Evaluation of Open Inquiry Learning Model for Physics Teachers

Main Article Content

Arra Quitaneg-Abaniel

Keywords

inquiry, open-inquiry model, Physics

Abstract

This research responded to the need to provide teachers with a clear model of inquiry-based instructions to help teachers implement this learning approach and take advantage of its benefits. The study employed an action research design, wherein the researcher designed and evaluated an Open Inquiry Learning Model in Physics (OILMP). The learning model was implemented to Grade 12 students under STEM track (n=30). The model defined the roles of teachers and students in an open inquiry learning approach. Findings revealed that teachers should orient, elicit questions, facilitate in the learning process, motivate the students, validate information, ask questions, summarize lesson, assess students and provide immediate feedback. Students' roles are to complete KWL chart, conduct research, validate or evaluate information, ask questions, plan for investigations, investigate, and report research and findings. This model provided complete details on how open inquiry may be facilitated in the Philippine setting.


 


Publication History


Version of Record online: June 18, 2021


Manuscript accepted: May 12, 2021


Manuscript revised: May 10, 2021


Manuscript received: September 21, 2020

Abstract 294 | PDF Downloads 233

References

Alamedine, M., & Ahwal, H. (2016). Inquiry based teaching in literature classrooms. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 332-337. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.031

Arslan Buyruk, A. (2014). Transition between open and guided inquiry instruction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141, 407-412.

Campbell, T., Zhang, D., & Neilson, D. (2011). Model based inquiry in the high school ophysics classroom: An exploratory study of implementation and Outcomes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 258-269. DOI: 10.1007/s10956-010-9251-6

Coban, G. (2013). The effects of inquiry supported by argument maps on Science process skills and epistemological views of prospective Science teachers. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12(3), 271-288. Retrieved from http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/files/pdf/vol12/271-288.Coban_JBSE_Vol.12.3.pdf

Danaia, L., Fitzgerald, M. & McKinnon, D.H. (2019). Barriers inhibiting inquiry-based science teaching and potential solutions: Perceptions of positively inclined early adopters. Res Sci Educ, 49, 543-566. DOI: 10.1007/s11165-017-9623-5

Danipog, D. (2018). Assessing the scientific inquiry practices of teachers and investigating their relationship with student learning (Unpublished dissertation) The University of Melbourne.

Erduran, S. (2006). Promoting ideas, evidence and argument in initial science teacher training. School Science Review, 87, 321, 45-50.

Fernandez, F.B. (2017). Action research in the physics classroom: the impact of authentic, inquiry based learning or instruction on the learning of thermal physics. Asia Pac. Sci. Educ., 3(3). DOI: 10.1186/s41029-017-0014-z

Gutierez, S. (2015). Collaborative professional learning through lesson study: identifying the challenges of inquiry-based teaching. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 118-134. Retrieved from http://www.iier.org.au/iier25/gutierez.html

Keselman, A. (2003). Supporting inquiry learning by promoting normative understanding of multivariable causality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(9), 898-21.

McNew-Birren, J., & van den Kieboom, L.A. (2017). Exploring the development of core teaching practices in the context of inquiry based science instruction: An interpretive case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 74-87

Pedaste, M., Maeots, M., Siiman, L., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S., Kamp, E., Manoli, C., Zacharia, Z., Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.002

Pizzolato, N., Fazio, C., Sperandeo-Mineo, R., & Persano Adorno, D. (2014). Open-inquiry driven overcoming of epistemological difficulties in engineering graduates: A case study in the context of thermal science. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 10(1), 1-24. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.010107

Sadeh, I. & Zion, M. (2012). Which type of inquiry project do high school biology students prefer: Open or Guided? Res Sci Educ, 42, 831-848. