistance and opportunities do so were made by others — have
to collaborate are available, and revealed that individuals go through
administrators and policies support stages in how they feel about the
the change. change (Fullan, 1991; Hall and Hord,
• Most systems and institutions 1987; Huberman and Miles, 1984).
resist change. Many educators find the progression
• Organizations that are continu- of stages of concern a valuable lens for
ously improving have ongoing mecha- facilitating change in schools
nisms for setting goals, taking actions, (Lieberman and Miller, 1991; Joyce,
assessing the results of their actions, 1990). Table 8-1 outlines the stages of
and making adjustments. concern about the use of a teaching
• Change is complex because it practice such as inquiry that calls for a
requires people to communicate with significant change in behavior (Hord
one another about complex topics in et al., 1987).
organizations that are, for the most By being aware of these stages in
part, large and structured (Loucks- teachers and others involved in
Horsley et al., 1998). change, administrators and teacher

Table 8-1. Typical Expressions of Concern About an Innovation
Stage of Concern Expression of Concern
6. Refocusing I have some ideas about something that would work even better.
5. Collaboration How can I relate what I am doing to what others are doing?
4. Consequence How is my use affecting learners? How can I refine it to have more impact?
3. Management I seem to be spending all my time getting materials ready.
2. Personal How will using it affect me?
1. Informational I would like to know more about it.
0. Awareness I am not concerned about it.
Adapted from Hord et al., 1987. Taking Charge of Change. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
leaders can effectively select the types adopt new approaches to support
of support that will be the most useful individual teachers. The remainder of
to teachers as they experience this this chapter discusses a number of
process. It is not a coincidence that these strategies.
this bears some resemblance to the
inquiry process itself. Professional development. As
described in Chapter 5, professional
development comes in many forms
PROVIDING A VARIETY OF
(Loucks-Horsley et al., 1998). If
SUPPORT FOR STAFF
teachers do not have access to such
Changes implemented by individual opportunities, administrators can help
teachers can succeed and endure only teachers find them or can create them
with simultaneous changes in the in the school or in cooperation with
district, school, or department in other schools. Many of the rich
which the teacher is working. Re- variety of potential learning experi-
search has demonstrated that the ences for teachers will not occur in an
ability of individuals in a system to organized, formal class.
change their teaching behavior is Every school has a measure of
dictated to a large degree by the expertise and experience that can be
underlying structures in the organiza- tapped. Even if formal arrangements
tion such as rewards, policies, and the for assistance include outside help,
overall culture of the organization administrators or teacher leaders can
(O’Day and Smith, 1993). Effective facilitate internal support mechanisms
change thus requires that a school such as the study groups described in

the next section. Fostering “communi- to practice new inquiry behaviors will
ties of learners” within schools will want information about inquiry and its
create a norm of experimentation and place in the curriculum. Administra-
evaluation that will apply to many tors can provide them with reference
other innovations. (See Teaching materials and with access to other
Standard F on page 51 and Program teachers, university professors, or
Standard E on page 222 of the Na- scientists who can answer their
tional Science Education Standards.) questions.
When the need for information is
Administrative assistance and coupled with personal concerns (at
support. As teachers pass through stage of concern number 4, for ex-
the stages of concern described in ample), teachers often express wor-
Table 8-1, administrators need to ries about whether the new teaching
provide them with professional strategies will be acceptable to the
development experiences appropriate principal, other teachers, and parents.
to their progress in constructing a These worries need to be listened to
new view of teaching and creating the and addressed, understanding that
new behaviors required to practice it. they are a natural part of the change
For example, at an early stage of process. One way to address this
concern, teachers who are beginning concern is to encourage small groups

context of many competing demands

for time and attention.
Availability of instructional mate-

rials, kits, and equipment. As
personal concerns are resolved, many
teachers have concerns about making
things work (stage of concern num-
ber 3). At this point, teachers have
many “how to” questions about
finding the time for inquiry activities,
covering the content, keeping the
students on task, having enough
of teachers to form study and support equipment, and so on. For example, is
groups that meet on a regular basis the schedule conducive for inquiry-
(during the school day if at all pos- based teaching? Are the periods or
sible). Small study groups not only teaching blocks long enough to
provide information; they also provide complete most activities in one day?
the mutual support that teachers need Do instructional units or courses of
as they progress through their con- study incorporate inquiry as the main
cerns. The collegiality provided by teaching and learning strategy?
this community of learners can also Traditional textbooks and units are
enhance teachers’ growth in learning often not conducive to inquiry-based
to use inquiry far more rapidly and teaching. Success is much more likely
deeply than if each teacher were doing when the teachers are using materials
it alone. that have inquiry “built in.” Adminis-
As the new teaching practices trators need to make an effort to see
begin, teachers will have many con- that teachers have such materials. See
cerns about their effectiveness, the Chapter 7 for ways to adapt traditional
amount of work required, and their materials to support inquiry-based
acceptance by others. Administrators learning, should this be impossible.
need to assure teachers that they Does the school or district emphasize
know and support what the teachers inquiry-oriented materials when
are doing. Other teachers also need to approving textbooks and instructional
hear that administrators are behind materials? Are the criteria for selec-
the inquiry-based approach. Public tion based on standards (national or
expressions of support can reiterate state) that have a strong inquiry
the importance of inquiry in the component? Administrators have an

opportunity, an obligation, and often 1991; Calhoun, 1994) and examination

the authority to influence the proce- of student work (Loucks-Horsley et al.,
dures and criteria used. Two recent 1998) by members of the group could
resources from the Center for Science, be both motivating and helpful.
Mathematics, and Engineering Educa-
tion will be of help in this matter Interpreting inquir y-based teach-
(NRC, 1999a; NRC, 1999b), as will ing and learning for parents and
Appendix B. other members of the public.
Nothing interferes with inquiry- Many administrators have learned the
based teaching more than lacking an hard way that it is much better to be
adequate supply of instructional proactive with the community than
materials. Administrators need to reactive. Administrators cannot wait
ensure that teachers have appropriate until the letters and phone calls start
kits, equipment, and supplies, and that coming in from parents and other
consumable supplies are replaced members of the public. They need to
regularly. Is the storage space ad- introduce and explain inquiry to
equate and secure? Experienced parents whose students are involved.
teachers can help find the answers to Newsletters, parent meetings, open
some of these questions, as can houses, phone trees, and special
administrators who pay attention to invitations to “science nights” are all
the problems teachers are having. ways to inform parents that inquiry-
Only by working through manage- based teaching and learning is being
ment questions can a teacher con- used in their child’s class. Administra-
struct an image and an understanding tors need to know and share the
of how inquiry-based teaching will advantages of teaching and learning
benefit his or her students (stage of this way and, at the same time, be
concern number five). Teachers at open about the pitfalls or adjustments
this stage will ask hard questions that some students will have to make
about the effectiveness of their teach- to succeed. Teachers also can be
ing. They often will seek answers asked to describe what they will do to
from the research and from careful help.
student assessments to assure them- Building support with the public
selves that they and the approach they cannot stop with parents. Local
are using are effective. Study groups businesses, government agencies and
can seek help from local university laboratories, museums, professional
researchers or district level science societies, and so on will be interested
education specialists in addressing in supporting standards-based reform
these concerns. Small action research efforts and often can provide re-
projects (Miller and Pine, 1990; Holly, sources of materials, kits, scientists as

consultants, or access to laboratories aged to use the kinds of classroom

for field trips. The local media may be assessments described in Chapter 4,
interested in a story that features a to embed their assessments in instruc-
local innovation consistent with tion, to consider how students’ lan-
national improvement efforts. By guage development influences assess-
stressing the acquisition of fundamen- ment results if they teach English
tal science knowledge through in- language-learners, and to use assess-
quiry, administrators can avoid ments to inform both their immediate
creating the image that inquiry is responses to students and their
about exploring any interesting idea or ongoing designs for instruction.
simply the latest fad on the educa- Administrators can review the quality
tional scene. of the inquiry used in a class as well as
students’ mastery of subject matter.
Student assessment procedures Do teachers include questions on their
aligned with the outcomes of quizzes (in the grades and courses
inquir y. Students and parents where this is appropriate) and use
quickly judge what is valued by the hands-on assessment tasks to measure
tests and grading system the teachers inquiry abilities? Assessments of
and the schools use, and they adjust inquiry are a very useful topic for
their behavior accordingly. If the teacher study groups and for action
inquiry activities and investigations research projects.
are simply interludes between memo- If tests are mandated by the district
rizing material from the text and other or state, what is their impact on
sources, the motivation to acquire teachers? If the tests do not measure
inquiry-based abilities will be limited. inquiry, how can the requirement or
If a teacher’s tests and those required the nature of the tests be modified?
by the school do not assess the Changing the policies involved is a tall
abilities and understanding of inquiry order but well worth the effort. Many
or, for that matter, the deep under- administrators and teachers are ready
standing of science concepts, students and willing to join in this task.
and parents may wonder why time is Until such changes can be made,
being spent on inquiry. administrators need to be open about
To avoid these pitfalls, administra- the fact that the tests only measure a
tors can encourage teachers to com- portion of the science objectives or
municate clearly to students and standards. And students who achieve
parents what they expect students in a deep understanding of science
their classes to know and be able to do content through inquiry usually do
and how they will assess and grade well on conventional tests (Bransford
them. Teachers should be encour- et al., 1999).

Promoting inquir y and problem

solving in other subject areas.
Inquiry is not exclusive to science or
science teaching. Teachers in other
departments at the secondary level
and teachers teaching other subject
areas at the elementary level can and
often do use inquiry-like strategies.
Teachers want and need the moral and
collegial support of working with
other teachers on innovative and, what
they consider, risky projects. They
also need the sense that they are not
out on an “intellectual limb”; that
inquiry has its counterparts in other
disciplines in addition to science. support each other in a common effort
Mathematics educators have long to change the way they teach and their
advocated problem solving as an over- students learn.
arching process for teaching math-
ematics. The TIMSS eighth grade Appropriate teacher evaluation
video study of mathematics instruc- procedures. Problems are sure to
tion (Stigler et al., 1999) highlighted arise if the formal and informal evalua-
the value of individuals or small tion of teachers is inconsistent with
groups of students working through a the essential elements of inquiry.
complex problem independent of the Teachers need to be assured that the
teacher before the teacher, with the innovative strategies they are using
help of several students, displays one are understood, objectively evaluated,
or more acceptable solution strategies. and rewarded when executed well.
Innovative social studies instructional The evaluator must understand
materials have incorporated inquiry inquiry to know what to observe in the
strategies by providing original source classroom. For example, evaluation of
materials for students to use in their inquiry-based teaching requires more
investigations and an inductive ap- than one class period visit. What one
proach to reaching the big ideas and day looks like confusion, and maybe
principles. When the majority of even chaos, might be the exploration
teachers in a school are working on a phase of instruction that will be
common goal, the level and amount of followed the next day when experi-
professional talk in the building goes ments and ideas come together for
up (Little, 1993) and teachers begin to most of the students.

Evaluators also need to look for CONCLUSION

how the teacher uses curriculum
Teaching science through inquiry
materials, interacts with students to
requires a new way of engaging
increase their understanding, and
students in learning. It therefore
assesses student work and thinking in
requires that all educators take on the
ways that influence teaching plans.
role of change agents. To foster the
Teachers can be asked to explain how
changes in teaching required by
student work demonstrates growth in
inquiry-based approaches, administra-
student understanding. Talking to
tors and other leaders need to provide
students can reveal their understand-
a wide array of support — from
ing of the content and the methods of
opportunities to learn, to materials
inquiry they are using. Lesson plans
and equipment, to moral support,
and the instructional model being
encouragement, and “running interfer-
used can indicate whether students
ence.” Without such support, inquiry-
are actively engaged in inquiry.
based science programs are unlikely
to succeed and even less likely to be
sustained. With it, all students are
much more likely to understand,
appreciate, and actively participate in
the scientific world.

References
American Association for the Advancement of Baron, J. B. (1990). Performance Assess-

Science. (1998). Blueprints for Science ment: Blurring the Edges among Assess-
Literacy. New York: Oxford University ment, Curriculum, and Instruction. In A.
Press. B. Champagne, B. E. Lovitts, & B. J.
American Association for the Advancement of Calinger (Eds), Assessment in the Service of
Science. (1989). Science for All Americans. Instruction: This Year in School Science
Washington, DC: American Association for 1990. Washington, DC: AAAS.
the Advancement of Science. Basaga, H., Geban, O., & Tekkaya, C. (1994).
American Association for the Advancement of The Effect of the Inquiry Teaching Method
Science. (1990). This Year in School on Biochemistry and Science Process Skill
Science 1990: Assessment in the Service of Achievements. Biochemical Education,
Instruction. Washington, DC: American 22(1), 29-32.
Association for the Advancement of Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment
Science. and Classroom Learning. Assessment in
American Psychological Association and Mid- Education, 5(1), 7-74.
Continent Regional Educational Labora- Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the
tory. (1993). Learner-Centered Psychologi- Black Box: Raising Standards through
cal Principles: Guidelines for School Classroom Assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
Redesign and Reform. Denver: 80(2), 139-148.
Mid-Continent Regional Educational Blank, R. (Chair, CCSSO/SCASS Science
Laboratory. Team for Measures of the Enacted
Anderson, C. W., & Smith, E. L. (1987). Curriculum). (1997). How is Science
Teaching Science. In Koehler-Richardson Taught in Schools? Washington, DC:
(Ed), Educators’ Handbook: A Research CCSSO.
Perspective (pp. 84-111). White Plains, NY: Blumenfeld, P. C. (1994). Lessons Learned:
Longman. How Collaboration Helped Middle Grade
Anderson, R. D. (1996). Study of Curriculum Science Teachers Learn Project-based
Reform. Washington DC: U.S. Govern- Instruction. The Elementary School
ment Printing Office. Journal, 94(5), 539-551.
Atkin, J. M., & Karplus, R. (1962). Discov- Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R.,
ery or Invention. The Science Teacher, (Eds). (1999). How People Learn: Brain,
29(2), 121-143. Mind, Experience, and School. Washington,
Atwater, B. F. (1987). Evidence for Great DC: National Academy Press.
Holocene Earthquakes Along the Outer Bredderman, T. (1982). Elementary School
Coast of Washington State. Science, 236, Science Process Programs: A Meta-analysis
942-944. of Evaluation Studies. (Final Report of
NSF-RISE Grant SED 18717).
REFERENCES 153

Bruer, J. T. (1993). Schools for Thought. Delpit, L. (1995). Other People’s Children:
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Cultural Conflict in the Classroom. New
Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving Scientific York: W.W. Norton.
Literary: From Purposes to Practices. Dewey, J. [1933 (1910)]. How We Think.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Bybee, R. W., & DeBoer, G. (1993). Goals Donovan, M. S., Bransford, J. D., &
for the Science Curriculum. In Handbook Pellegrino, J. W. (Eds). (1999). How
of Research on Science Teaching and People Learn: Bridging Research and
Learning. Washington, DC: National Practice. Washington, DC: National
Science Teachers Association. Academy Press.
Byrnes, J. P. (1996). Cognitive Development Driver, R., Guesni, E., & Tiberghiem, A.
and Learning in Instructional Contexts. (1985). Children’s Ideas in Science.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Calhoun, E. F. (1994). How to Use Action Driver, R., Squires, A., Duck, P., & Wood-
Research in the Self-Renewing School. Robinson, V. (1994). Making Sense of
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervi- Secondary Sciences: Research into
sion and Curriculum Development. Children’s Ideas. London: Routledge.
Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., & Franke, M. Duckworth, E. (1987). The Having of
(1996). Cognitively Guided Instruction: A Wonderful Ideas and Other Essays on
Knowledge Base for Reform in Primary Teaching and Learning. New York:
Mathematics Instruction. Elementary Teachers College Press, Columbia
School Journal, 97(1), 3-20. University.
Champagne, A. B., Kouba, V. L., & Hurley, M. Duschl, R. A. (1992). Teaching of Theory: A
(In press). Assessing Inquiry. Albany, NY: Guiding Concept in Science Education.
State University of New York. Chapter IX in Teaching About the History
Cochran, K. F. (1992) Pedagogical content and Nature of Science and Technology:
knowledge: Teachers’ Transformations of Background Papers. Colorado Springs:
Subject Matter. In F. Lawrenz, K. Cochran, Biological Sciences Curriculum Study
J. Krajcik, & P. Simpson (Eds), Research (BSCS).
Matters…To the Science Teacher. Mono- Duschl, R. A., & Gitomer, D. H. (1991).
graph Number Five of the National Epistemological Perspectives on Concep-
Association of Research in Science tual Change: Implications for Educational
Teaching. Practice. Journal of Research in Science
Council of Chief State School Officers. Teaching, 28(9), 839-858.
(1999). Guide to Scoring LEP Student Duschl, R. A., & Gitomer, D. H. (1997).
Responses to Open-Ended Science Items. Strategies and Challenges to Changing the
Washington, DC: SCASS LEP Consortium Focus of Assessment and Instruction in
Project, CCSSO. Science Classrooms. Educational Assess-
Daro, P. (1996). Standards and Portfolio ment, 4(1), 37-73.
Assessment . In J. B. Baron & D. P. Wolf Flick, L. B. (1995). Complex Classrooms: A
(Eds), Performance-Based Student Assess- Synthesis of Research on Inquiry Teaching
ment: Challenges and Possibilities (pp. 239- Methods and Explicit Teaching Strategies.
260). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Paper presented at the annual meeting of
Press. the National Association of Research in
De Jong, T., & Van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Science Teaching, San Francisco (ED 383
Scientific Discovery Learning with 563).
Computer Simulations of Conceptual Fradd, S. H., & Lee, O. (1999). Teachers’
Domains. Review of Educational Research, Roles in Promoting Science Inquiry with
68(2), 179-201. Students from Diverse Language Back-
DeBoer, G. E. (1991). A History of Ideas in grounds. Educational Researcher, 28(6),
Science Education: Implications for 14-42.
Practice. New York: Teachers College Fullan, M. G. (1993). Change Forces:
Press, Columbia University. Probing the Depths of Education Reform.
New York: The Falmer Press.

Fullan, M. G. (1991). The New Meaning of Hiebert, J. (1999). Relationship Between

Educational Change. New York: Teachers Research and the NCTM Standards.
College Press. Journal for Research in Mathematics
Gallas, K. (1995). Talking Their Way Into Education, 30(1), 3-19.
Science: Hearing Children’s Questions and Holly, P. (1991). Action Research: The
Theories, Responding with Curricula. New Missing Link in the Creation of Schools as
York: Teachers College Press. Centers of Inquiry. In A. Lieberman & L.
Gitomer, D. H., & Duschl, R. A. (1995). Miller (Eds), Staff Development for
Moving Toward a Portfolio Culture in Education in the ’90s: New Demands, New
Science Education. In M. S. Glynn & R. Realities, New Perspectives (pp. 133-157).
Duit (Eds), Learning Science in the Schools: New York: Teachers College Press.
Research Reforming Practice (pp. 299-325). Hord, S. M., Rutherford, W. L., Huling-
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Austin, L., & Hall, G. E. (1987). Taking
Glaser, R. (1992). Expert Knowledge and Charge of Change. Alexandria, VA:
Process of Thinking. In D. F. Halpern Association for Supervision and Curricu-
(Ed), Enhancing Thinking Skills in Science lum Development.
and Mathematics (pp. 63-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Huberman, A. M. & Miles, M. B. (1984).
Erlbaum. Innovation Up Close: How School Improve-
Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff Development and ment Works. New York: Plenum.
the Process of Teacher Change. Educa- Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific Literacy: New
tional Researcher, 15(5), 5-12. Minds for a Changing World. Science
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in Education, 82, 407-416.
Schools: Facilitating the Process. Albany: Joyce, B. (Ed). (1990). Changing School
State University of New York Press. Culture Through Staff Development, 1990
Harms, N., & Kahl, S. (1980). Project Yearbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Synthesis: Final Report to The National Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Science Foundation. Boulder, CO: Univer- Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W.,
sity of Colorado. & Soloway, E. (1994). A Collaborative
Harms, N., & Yager, R. E. (1981). What Model for Helping Middle Grade Science
Research Says to the Science Teacher, Vol. Teachers Learn Project-based Instruction.
3. Washington, DC: National Science The Elementary School Journal, 94(5),
Teachers Association. 483-497.
Hashweh, M. Z. (1987) Effects of Subject Ladewski, B. J., Krajcik, J. S., & Harvey, C. L.
Matter Knowledge in the Teaching of (1994). A Middle Grade Science Teacher’s
Biology and Physics. Teaching and Emerging Understanding of Project-based
Teacher Education, 3, 109-120. Instruction. The Elementary School
Haury, D. L. (1993). Teaching Science Journal, 94(5), 499-515.
Through Inquiry. ERIC CSMEE Digest Layman, J. W., Ochoa, G., & Heikkinen, H.
(March Ed 359 048). (1996). Inquiry and Learning: Realizing
Herbart, J. (1901). Outlines of Education Science Standards in the Classroom. New
Doctrine, C. DeGarmo (Trans); A. Lange York: College Entrance Examination
(Ed). New York: Macmillan. Board.
Hewson, P. W., & Thorley, N. R. (1989). The Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (Eds). (1991).
Conditions of Conceptual Change in the Staff Development for Education in the ’90s:
Classroom. International Journal of New Demands, New Realities, New
Science Education, 11(5), 541-553. Perspectives (2nd ed.). New York: Teach-
Heywood, J., & Heywood, S. (1992). The ers College Press.
Training of Student-Teachers in Discovery Linn, M. C., Clement, C., Pulos, S., &
Methods of Instruction and Learning. (No. Sullivan, P. (1989). Scientific Reasoning in
1/92) ED 358 034. Dublin, Ireland: Adolescence: The Influence of Instruction
Department of Teacher Education, The in Science Knowledge and Reasoning
University of Dublin. Strategies. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 26(2), 171-187.
REFERENCES 155

Little, J. W. (1993). Teachers’ Professional Minstrell, J. (1982). Explaining the At-Rest

Development in a Climate of Educational Condition of an Object. The Physics
Reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Teacher, 20, 10.
Analysis, 15, 129-151. Minstrell, J. (1989). Teaching Science
Lloyd, C. V. (1988). The Relationship for Understanding. In L. B. Resnick &
Between Scientific Literacy and High School L. E. Klopfer (Eds), Toward the Thinking
Biology Textbooks. Paper presented at the Curriculum: Current Cognitive Research
annual meeting of the National Reading (pp. 129-149). Alexandria, VA:
Conference, Austin, TX. Association for Supervision and Curricu-
Lott, G. W. (1983). The Effect of Inquiry lum Development.
Teaching and Advance Organizers upon Minstrell, J. (1992). Facets of Students’
Student Outcomes in Science Education. Knowledge and Relevant Instruction. In R.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds),
20(5), 437-451. Proceedings of the International Workshop
Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., on Research in Physics Education: Theoreti-
& Stiles, K. E. (1998). Designing Profes- cal Issues and Empirical Studies (pp. 110-
sional Development for Teachers of Science 128). Kiel, Germany: Instituit fur die
and Mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Padagogik de Naturiwissenshaften.
Corwin Press, Inc. Narode, R. (1987). Teaching Thinking Skills.
Malley, M. (1992). The Nature and History NEA Professional Library. Washington,
of Science. Chapter V in Teaching About DC: National Education Association.
the History and Nature of Science and National Commission for Teaching &
Technology: Background Papers (pp. 67-80). America’s Future. (1996). What Matters
Colorado Springs: Biological Sciences Most: Teaching for America’s Future. New
Curriculum Study (BSCS). York: Author.
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., National Research Council. (1990). Fulfilling
Blunk, M., Crawford, B. Kelley, B., & the Promise: Biology Education in the
Meyer, K. M. (1994). Enacting Project- Nation’s Schools. Washington, DC:
Based Science: Experiences of Four National Academy Press.
Middle Grade Teachers. The Elementary National Research Council. (1996). The
School Journal, 94(5), 517-538. National Science Education Standards.
Mayer, W. (1978). Biology Teacher’s Hand- Washington DC: National Academy Press.
book (3rd ed.). Colorado Springs: Biologi- National Research Council. (1997). Science
cal Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS). Teaching Reconsidered. A Handbook.
McDermott, L. C., & the Physics Education Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Group at the University of Washington. National Research Council. (1999a).
(1996). Physics by Inquiry (Volumes I & II). Designing Mathematics and Science
New York: John Wiley. Curriculum Programs: A Guide for Using
McDermott, L. C., & Redish, E. F. (1999). Mathematics and Science Education
Resource Letter: PER-1: Physics Educa- Standards. Washington, DC: National
tion Research. American Journal of Physics Academy Press.
67(10), 755-767. National Research Council. (1999b).
Mechling, K. R., & Oliver, D. L. (1983). Selecting Instructional Materials: A Guide
Promoting Science Among Elementary for K-12 Science. Washington, DC:
School Principals. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Science Teachers Association. Neill, D. M., & Medina, N. J. (1989).
Millar, R., & Driver, R. (1987). Beyond Standardized Testing: Harmful to Educa-
Process. Studies in Science Education, 14, tional Health. Phi Delta Kappan 70(9),
33-62. 688-697.
Miller, D. M., & Pine, G. J. (1990). Advanc- Nelson, A. R., Atwater, B. F., Bobrowsky, P. T.,
ing Professional Inquiry for Educational Bradley, L. A., Clague, J. J., Carver, G. A.,
Improvement Through Action Research. Darienzo, M. E., Grant, W. C., Krueger,
Journal of Staff Development, 11(3), 56-61. H. W., Sparks, R., Stafford, T. W., & Stuiver,

M. (1995). Radiocarbon Evidence for Sciences, 2(1), 61-94.

Extensive Plate-boundary Rupture about Rowe, M. B. (1991). Implications of the New
300 Years Ago at the Cascadia Subduction Science Curricula. In S. M. Malcom & G.
Zone. Nature, 378, 371-374. Kulum (Eds), Science Assessment in the
New Standards Project. (1997). New Service of Reform. Washington, DC:
Standards Performance Standards. American Association for the Advancement
Washington, DC: National Center on of Science (now published by Lawrence
Education and the Economy. Erlbaum).
Novak, J. D. (1987). Proceedings of the Rowe, M. B. (1974). Wait Time and Rewards
Second International Seminar: Misconcep- as Instructional Variables, Their Influence
tions and Educational Strategies in Science on Language, Logic, and Fate Control:
and Mathematics (Volumes I-III) . Ithaca, Part One - Wait Time. Journal of Research
NY: Cornell University. in Science Teaching, 11, 81-94.
O’Day, J., & Smith, M. (1993). Systemic Satake, K., Shimazaki, K., Tsuji, Y., & Ueda,
Reform and Educational Opportunity. In S. K. (1996). Time and Size of a Giant
H. Fuhrman (Ed), Designing Coherent Earthquake in Cascadia Inferred from
Education Policy: Improving the System Japanese Tsunami Record of January 1700.
(pp. 312-322). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Nature, 379, 246-249.
Piaget, J. (1975). The Development of Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S.
Thought. New York: Viking Press. A. (1997). Splintered Vision: An Investiga-
Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The tion of U.S. Science and Mathematics
Psychology of the Child. New York: Basic Education. Boston: Kluwer Academic
Books. Publishers.
Prather, J. P. (1996). The Role of the School Schwab, J. (1960). What Do Scientists Do?
Principal in Science Education Reform. In Behavioral Science, 5(1).
J. Rhoton & P. Bowers (Eds), Issues in Schwab, J. (1966). The Teaching of Science.
Science Education. Arlington, VA: Na- Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
tional Science Teachers Association and Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M.A., Bakken, J.
National Science Education Leadership P., & Brigham, F. J. (1993). Reading
Association. Versus Doing: The Relative Effects of
Project Kaleidoscope. (1991). What Works: Textbook-based and Inquiry-oriented
Building National Science Communities, Approaches to Science Learning in Special
Strengthening Undergraduate Science and Education Classrooms. The Journal of
Mathematics. Washington, DC: Author. Special Education, 27(1), 1-15.
Raizen, S. A., & Kaser, J. S. (1989). Assess- Secules, T., Cottom, C. D., Bray, M. H.,
ing Science Learning in Elementary Miller, L. D., & The Cognition and
School: Why, What, and How? Phi Delta Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997).
Kappan, 70(9), 718-722. Schools for Thought: Creating Learning
Resnick, L. B., Bill, V. L., Lesgold, S. B., & Communities. Educational Leadership,
Leer, M. N. (1991). Thinking in Arith- 54(6), 56-60.
metic Class. In B. Means, C. Chelemer, & Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those Who Under-
M. S. Knapp (Eds), Teaching Advanced stand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching.
Skills to At Risk Students (pp. 27-53). San Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Shymansky, J. A., Hedges, L. V., &
Roberts, L., Wilson, M., & Draney, K. Woodworth, G. (1990). A Reassessment of
(1997). The SEPUP Assessment System: the Effects of Inquiry-based Science
An Overview. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Curriculum of the ’60s on Student Perfor-
Evaluation and Assessment Research mance. Journal of Research in Science
Center. Teaching, 27, 127-144.
Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Conant, F. R. Shymansky, J. A., Kyle, W. C., & Alport, J. M.
(1992). Appropriating Scientific Discourse: (1983). The Effects of New Science
Findings from Language Minority Class- Curricula on Student Performance.
rooms. The Journal of the Learning Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
20(5), 387-404.
REFERENCES 157

Songer, N. B., & Linn, M. C. (1991). How Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
Do Students’ Views of Science Influence 19(6), 511-522.
Knowledge Integration? Journal of Weiss, I. R. (1978). Report of the 1977
Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), National Survey of Science, Mathematics,
761-784. and Social Studies Education. Washington,
Stake, R. E., & Easley, J. A. (1978). Case DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Studies in Science Education. Urbana, IL: Weiss, I. R. (1987). Report of the 1985-1986
Center for Institutional Research and National Survey of Science and Mathemat-
Curriculum Evaluation, University of ics Education. Research Triangle Park,
Illinois. NC: Research Triangle Institute.
Stigler, J. W., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998).
Knoll, S., & Serrano, A. (1999). The Inquiry, Modeling and Metacognition:
TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study. Making Science Accessible to All Students.
Methods and Findings from an Exploratory Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3-118.
Research Project on Eighth-Grade Math- White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (In press).
ematics Instruction in Germany, Japan, and Metacognitive Facilitation: An Approach to
the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Making Scientific Inquiry Accessible to All.
Government Printing Office. In J. Minstrell & E. Van Zee (Eds),
Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J. J., & Novak, Teaching in the Inquiry-Based Science
J. D. (1994). Research on Alternative Classroom. Washington, DC: American
Conceptions in Science. In D. L. Gabel Association for the Advancement of
(Ed), Handbook of Research on Science Science.
Teaching and Learning (pp. 177-210). New Wise, K. C., & Okey, J. R. (1983). A Meta-
York: Macmillan. analysis of the Effects of Various Science
Weinstein, T., Boulanger, F. D., & Walberg, H. Teaching Strategies on Achievement.
J. (1982). Science Curriculum Effects in Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
High School: A Quantitative Synthesis. 20(5), 419-435.

Appendixes


Appendix A
Excerpts from the
National Science Education
Standards
APPENDIX A-1
FUNDAMENTAL ABILITIES OF INQUIRY:
GRADES K-4
Ability Elaboration
• Ask a question about objects, This aspect of the standard emphasizes

organisms, and events in the students asking questions that they
environment. can answer with scientific knowledge,
combined with their own observations.
Students should answer their questions
by seeking information from reliable
sources of scientific information and
from their own observations and
investigations.
• Plan and conduct a simple In the earliest years, investigations are

investigation. largely based on systematic observations.
As students develop, they may design and
conduct simple experiments to answer
questions. The idea of a fair test is
possible for many students to consider by
fourth grade.
APPENDIX A 161

Ability Elaboration
• Employ simple equipment and In early years, students develop simple

tools to gather data and extend skills, such as how to observe, measure,
to the senses. cut, connect, switch, turn on and off,
pour, hold, tie, and hook. Beginning with
simple instruments, students can use
rulers to measure the length, height, and
depth of objects and materials; thermom-
eters to measure temperature; watches to
measure time; beam balances and spring
scales to measure weight and force;
magnifiers to observe objects and organ-
isms; and microscopes to observe the
finer details of plants, animals, rocks,
and other materials. Children also
develop skills in the use of computers and
calculators for conducting investigations.
• Use data to construct a This aspect of the standard emphasizes

reasonable explanation. the students’ thinking as they use data to
formulate explanations.
Even at the earliest grade levels,
students should learn what constitutes
evidence and judge the merits or strength
of the data and information that will
be used to make explanations. After
students propose an explanation, they will
appeal to the knowledge and evidence
they obtained to support their explana-
tions. Students should check their expla-
nations against scientific knowledge,
experiences, and observations of others.
• Communicate investigations Students should begin developing the

and explanations. abilities to communicate, critique, and
analyze their work and the work of other
students. This communication might be
spoken or drawn as well as written.


GRADES 5-8
Ability Elaboration
• Identify questions that can be Students should develop the ability to

answered through scientific refine and refocus broad and ill-defined
investigations. questions. An important aspect of this
ability consists of students’ ability to
clarify questions and inquiries and direct
them toward objects and phenomena that
can be described, explained, or predicted
by scientific investigations. Students
should develop the ability to identify their
questions with scientific ideas, concepts,
and quantitative relationships that guide
investigation.
• Design and conduct a scientific Students should develop general abilities,

investigation. such as systematic observation, making
accurate measurements, and identifying
and controlling variables. They should
also develop the ability to clarify their
ideas that are influencing and guiding the
inquiry, and to understand how those
ideas compare with current scientific
knowledge. Students can learn to formu-
late questions, design investigations,
execute investigations, interpret data, use
evidence to generate explanations,
propose alternative explanations, and
critique explanations and procedures.
APPENDIX A 163

Ability Elaboration
• Use appropriate tools and The use of tools and techniques, includ-
techniques to gather, analyze, ing mathematics, will be guided by the
and interpret data. question asked and the investigations
students design. The use of computers for
the collection, summary, and display of
evidence is part of this standard. Students
should be able to access, gather, store,
retrieve, and organize data, using hard-
ware and software designed for these
purposes.
• Develop descriptions, Students should base their explanation on

explanations, predictions, and what they observed, and as they develop
models using evidence. cognitive skills, they should be able to
differentiate explanation from description
— providing causes for effects and
establishing relationships based on
evidence and logical argument. This
standard requires a subject matter
knowledge base so the students can
effectively conduct investigations,
because developing explanations estab-
lishes connections between the content of
science and the contexts within which
students develop new knowledge.
• Think critically and logically to Thinking critically about evidence

make the relationships between includes deciding what evidence should
evidence and explanations. be used and accounting for anomalous
data. Specifically, students should be able
to review data from a simple experiment,
summarize the data, and form a logical
argument about the cause-and-effect
relationships in the experiment. Students
should begin to state some explanations
in terms of the relationship between two
or more variables.

Ability Elaboration
· Recognize and analyze alternative Students should develop the ability to

explanations and predictions. listen to and respect the explanations
proposed by other students. They should
remain open to and acknowledge differ-
ent ideas and explanations, be able to
accept the skepticism of others, and
consider alternative explanations.
• Communicate scientific With practice, students should become

procedures and explanations. competent at communicating experimen-
tal methods, following instructions,
describing observations, summarizing
the results of other groups, and telling
other students about investigations and
explanations.
• Use mathematics in all aspects Mathematics is essential to asking and

of scientific inquiry. answering questions about the natural
world. Mathematics can be used to ask
questions; to gather, organize, and
present data; and to structure convincing
explanations.

GRADES 9-12
Ability Elaboration
• Identify questions and concepts Students should formulate a testable

that guide scientific investigations. hypothesis and demonstrate the logical
connections between the scientific
concepts guiding a hypothesis and the
design of an experiment. They should
demonstrate appropriate procedures, a
knowledge base, and conceptual under-
standing of scientific investigations.
APPENDIX A 165

Ability Elaboration
• Design and conduct Designing and conducting a scientific

scientific investigations. investigation requires introduction to the
major concepts in the area being investi-
gated, proper equipment, safety precau-
tions, assistance with methodological
problems, recommendations for use of
technologies, clarification of ideas that
guide the inquiry, and scientific knowl-
edge obtained from sources other than
the actual investigation. The investigation
may also require student clarification of
the question, method, controls, and
variables; student organization and
display of data; student revision of
methods and explanations; and a public
presentation of the results with a critical
response from peers. Regardless of the
scientific investigation performed,
students must use evidence, apply logic,
and construct an argument for their
proposed explanations.
• Use technology and mathematics A variety of technologies, such as hand

to improve investigations and tools, measuring instruments, and calcu-
communications. lators, should be an integral component
of scientific investigations. The use of
computers for the collection, analysis,
and display of data is also a part of this
standard. Mathematics plays an essential
role in all aspects of an inquiry. For
example, measurement is used for
posing questions, formulas are used for
developing explanations, and charts and
graphs are used for communicating
results.

Ability Elaboration
• Formulate and revise scientific Student inquiries should culminate in

explanations and models using formulating an explanation or model.
logic and evidence. Models should be physical, conceptual,
and mathematical. In the process of
answering the questions, the students
should engage in discussions and
arguments that result in the revision
of their explanations. These discussions
should be based on scientific knowledge,
the use of logic, and evidence from their
investigation.
• Recognize and analyze This aspect of the standard emphasizes

alternative explanations and the critical abilities of analyzing an
models. argument by reviewing current scientific
understanding, weighing the evidence,
and examining the logic so as to decide
which explanations and models are best.
In other words, although there may be
several plausible explanations, they do
not all have equal weight. Students should
be able to use scientific criteria to find
the preferred explanations.
• Communicate and defend a Students in school science programs

scientific argument. should develop the abilities associated
with accurate and effective communica-
tion. These include writing and following
procedures, expressing concepts,
reviewing information, summarizing data,
using language appropriately, developing
diagrams and charts, explaining statistical
analysis, speaking clearly and logically,
constructing a reasoned argument, and
responding appropriately to critical
comments.
APPENDIX A 167

APPENDIX A-2
FUNDAMENTAL UNDERSTANDINGS OF INQUIRY
GRADES K-4
Understanding Elaboration
• Scientific investigations involve

asking and answering a question
and comparing the answer with
what scientists already know
about the world.
• Scientists use different kinds of Types of investigations include describing

investigations depending on the objects, events, and organisms; classify-
questions they are trying to ing them; and doing a fair test
answer. (experimenting).
• Simple instruments, such as

magnifiers, thermometers, and
rulers, provide more information
than scientists obtain using only
their senses.
• Scientists develop explanations Good explanations are based on evidence

using observations (evidence) from investigations.
and what they already know about
the world (scientific knowledge).
• Scientists make the results of their

investigations public; they describe
the investigations in ways that
enable others to repeat the investigations.
• Scientists review and ask questions

about the results of other scientists’
work.

FUNDAMENTAL UNDERSTANDINGS OF INQUIRY:

GRADES 5-8
• Different kinds of questions Some investigations involve observing

suggest different kinds of and describing objects, organisms, or
scientific investigations. events; some involve collecting speci-
mens; some involve experiments; some
involve seeking more information; some
involve discovery of new objects and
phenomena; and some involve making
models.
• Current scientific knowledge and Different scientific domains employ

understanding guide scientific different methods, core theories, and
investigations. standards to advance scientific knowledge
and understanding.
• Mathematics is important in all

aspects of scientific inquiry.
• Technology used to gather data

enhances accuracy and allows
scientists to analyze and quantify
results of investigations.
• Scientific explanations emphasize The scientific community accepts and

evidence, have logically consistent uses such explanations until displaced by
arguments, and use scientific better scientific ones. When such
principles, models, and theories. displacement occurs, science advances.
APPENDIX A 169

• Science advances through Asking questions and querying other

legitimate skepticism. scientists’ explanations is part of scientific
inquiry. Scientists evaluate the explana-
tions proposed by other scientists by
examining evidence, comparing evidence,
identifying faulty reasoning, pointing out
statements that go beyond the evidence,
and suggesting alternative explanations
for the same observations.
• Scientific investigations some- All of these results can lead to new

times result in new ideas and investigations.
phenomena for study, generate
new methods or procedures for
an investigation, or develop
new technologies to improve
the collection of data.
FUNDAMENTAL UNDERSTANDINGS OF INQUIRY:

GRADES 9-12
• Scientists usually inquire about Conceptual principles and knowledge

how physical, living, or designed guide scientific inquiries. Historical and
systems function. current scientific knowledge influence the
design and interpretation of investigations
and the evaluation of proposed explana-
tions made by other scientists.
• Scientists conduct investigations For example, they may wish to discover

for a wide variety of reasons. new aspects of the natural world, explain
recently observed phenomena, or test the
conclusions of prior investigations or the
predictions of current theories.

• Scientists rely on technology to New techniques and tools provide new

enhance the gathering and evidence to guide inquiry and new
manipulation of data. methods to gather data, thereby contrib-
uting to the advance of science. The
accuracy and precision of the data, and
therefore the quality of the exploration,
depends on the technology used.
• Mathematics is essential in Mathematical tools and models guide and

scientific inquiry. improve the posing of questions, gather-
ing data, constructing explanations, and
communicating results.
• Scientific explanations must

adhere to criteria such as: a
proposed explanation must be
logically consistent; it must abide
by the rules of evidence; it must
be open to questions and possible
modification; and it must be based
on historical and current scientific
knowledge.
• Results of scientific inquiry — In communicating and defending the

new knowledge and methods — results of scientific inquiry, arguments
emerge from different types of must be logical and demonstrate connec-
investigations and public tions between natural phenomena,
communication among scientists. investigations, and the historical body of
scientific knowledge. In addition, the
methods and procedures that scientists
used to obtain evidence must be clearly
reported to enhance opportunities for
further investigation.
APPENDIX A 171


Appendix B
Selecting
Instructional Materials
Science teachers often ask about study the natural world and propose
instructional materials that will help explanations based on the evidence
them implement inquiry-based derived from their work” (p. 23). The
instructional strategies and provide Standards call for students to develop
students with opportunities to develop the abilities and understandings that
the abilities and understandings of will enable them to engage in this kind
scientific inquiry. This appendix is of activity. A key question when
intended to help identify and select selecting instructional materials is the
such instructional materials. It begins extent to which they support teachers
with a brief summary of the different in helping students achieve these
uses of the term “inquiry” presented goals.
early in this document, so that this 2. Inquiry-Based Teaching. The
section can stand alone and be shared Standards state that “inquiry into
with those responsible for selecting authentic questions generated from
instructional materials. student experiences is the central
strategy for teaching science.” How-
ever, the importance of inquiry “does
INQUIRY IN THE NATIONAL not imply that all teachers should
SCIENCE EDUCATION pursue a single approach to teaching
STANDARDS science.” Inquiry is a characteristic of
Inquiry is used several ways in the both a desired form of teaching and
Standards. particular kinds of classroom activi-
ties. It can be used to teach (1)
1. Scientific Inquiry. According to subject matter of physical, life, earth
the National Science Education and space sciences, (2) the nature of
Standards, “Scientific inquiry refers to the scientific enterprise (i.e., about
the diverse ways in which scientists scientific inquiry), and (3) the abilities
APPENDIX B 173

required to conduct scientific inquiry. a thoughtful and effective process.

Inquiry-based teaching is a means, not To be both usable and defensible,
an end. the selection criteria must be few in
3. Inquiry-Based Learning. In the number and embody the critical
Standards, inquiry also refers to tenets of accurate science content,
learning processes. It is an active effective teaching strategies, and
learning process — “something that appropriate assessment techniques.
students do, not something that is The process described in the
done to them” (p. 2). The Standards following pages can help teachers,
tie inquiry-based learning both to curriculum designers, or other person-
scientific inquiry and to studies of nel complete a thorough and accurate
human learning. evaluation of instructional materials.
To help make this examination both
Clearly there are connections thorough and usable, references to
among these uses of inquiry in the specific sections of the National
Standards. The task of selecting Science Education Standards are
instructional materials requires provided, as are worksheets to keep
consideration of all these ways of track of the information needed to
thinking about inquiry. analyze and select the best instruc-
The selection of instructional tional materials.
materials can be helped by standards- Selection of instructional materials
based thinking. Instead of asking, parallels a guided inquiry in many
“what standards will a particular set of respects. First, questions need to be
materials meet?” it is better to ask, “if I identified that will guide the analysis
want to accomplish a certain outcome, and eventually the selection. Such
what materials do I need?” questions include:
• Is “science as inquiry” evident as

ANALYZING INSTRUCTIONAL
content in the materials?
MATERIALS
• Is the presentation of inquiry as
The process of analyzing and content accurate?
selecting quality instructional • Is inquiry-based teaching evident
materials includes determining the in the materials?
degree to which they are consistent • Is there adequate time and oppor-
with the goals, principles, and tunity for students to develop the
criteria developed in the National abilities and understandings of scientific
Science Education Standards. Well- inquiry and an understanding of science
defined selection criteria help ensure subject matter concepts?

Second, an investigation of the • Analysis of inquir y-based

materials needs to be designed and teaching
conducted. The investigation requires • Analysis of assessment process
systematic observations, accurate and • Evaluation of teacher’s guide
consistent records, and clarification of • Analysis of materials use and
the questions that guide the process. management
Are the observations consistent
between different sets of materials? In this appendix, criteria for analy-
Were variables controlled, such as sis of instructional materials focus on
design and layout versus accurate their usefulness for classroom teach-
portrayal of inquiry? Were similar ers and their degree of alignment with
techniques used to review all materi- the Standards. A thorough analysis of
als? Are the same kinds of data instructional materials requires
collected for all materials? considerable time, collaboration, and
Third, recorded observations need attention to detail. Good working
to be used to develop summaries of notes are helpful in this process. For
the respective materials. These that purpose, analysis worksheets are
summaries should be based on what included at the end of this section.
was observed and should differentiate
among the materials.
Fourth, rational arguments need to OVERVIEW OF THE
be developed for the selection of INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
materials. The arguments should be (SEE WORKSHEET 1)
based on observations and address
A quick overview of the materials
alternatives and options.
precedes a more detailed examination.
Finally, the process and final
The first consideration is whether the
recommendation should be fully
materials emphasize the key ideas and
documented. This will be helpful for
abilities from the “Science as Inquiry”
final review by such decision-makers
standard. To help make this determi-
as administrators and school boards.
nation, look at the table of contents,
index, and glossary. Worksheet 1
ANALYSIS PROCEDURES contains terms related to science as
inquiry taken from the Standards.
The procedures outlined in this
These terms will give a preliminary
section include:
indication of coverage of these funda-
mental topics.
• Over view of instructional
Look through both student and
materials
teacher materials.
• Analysis of science as inquiry
APPENDIX B 175

• Are student outcomes listed? ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL

• Are some of these inquiry MATERIALS FOR INQUIRY AS
outcomes? CONTENT (SEE WORKSHEET 2)
Look for evidence in discussions in

Look for student investigations or
the text and in the student investiga-
activities.
tions of whether and how the funda-
mental abilities and understanding are
• Where are they located? Note
addressed. (See Chapter 2 and
that in some materials, student investi-
Appendix A in this book, refer to a
gations are integrated within the
print copy of the National Science
reading material. In others, they are
Education Standards, or access the
located in a separate section —
Standards through the World Wide
sometimes at the back of a chapter or
Web at www.nap.edu/readingroom/
book or in a separate laboratory
books/nses.) Examine several
manual.
lessons in the student and teacher
• Do they come after teacher
materials. To what degree do the
explanations or lectures, or after
lessons provide students the opportu-
students have read in their books? Or
nity to develop the abilities and
are they used to engage students in
understandings of scientific inquiry?
exploring new ideas before explana-
Read through the text narrative,
tions are suggested?
looking for student investigations and
examining any suggestions for activi-
Read several relevant paragraphs of
ties outside of class time. Consider:
student text material.
• Are opportunities provided for

• What is your judgment about the
students to develop abilities of
presentation of scientific inquiry?
scientific inquir y such as posing
• Are the concepts in the students’
their own questions, designing their
text consistent with the fundamental
own investigations, using appropri-
concepts and abilities in the Stan-
ate tools and techniques to gather
dards?
data, using evidence to communicate
• Does the text include more,
defensible explanations of cause and
fewer, or different concepts?
effect relationships, or using scien-
• Do the photographs and illustra-
tific criteria to analyze alternative
tions provide further understanding of
explanations to determine a pre-
science as inquiry?
ferred explanation?

• What opportunities are provided should be consistent with contempo-

for students to develop a fundamental rary models of learning. The criteria
understanding of scientific inquiry? in this section are based on character-
istics of effective teaching proposed in
In addition to the language of the Teaching Standards A, B, and E:
text, examine the teacher’s guide for
ways to discuss the role and limita- • Teaching Standard A — Teach-
tions of scientific skills such as makers of science plan an inquiry-based
ing observations, organizing and science program for their students.
interpreting data, and constructing • Teaching Standard B — Teach-
defensible explanation based on ers of science guide and facilitate
evidence. learning.
• Teaching Standard E — Teach-
• Is there a discussion of how ers of science develop communities of
science advances through legitimate science learners that reflect the
skepticism? intellectual rigor of scientific inquiry
• Is there a discussion of how and the attitudes and social values
scientists evaluate explanations of conducive to science learning.
others by examining and comparing
evidence, identifying reasoning that Using the following sequence of
goes beyond the evidence, and sug- questions, examine several lessons in
gesting alternative explanations for the student materials and the teacher’s
the same evidence? guide.
• Are there opportunities for
students to demonstrate these same • Do the materials identify specific
understandings as a part of their learning goals and outcomes for
investigations? students that focus on one or more of
the fundamental abilities and under-
standings of Science As Inquiry?
ANALYSIS OF PEDAGOGY
• Study the opening pages of a
(SEE WORKSHEET 3)
relevant chapter or section. Does the
What students learn about inquiry material on these pages engage and
and the abilities they develop depends focus student thinking on interesting
on many things, including the accu- questions, problems, or relevant
racy and developmental appropriate- issues?
ness of content and its congruence • Does the material provide a
with the full intent of the content sequence of learning activities con-
standards. Opportunities to learn nected in such a way as to help stu-
dents build abilities of inquiry and
APPENDIX B 177

fundamental understandings about different situations? For example, are

inquiry or a subject matter concept? the students asked to explain new
• Do the activities incorporate all situations with concepts they have
five essential features of classroom learned? Are they asked to design
inquiry described in Chapter 2? Are investigations into questions they have
suggestions provided to help the not yet addressed?
teacher keep students focused on the • Are assessment tasks fair for all
purpose of the lesson? students? For example, does success
• Does the teacher’s guide present on assessment tasks depend too
common student difficulties in devel- heavily on the student’s ability to read
oping inquiry abilities and understand- complex items or write explanations,
ings? Does it suggest possible alterna- as opposed to understanding the
tive conceptions or misconceptions fundamental concepts or being able to
students may have and how to address think scientifically?
them? Are suggestions provided for • Are suggestions for scoring
teachers to find out what their student criteria or rubrics provided for the
already know and can do? Are there teacher?
learning activities designed to help
students identify what they know and
EVALUATING THE TEACHER’S
build new concepts and abilities?
GUIDE (SEE WORKSHEET 5)
Examine several lessons in the

ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT
teacher’s guide to help answer the
PROCESS (SEE WORKSHEET 4)
following questions:
Assessment criteria in this section
are grounded in the Assessment • Does the teacher’s guide present
Standards A to E. Examine several appropriate and sufficient background
lessons in the student and teacher in science?
materials for evidence to answer the • Are the suggested teaching
following questions: strategies usable by most teachers?
• Are suggestions provided for pre-
• Is there consistency between and post-investigation discussions
learning goals and assessment? For focusing on subject matter concept
example, if instruction focuses on development, inquiry abilities, and
building and understanding fundamen- inquiry understandings?
tal concepts, do assessments focus on • Does the teacher’s guide recom-
explanations and not on vocabulary? mend additional professional develop-
• Do assessments stress applica- ment?
tion of abilities and concepts to new or • Does the teacher’s guide indicate

the types of support teachers will need materials must be managed and
for the instructional materials? orchestrated during a typical chapter,
unit, or teaching sequence (e.g.,
student text, teacher’s guide, transpar-
ANALYSIS OF MATERIALS USE
encies, handouts, videos, and
AND MANAGEMENT (SEE
software)?
WORKSHEET 6)
• Does the teacher’s guide contain
A high degree of alignment of the suggestions for effectively managing
content, pedagogy, and assessment materials?
criteria described in the Standards • Do the instructional materials
does not necessarily guarantee that call for equipment, supplies, and
instructional materials will be easy to technology that teachers may not
manage. The Standards address the have?
importance of professional develop- • Do the instructional materials
ment, and some aspects of the pro- identify safety issues and provide
gram standards apply as well. It is adequate precautions?
useful to ask: • Is the cost for the materials and
replacements reasonable? Are there
• How many different types of special requirements?
APPENDIX B 179

WORKSHEET 1:
OVERVIEW OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
1. Terms Location(s) Page(s)
scientific questions __________ _______

investigation __________ _______
variables __________ _______
communication __________ _______
observation __________ _______
critical thinking __________ _______
logic __________ _______
reasoning __________ _______
experiments __________ _______
evidence __________ _______
explanations __________ _______
models __________ _______
theory __________ _______
skepticism __________ _______
Comments on breadth and depth of coverage:
2. Statements of expected student

outcomes or inquiry abilities and
understandings
Examples: Location Page(s)
a. _______________________________ __________ _______
b. _______________________________ __________ _______

WORKSHEET 1 (CONTINUED)
3. Student investigations/activities Location Page(s)
Titles of example investigations/activities:
a. _______________________________ __________ _______
b. _______________________________ __________ _______
c. _______________________________ __________ _______
Comments:
4. Presentation of concepts and abilities Location Page(s)
Paragraph 1 __________ _______
Comments:
Paragraph 2 __________ _______
Comments:
Overall impression from the overview of the materials:
APPENDIX B 181

WORKSHEET 2:
ANALYSIS OF INQUIRY AS CONTENT
1. What opportunities are provided for students to develop abilities of scientific inquiry?
Cite specific examples: Page(s)
a. Pose relevant questions ______
b. Plan and conduct investigations ______
c. Use appropriate tools and techniques to gather data ______

d. Use evidence to communicate defensible explanations of
cause and effect ______
e. Use scientific criteria to analyze alternative explanations

and develop a preferred explanation ______
Comments:
2. Opportunities to develop understanding of scientific inquiry
Cite specific examples: Page(s)
a. Discussion of both roles and limitations of skills such as

organizing and interpreting data, constructing explanations ______
b. Discussion of how science advances through legitimate skepticism ______

Page(s)
c. Discussion of how scientists evaluate proposed explanations

of others by examining and comparing evidence, reasoning
that goes beyond the evidence, suggesting alternative
explanations for the same evidence ______
d. Opportunities for students to demonstrate these same

understandings as part of their investigations ______
Comments:
Estimate of alignment with National Science Education Standards Inquiry Standard:
Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Some [ ] Little [ ] None [ ]
Rationale for alignment estimate:
APPENDIX B 183

WORKSHEET 3:
ANALYSIS OF PEDAGOGY
Yes No
1. Do the materials identify specific learning goals and outcomes for
students that focus on one or more of the fundamental abilities
and understandings of inquiry? ____ ____
Comments:
2. Do the materials engage and focus student thinking on interesting

questions, problems, or relevant issues rather than opening
with statements of fact and vocabulary? ____ ____
Comments:
3. Do materials provide a sequence of learning activities connected

in such a way as to help students build abilities of inquiry,
understandings of inquiry, and/or fundamental science
subject matter concepts? ____ ____
Does the material provide specific means (e.g., connections

among activities, linkage between text and activities, building
from concrete to abstract, and embedded assessments) to
help the teacher keep students focused on the purpose
of the lesson? ____ ____
Comments:

Yes No
4. Are student subject matter learning goals reached through an

inquiry that contains all five essential features of classroom inquiry
learning (Table 2-5, p. 25)? ____ ____
Comments:
5. Does the teacher’s guide present common student difficulties in

learning inquiry abilities and understandings? ____ ____
Are suggestions provided to access prior abilities and

understandings of students? ____ ____
Comments:
Estimate of alignment with National Science Education Standards Teaching Standard:
APPENDIX B 185

WORKSHEET 4:
ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT PROCESS
Cite example or evidence of: Yes No
1. Consistency between learning goals and assessment ____ ____
2. Assessments stressing application of abilities and concepts to

new or different situations ____ ____
3. Fairness of assessment tasks for all students — for example,

task does not rely heavily upon the student’s ability to read
complex items or write explanations, as opposed to
demonstrating inquiry abilities of understanding fundamental
science subject matter concepts ____ ____
4. The inclusion of actual assessment instruments, scoring

criteria or rubrics, and specific suggestions provided
regarding their use ____ ____
Comments:
Estimate of alignment with National Science Education Standards Assessment Standard:

WORKSHOP 5:
EVALUATING THE TEACHER’S GUIDE
Yes No
1. Is appropriate and sufficient background in science presented? ____ ____
2. Are the suggested teaching strategies usable by most teachers? ____ ____
3. Are suggestions provided for pre- and post-investigation discussions

focusing on subject matter, concept development, inquiry abilities,
and inquiry understandings? ____ ____
4. Is additional professional development recommended? ____ ____
5. Are the types of support teachers will need for the instructional
materials indicated? ____ ____
Comments:
Estimate of usefulness of guide in overall instructional materials management:
Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Fair [ ] Poor [ ]
APPENDIX B 187

WORKSHEET 6:
ANALYSIS OF MATERIALS USE AND MANAGEMENT
1. How many different types of materials must be managed and

orchestrated during a typical chapter, unit, or teaching sequence
(e.g., student text, teacher’s guide, student materials,
transparencies, handouts, videos, software)?
Comments:
Yes No
2. Does the teacher’s guide contain suggestions for effectively
managing instructional materials? ____ ____
Comments:
3. Do instructional materials call for equipment, supplies, and

technology that teachers using these materials might not have? ____ ____
Comments:
4. Is the cost for the materials and replacements reasonable? ____ ____
Are there special requirements? ____ ____
Comments:
Estimate of use and management:
Easy [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Difficult [ ]
Rationale for overall estimate:

Appendix C
Resources for Teaching
Science Through Inquiry
The following list represents a Exploratorium Institute for Inquiry

sampling of the many resources http://www.exploratorium.edu/IFI/
available to help teachers and others resources/websites.html
use inquiry as a basis for teaching and
learning science. Whenever possible, The Science Learning Network
we have listed Web sites or materials http://www.sln.org/
that themselves contain lists of
resources. The reader is encouraged Project 2061
also to consult the References American Association for the Advance-
section in this publication for further ment of Science
information. http://www.project2061.org/
Science Education Projects Funded by

WEB SITES
the National Science Foundation
These Web sites contain references http://watt.enc.org/nsf.html
to a wide variety of resources, includ-
ing student curriculum materials, Professional Development Summer
bibliographies, and professional Opportunities for Teachers
development opportunities. NSF-Funded Projects
http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/ehr/esie/
Eisenhower National Clearinghouse teso/
The Ohio State University
http://www.enc.org/
APPENDIX C 189

BOOKS JOURNALS
Science for All Children: A Guide to The Science Teacher; Science and
Improving Elementary Education Children
in Your School District National Science Teachers Association
National Science Resources Center/ http://www.nsta.org/pubs/tst/
Smithsonian Institution
National Academy Press, Washington, Hands On!
DC: 1997. TERC, Inc.
http://www.nationalacademies.org/ http://www.terc.edu/handson/
publications/ handson.html
Inquiry: Thoughts, Views, and Strate- Journal of Research in Science

gies for the K-5 Classroom Teaching
Foundations, Volume 2 National Association for Research in
Division of Elementary, Secondary, Science Teaching
and Informal Education http://science.coe.uwf.edu/narst/
National Science Foundation, Arling- jrstinfo.htm
ton, VA: 1999.
ENC Focus, A Magazine for Classroom
Inquiry and Learning: Realizing Innovators
Science Standards in the Classroom Eisenhower National Clearinghouse
John W. Layman, George Ochoa, and for Mathematics and Science
Henry Heikkinen Education
The National Center for Cross Disci- http://www.enc.org/order/
plinary Teaching and Learning
College Entrance Examination Board, Connect
New York: 1996. Synergy Learning International, Inc.
http://www.synergylearning.org
Physics by Inquiry, Volumes I and II
Lillian C. McDermott and the Physics
RESOURCE GUIDES
Education Group, University of
Washington Resources for Teaching Elementary
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York: School Science
1996. National Science Resources Center/
Smithsonian Institution
National Academy Press, Washington,
DC: 1996.
http://www.nap.edu

Resources for Teaching Middle School Science K-6: Investigating Classrooms,

Science developed by WGBH Boston.
National Science Resources Center/ http://www.wgbh.org/wgbh/learn/
Smithsonian Institution scilib/aboutvid.html/
National Academy Press, Washington,
Teaching High School Science (avail-
DC: 1998.
able Fall 2000), developed by WGBH
http://www.nap.edu
Boston.
http://www.wgbh.org/wgbh/learn/
INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS THSS.html/
“Resource List: The ENC Collection” Visualizing Growth: Changing the Way
ENC Focus: A Magazine for Classroom We Teach Science, developed by
Innovators, vol. 6, no. 1, 1999, WNED, the Buffalo Museum of
pp. 39-62. Science, and the Buffalo Public
Eisenhower National Clearinghouse Schools.
for Mathematics and Science
Education Available from the New York State
http://www.enc.org/order/ Education Department (518-474-5862):
Just Think: Problem Solving through
VIDEO COLLECTIONS Inquiry.
Collections of videos (with guide- Available from Heinemann (800-541-

books) portraying inquiry-based 2086):
teaching and learning include: Sense Making in Science Video Series,
developed by TERC.
Available from the Annenberg/
Corporation for Public Broadcasting Available from the Mr. Wizard
(http://www.learner.org/): Institute (800-537-0008):
Private Universe Teacher Workshops, Teacher to Teacher with Mr. Wizard,
developed by The Harvard- developed by the Mr. Wizard
Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. Foundation.
Science Images, developed by the

North Central Regional Educational
Laboratory.
APPENDIX C 191


Index
A students, xii, 34, 95, 117-118

teachers, xii, 23, 88-90, 94, 95-98, 139, 140,
Administrators, xviii, 143, 144, 145-146, 147- 148, 151
149, 150, 152 see also Motivation
American Association for the Advancement
of Science, 14, 79
Assessment of learning, 75-85 B
assessment of students, general, 22, 122,
150 Beliefs, see Attitudes and beliefs
assessors of students, 22, 96-97, 105 Biological Sciences Curriculum Study, 17,
environments centered on, 122 124
formative, 76, 79, 80, 85
instructional materials assessment,
outcomes, 176, 177, 178 C
knowledge, 77-78
non-English/second-language English Case studies
students, 83-84, 150 teacher professional development, use in,
portfolios, 82, 84 104-105
promoting inquiry, 150 see also Vignettes
purposes of, 76 Cognitive abilities, 18, 66, 72, 144, 164
questions used in, 76, 79, 81, 82; see also research on, 116, 121-122
Tests and testing see also Logical thinking; Problem-
self-assessment by students, 48, 59, 80- solving; Skepticism; Transfer of
81, 119 learning
summative, 76-77, 83, 85 Communication skills, xii, 8, 14, 43, 161, 165,
teacher education on, 96-97 167, 171
of teachers, 22, 105, 144, 151-152 community-centered environments, 122-
teaching standards, 22 123
understanding, 77-78 content standards, 19, 20
vignettes, 40, 41-42, 46, 57, 58, 64-65, 78, K-4, 45-46, 103, 104, 161
79, 83 non-English/second-language English
see also Outcomes of learning; Research, students, 121-122, 125, 126, 133-134
educational assessment of, 83-84, 150
Attitudes and beliefs, 144, 145-146 parents, 144
instructional materials assessment, 177 promoting inquiry, 144, 145
research on, 117-118, 121, 139, 140 self-assessment and, 80, 81
scientific, general, 14
INDEX 193

teacher professional development, 103, E

104, 150
teaching standards, 25, 27, 29, 30 Earth and space science standard (Grades 5-
vignettes, 45-46, 59, 66, 69, 71-72, 103 8), 48, 58
vocabulary development, 68, 83, 125, 133- Educational research, see Research,
134, 138 educational
Computer-aided education, 164 Elementary education, see Kindergarten to
see also Internet Grade 4
Constructed-response items, 82 Elementary Science Study, 17
Content and content standards, 14, 18-21 English as a second language/non-English
equipment and supplies, 19, 20 speakers, 121-122, 125, 126, 133-134
grades 5 to 8, 19, 20, 48 assessment of, 83-84, 150
grades 9 to 12, 19, 20 Equipment and supplies, 43, 49-50, 162
instructional materials assessment, 176- content standards, 19, 20
177 instructional materials assessment, 179
investigations, 19, 20 teacher professional development, 90
K-4, 19, 20, 41 teaching standards, 22, 26
logical thinking, 19, 20 see also Instructional materials;
mathematics, 19, 20 Technology, use of
myths about inquiry-based learning, 36- Ethnic factors, see Minority cultures
37 Evaluation, see Assessment of students;
pedagogical, 102-104 Research, educational
skepticism, 20 Evidence-based explanations, 4, 8, 161, 164,
student-generated models, 19, 20 167, 168, 169, 171
teacher professional development, 88 assessment of, 79
teaching standards, 22 content standards, 19, 20, 21
technology, use of, 19, 20 historical perspectives, 16
vignettes, 41, 59, 60, 70 teaching standards, 25-27, 29, 33
Council of Chief State School Officers, 83-84 vignettes, 44, 47, 48, 49, 53-57, 58-59, 63,
Critical thinking, see Skepticism 64, 65, 66, 71, 72
Curriculum, 6, 35, 135-136 see also Experimentation; Investigations;
administrators’ role, 147 Models, student-generated;
assessment, 76 Observation skills
historical perspectives, 16-18, 33-34, 124- Experimentation, 14, 164
125 historical perspectives, 16-17, 18
research on, 124-125, 127 teacher professional development, 90, 112
student-initiated investigations, 132 teachers’ role, 16-17, 33
teacher education, 93, 105-109, 113, 151- Explanations, 7, 14, 35, 89, 164, 165, 167
152 alternative, 14, 16, 19, 21, 25, 27, 55, 56-
see also Models, instructional; Outcomes 57, 66, 71, 118, 127, 165, 167, 171,
of learning 176
assessment of, 78-79
content standards, 19, 20, 21
D instructional materials assessment, 176
teaching standards, 25, 27, 29
Dewey, John, 14, 16, 34 testing, 10
Diagrams and drawings, 81 vignettes, 45-46, 48, 55-57, 58, 65, 66, 71
instructional materials assessment, 176 see also Evidence-based explanations;
vignettes, 53, 54, 56, 57, 61-63, 72, 74 Models, student-generated;
Discipline, 136 Transfer of learning
teaching standards, 22
194 INDEX

F How People Learn, 116, 121

Hypotheses, see Explanations
Fact-based learning/memorization, xii, 14,
80, 116, 118, 127, 150
vocabulary development, 68, 83, 125, 133- I
134, 138
Feedback and revision Inference, see Logical thinking
student, 82, 84 Instructional materials, 15-16, 28, 138-139,
teacher professional development, 89 144, 148-149, 191
Field experiences, 66-73, 150 kit-based instruction, 36, 148-149
museums, 92, 99-101, 102, 121, 149 myths about, 36
teacher professional development, 92, 99- safety concerns, 179
101, 102, 111-112 selection, 137, 173-179
Formative assessments, 76, 79, 80, 85 teachers’ guides, 175, 177, 178-179, 190
see also Questions technology, use of, 179
Funding textbooks, 15, 16, 96, 140, 148
National Science Foundation, 124, 138- video tapes, 90, 105, 106-107, 191
139 vignettes, 39, 40, 44-45
study at hand, xix see also Equipment and supplies
Instruments, see Equipment and supplies
Intermediate Science Curriculum Study, 17
G Internet, 138, 176, 189-191
Investigations, 10, 13, 14, 161, 163, 165, 168,
Grades 5 to 8 169, 170, 171
content standards, 19, 20, 48 content standards, 19, 20
fundamental abilities, 163-165 frequently asked questions about inquiry,
fundamental understandings, 169-170 131-132
vignettes, 92, 99-101, 102, 111-112 instructional materials assessment, 176
Grades 9 to 12 student-initiated, 6-10, 131-132, 173, 176
community-centered environments, 123 teacher professional development, 89, 99-
content standards, 19, 20 100
fundamental abilities, 165-167 teaching standards, 22, 23
fundamental understandings, 170-171 vignettes, 7, 40, 44, 47, 51-54, 66, 69
vignettes, 60-73 see also Evidence-based explanations;
Experimentation; Vignettes
H
J
Hands-on instruction, general, 138
myths about, 36 Journals, student, 82
teacher education, 93, 106-109 vignettes, 67, 81
see also Experimentation; Investigations
Hebart, J., 33-34
High school, see Grades 9 to 12 K
Historical perspectives, 14-18, 144
content standards, 20 Kindergarten to Grade 4, 43, 190
curricula, 16-18, 33-34, 124-125 assessment of, 81
instructional models, 16-17, 33-34, 124- content standards, 19, 20, 41
125, 126 fundamental abilities, 161-162
myths about inquiry-based learning, 36- fundamental understandings, 168
37 instructional models, 34
research on inquiry, 17, 34, 124-125 teacher professional development, 95-105
as teaching tool, 56-57, 58, 59, 170 vignettes, 40-48, 95-105
INDEX 195

Kit-based instruction, 148-149 Motivation, xii, xiii

myths about, 36 student-initiated investigations, 6-10, 131-
132, 173, 176
vignettes, 65
L see also Attitudes and beliefs
Multiple-choice items, 82, 83
Laboratory experiments, see Museums, 92, 99-101, 102, 121, 149
Experimentation
Language skills, see Communication skills
Learning outcomes, see Outcomes of N
learning
Life-long learning, 87, 109-112 National Aeronautics and Space
Logical thinking, 14, 164, 165, 171 Administration, xix
content standards, 19, 20 National Science Education Standards, xii-
research on, 117, 125 xviii, 8, 10
teaching standards, 26, 29 classroom assessment, 75-85 (passim)
concepts vs principles, 132
content standards, 14, 18-21, 36-37, 48, 58,
M 60, 70
fundamental abilities of inquiry,
Mathematics, 139-140, 164, 165, 166, 169, 161-167
171 fundamental understandings of inquiry,
content standards, 19, 20 168-171, 177-178
national standards research, 127 instructional material selection, 173-187
teacher education, 94, 107 laboratory experiments, 18
vignettes, 46, 66 myths about, 35-37
Memory and memorization, 14, 80, 116, 118, nature of inquiry, 13-14
127, 150 process skills, 134
vocabulary development, 68, 83, 125, 133- promoting inquiry, 115, 144
134, 138 research related to, 117, 120, 126, 127
Middle School, see Grades 5 to 8 teacher professional development, 87, 91,
Minority cultures, 121-122, 123, 126, 133-134 109, 113
see also English as a second language/ teaching standards, outlined and
non-English speakers explicated, 21-33, 134-135
Models, instructional, 6, 10, 13, 14, 21, 33-35 traditional instructional materials, 138
community-centered environments, 122- vignettes connected to, 48, 58, 64-65, 66,
123 70, 72
historical perspectives, 16-17, 33-34, 124- National Science Foundation, xix, 16, 95, 124,
125, 126 138-139
teacher education, 93-94 National Teachers Association, xvii
teaching standards, 20, 21, 22 New Standards Project, 79, 84
traditional, 88, 91, 92, 109, 115, 135-136, Novel situations, see Transfer of learning
138, 143; see also Memory and
memorization
transfer of learning, 35 O
vignettes, 39, 40, 47-48, 59, 65
Models, student-generated, 119, 164, 167 Observation skills, 7, 18, 25
content standards, 19, 20 journals, student, 67
diagrams and drawings, 53, 54, 56, 57, 61- vignettes, 47-48, 52, 59, 63, 49, 67
63, 72, 74, 81, 176 see also Evidence-based explanations
teacher education, 94-95, 100 Organizational factors, 144-146
vignettes, 53-57, 58-59, 61-62, 71 administrators, xviii, 143, 144, 145-146,
see also Hypotheses 147-149, 150, 152
196 INDEX

Parent-Teacher Associations, 8 communication skills, 103, 104, 150

policy-makers, 115, 127-128, 139-140 content and content standards, 88
Outcomes of learning on curriculum, 93, 105-109, 113, 151-152
instructional materials assessment, 176, 177 experimentation laboratory, 90, 112
K-4, 40, 41-42, 46 field experiences, 92, 99-101, 102, 111-112
promoting inquiry, 150 hands-on instruction, general, 93, 106-109
student-initiated investigations, 132 investigations, 89, 99-100
teacher education, 112 mathematics, use of, 94, 107
vignettes, 40, 41-42, 46, 57, 58, 64-65, 78, problem-solving, 106-108
79, 83 skills, development of in students, 89, 90
see also Assessment of learning; Content student-generated models, 94-95, 100
and content standards teachers’ guides, 175, 177, 178-179, 190
video tapes, 90, 105, 106-107, 191
vignettes, 88-113 (passim)
P Public-at-large, education of
assessment, role in, 82
Parents, xviii promoting inquiry among, 149-150
promoting inquiry among, 115, 143, 144, teaching standards, 22
147, 149-150
teaching standards, 22
Parent-Teacher Associations, 8 Q
Pedagogy, 17, 21-33, 103
instructional materials assessment, 177-178 Questions, 127, 161, 163, 165, 168, 169, 170
research and, 127 in classroom assessment, 76, 79, 81, 82
see also Models, instructional; Teachers frequently asked questions about inquiry,
Physical Sciences Study Committee, 17, 124 131-141
Physics by Inquiry, 93, 190 on questions per se, 131, 136
Piaget, Jean, 34 instructional materials assessment, 176
Policy-makers instructional models, 35
barriers raised by, 139-140 myths about inquiry-based learning, 36
promoting inquiry, 115 nature of inquiry, 13-14
research and, 127-128 teacher professional development, 89
Portfolios, 82, 84 teaching standards, 24-25, 26-27, 28, 29
Predictions, 14, 164, 165 vignettes, 6, 42-44, 47, 50-51, 54, 55-56, 58,
content standards, 19 60, 61, 63-64, 65, 66, 67, 71
Principles, see Administrators
Problem-solving, xii, 43, 120
community-centered, 123 R
motivation and, xiv
promotion of, 151 Race/ethnicity, see Minority cultures
research on, 116, 117 Research, educational, 115-118
teacher education on, 106-108 administrators, 143
see also Explanations; Transfer of attitudes and beliefs, 117-118, 121, 139,
learning 140
Process skills, 125-126, 134 barriers to inquiry-oriented approach,
cognitive abilities vs, 18 139-140
see also Experimentation; Observation cognitive abilities, 116, 121-122
skills curriculum, 124-125, 127
Professional development, teachers, xviii, historical perspectives, 17, 34, 124-125
23, 88-113, 137, 139, 140, 140-141, learning environments, 121-124
143, 146-148, 179 logical thinking, 117, 125
on assessment of students, 96-97 organizational factors, 143, 144-146
case studies used in, 104-105 policy and, 127-128
INDEX 197

problem-solving, 116, 117 T

social factors, 118-123 (passim), 144-145
transfer of learning, 116-117, 119-120, 122 Teachers, xviii, 21-33
Revision, see Feedback and revision assessment of, 22, 105, 144, 151-152
Rote learning, see Memory and assessment of students by, 22, 96-97, 105,
memorization 122, 150
education on, 96-97
attitudes and beliefs, xii, 23, 88-90, 94, 95-
S 98, 139, 140, 148, 151
essential features of classroom inquiry,
Safety 24-28, 40, 46-47, 58-59
instructional materials assessment, 179 experimentation, role in, 16-17, 33, 90,
student-initiated investigations, 132 112
teaching standards, 22 evaluation of
Schwab, Joseph, 15 guides, 175, 177, 178-179, 190
Science Curriculum Improvement Study, 17, historical perspectives used by, 56-57, 58,
34, 124 59, 170
Self-assessment, 48, 59, 80-81, 119 instructional models, 35
Skepticism, 14, 164, 169 laboratory experiments, 15-16
alternative explanations, 14, 16, 19, 21, 25, life-long learning, 87, 109-112
27, 55, 56-57, 66, 71, 118, 127, 165, promoting inquiry among, 115, 143, 144,
167, 171, 176 145-146
content standards, 20 structure and guidance, extent provided
teaching standards, 22 by, 28-33, 40, 136-137
Skills, general, xii-xiii, 13, 39 discipline, 22, 136
assessment of, 78 safety, 22, 132, 179
historical perspectives, 17 student-initiated investigations, 6-10,
instructional materials assessment, 177 131-132, 173, 176
teacher professional development, 89, 90 see also Questions
see also Cognitive abilities; standards, outlined, 22-23
Communication skills; Logical technology, role in use of, 16, 41-43, 105
thinking; Problem-solving; Process see also Assessment of learning; Models,
skills instructional; Pedagogy;
Social factors Professional development,
barriers to inquiry-oriented approach, teachers; Vignettes; “vignettes”
139-140 subheads under other mainheads
community-centered environments, 122- Technology, use of, 164, 166, 168, 169, 170
123 content standards, 19, 20
instructional materials assessment, 177 instructional materials assessment, 179
minority cultures, 121-122, 123, 126, 133- teachers’ role, 16, 41-43, 105
134 vignettes, 41-42, 43, 46, 48-50, 66, 102-103,
research on, 118-123 (passim), 144-145 105
see also Communication skills; see also Equipment and supplies
Organizational factors; Parents Tests and testing, 76, 77, 150
State Collaborative on Assessment and constructed-response items, 82
Student Standards, 83-84 multiple-choice items, 82, 83
Summative assessments, 76-77, 83, 85 teaching for understanding, 124
portfolios, 82, 84 see also Summative assessments
see also Tests and testing Textbooks, 15, 16, 96, 140, 148
Summer Institute for Inservice Teachers, 95 Third International Mathematics Science
Study (TIMSS), 135, 151
198 INDEX

Transfer of learning, 132-133, 170 instructional materials, 39, 40, 44-45

instructional models, 35 instructional models, 39, 40, 47-48, 59, 65
research on, 116-117, 119-120, 122 investigations, 7, 40, 44, 47, 51-54, 66, 69
vignette, 60-61, 64-65 journals, student, 67, 81
K-4, 40-48, 95-105
mathematics, 46, 66
V museums, 92, 99-101, 102
observational skills, 47-48, 52, 59, 63, 49,
Video tapes, teacher education, 90, 105, 106- 67; see also “explanations, evidence-
107, 191 based” supra
Vignettes, xix outcomes of learning, 40, 41-42, 46, 57,
assessment of learning, 40, 41-42, 46, 57, 58, 64-65, 78, 79, 83; see also
58, 64-65, 78, 79, 83 “assessment of learning” supra
classroom assessment, 40, 41-42, 46, 57, questions, use of, 6, 42-44, 47, 50-51, 54,
58, 64-65, 78, 79, 83 55-56, 58, 60, 61, 63-64, 65, 66, 67,
communication skills, 45-46, 59, 66, 69, 71
71-72, 103 scientists, approach of, 1-5, 13, 15
content and content standards, 41, 59, 60, student-generated models, 53-57, 58-59,
70 61-62, 71
diagrams and drawings, use of, 53, 54, 56, teacher professional development, 88-113
57, 61-63, 72, 74 (passim)
explanations, evidence-based, 44, 47, 48, technology, use of, 41-42, 43, 46, 48-50,
49, 53-57, 58-59, 63, 64, 65, 66, 71, 66, 102-103, 105
72 transfer of learning, 60-61, 64-65
explanations, general, 45-46, 48, 55-57, 58, Vocabulary development, 68, 83, 125, 133-
65, 66, 71 134, 138
field experiences, 66-73; see also
“museums” infra
formative assessment, 76 W
Grades 5 to 8, 6-10, 13, 48-59
Grades 9 to 12, 60-73 World Wide Web, see Internet
INDEX 199

Credits
Cover and page xix: Students at Glebe Page ix and page 123: Students at
Elementary School, Arlington, VA, Bailey’s Elementary School, Fairfax,
work on an activity from Organisms, VA, work on an activity from Animal
a first-grade unit in the Science and Studies, a fourth-grade unit. Rick
Technology for Children (STC) Vargas, photographer. Courtesy of
curriculum program. Eric Long, the NSRC.
photographer. Courtesy of the Page ix and page 116: Student at
National Science Rsources Center Edmund Burke School, Washington,
(NSRC). DC. Danyelle Miller-Coe,
Page viii and page 6: Illustration by photographer.
student at Edmund Burke School, Page ix and page 133: Courtesy of the
Washington, DC. Biological Sciences Curriculum
Page viii and page 7: Students at Study (BSCS).
Edmund Burke School, Page ix and page 86: Courtesy of the
Washington, DC. Danyelle Miller- Physics Education Group,
Coe, photographer. University of Washington, Seattle.
Page viii and page x: Students at Page ix and page 147: Courtesy of the
Edmund Burke School, Physics Education Group,
Washington, DC. Danyelle Miller- University of Washington, Seattle.
Coe, photographer. Page ix and page 107: Teachers
Page viii: Student at Edmund Burke participating in an NSRC
School, Washington, DC. Danyelle Leadership Institute. Rick Vargas,
Miller-Coe, photographer. photographer. Courtesy of the
Page viii and page 67: Students NSRC.
conducting an investigation of Page xi: Students at Edmund Burke
marine life. Courtesy of the School, Washington, DC. Danyelle
Eisenhower Consortium @ SERVE. Miller-Coe, photographer.
Page viii and page 68: Students Page xiv: Drawing by Van Nguyen,
conducting an investigation of National Academy Press.
marine life. Courtesy of the Page xx: Students at Edmund Burke
Eisenhower Consortium @ SERVE. School, Washington, DC. Danyelle
Miller-Coe, photographer.
200 CREDITS

Page 2: Courtesy of Brian Atwater and Page 38: Students at Edmund Burke
Mary Lou Zoback, U.S. Geological School, Washington, DC. Danyelle
Survey. Miller-Coe, photographer.
Page 4: Image of article reprinted by Page 40: Courtesy of BSCS.
permission from Nature 378:371- Page 42: Courtesy of BSCS.
372. Copyright 1995 Macmillan Page 43: Student at Edmund Burke
Magazines Ltd. School, Washington, DC. Danyelle
Page 9: Letter written by student, Miller-Coe, photographer.
Janney Elementary School, Page 45: Students at Glebe Elementary
Washington, DC. School, Arlington, VA, work on an
Page 12: Student and teacher at activity from Organisms, a first-
Edmund Burke School, Washington, grade STC unit. Courtesy of the
DC. Danyelle Miller-Coe, NSRC.
photographer. Page 49: Illustration by National
Page 15: Probably Tuskegee Institute. Academy Press.
From the Library of Congress Page 51: Courtesy of BSCS.
Photo Collections. Page 52: Students at Chevy Chase
Page 16: From the Library of Congress Elementary School, Chevy Chase,
Photo Collections. MD. David Savage, photographer.
Page 17: From the Library of Congress Courtesy of the NSRC.
Photo Collections. Page 53: Moon phase photos courtesy
Page 24: Courtesy of Lawrence Hall of of BSCS.
Science, University of California, Page 55: Student at Eastern Middle
Berkeley. School, Silver Spring, MD. Robert
Page 28: Students working on an Allen Strawn, photographer.
activity from Floating and Sinking, a Page 56: Image of the Copernican
fifth-grade STC unit. Courtesy of model of the universe. Reproduced
the NSRC. from the Collections of the Library
Page 30: Courtesy of the Lawrence Hall of Congress.
of Science, University of California, Page 57: Page from Galileo’s “Starry
Berkeley. Messenger.” Reproduced from the
Page 31: Student at Edmund Burke Collections of the Library of
School, Washington, DC. Danyelle Congress.
Miller-Coe, photographer. Page 62: Sketch drawn by student at
Page 32: Students at Edmund Burke Woodrow Wilson Senior High
School, Washington, DC. Danyelle School, Washington, DC.
Miller-Coe, photographer. Page 73: Students at Edmund Burke
Page 38: Students at Edmund Burke School, Washington, DC. Danyelle
School, Washington, DC. Danyelle Miller-Coe, photographer.
Miller-Coe, photographer. Page 74: Worksheet from students at
Page 38: Student at Edmund Burke Edmund Burke School, Washington,
School, Washington, DC. Danyelle DC.
Miller-Coe, photographer.
CREDITS 201

Page 77: Students at Glebe Elementary Page 113: Principal and teacher at East
School, Arlington, VA, working on Silver Spring Elementary School,
an activity from Organisms, a first- Silver Spring, MD. Robert Allen
grade STC unit. Courtesy of the Strawn, photographer.
NSRC. Page 114: Students at Eastern Middle
Page 81: Courtesy of BSCS. School, Silver Spring, MD. Robert
Page 88: BASEE workshop, summer Allen Strawn, photographer.
1999. Courtesy of Mary Lou Page 118: Students at Edmund Burke
Zoback, U.S. Geological Survey. School, Washington, DC. Danyelle
Page 89: Students observing a Rube Miller-Coe, photographer.
Goldberg device. Courtesy of Page 121: Student at Montgomery Blair
Argonne National Laboratory. High School, Silver Spring, MD.
Page 92: Students and teacher at Piney Robert Allen Strawn, photographer.
Branch Elementary School, Takoma Page 125: Student at Amidon
Park, MD. Robert Allen Strawn, Elementary School, Washington,
photographer. DC, working on an activity from
Page 94: Teachers participating in an Floating and Sinking, a fifth-grade
NSRC Leadership Institute. Rick STC unit. Courtesy of the NSRC.
Vargas, photographer. Courtesy of Page 130: Student at Piney Branch
the NSRC. Elementary School, Takoma Park,
Page 97: Teachers at Bellevue School MD. Robert Allen Strawn,
District, Bellevue, WA, participating photographer.
in a Physics by Inquiry class Page 134: Students at Amidon
conducted by the Physics Education Elementary School, Washington,
Group. Courtesy of the Physics DC, working on an activity from
Education Group, University of Floating and Sinking, a fifth-grade
Washington, Seattle. STC unit. Courtesy of the NSRC.
Page 100: Courtesy of the Page 136: Courtesy of Lawrence Hall of
Exploratorium, San Francisco, CA. Science, University of California,
Page 102: Courtesy of the Berkeley.
Exploratorium, San Francisco, CA. Page 138: Courtesy of the NSRC.
Page 104: Courtesy of BSCS. Page 142: Courtesy of the Physics
Page 110: Students and teacher at Education Group, University of
Edmund Burke School, Washington, Washington, Seattle.
DC. Danyelle Miller-Coe, Page 148: High school science supply
photographer. shelves. Lisa Vandemark,
Page 111: BAESI field trip. Courtesy of photographer.
Mary Lou Zoback, U.S. Geological Page 151: Photodisk image.
Survey.
202 CREDITS

Inquire

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inquire

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This PDF is available at http://nap.nationalacademies.

Inquiry and the National Science

FIND RELATED TITLES SUGGESTED CITATION

Center for Science, Mathematics,

National Research Council

National Academy Press

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS • 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW • Washington, DC 20418

This study by the Center’s Committee on Development of an Addendum to the National

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards : a guide for

This report is also available online at http://www.nap.edu.

Printed in the United States of America.

Copyright 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

National Academy of Sciences

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT OF AN ADDENDUM TO THE

Peter Dow (Chair), First Hand Learning, Inc.

Staff, Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE EDUCATION K–12

Jane Butler Kahle (Chair), Miami University, Oxford, OH

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

This report has been reviewed in Ken Bingman, Shawnee Mission

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

FOREWORD: A SCIENTIST’S PERSPECTIVE ON INQUIRY xi

1 INQUIRY IN SCIENCE AND IN CLASSROOMS 1

2 INQUIRY IN THE NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION STANDARDS 13

3 IMAGES OF INQUIRY IN K-12 CLASSROOMS 39

4 CLASSROOM ASSESSMENT AND INQUIRY 75

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

5 PREPARING TEACHERS FOR INQUIRY-BASED TEACHING 87

6 MAKING THE CASE FOR INQUIRY 115

7 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT INQUIRY 131

8 SUPPORTING INQUIRY-BASED TEACHING AND LEARNING 143

A EXCERPTS FROM THE NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION STANDARDS

B SELECTING INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS 173

C RESOURCES FOR TEACHING SCIENCE THROUGH INQUIRY 189

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

skills and understandings. Students variability to differences in the lengths

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

In December 1995 same roles. The result

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

National Science Education Standards K-12 Classrooms,” examines science

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

directly to improve teaching and

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

planned addenda to the Standards. Vasquez, and Henry Heikkinen, who

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

As pointed out in the National A good way to begin this investiga-

INQUIRY IN SCIENCE AND IN CLASSROOMS 1

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

stands of dead trees at other places using carbon 14 radiometric methods.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

INQUIRY IN SCIENCE AND IN CLASSROOMS 3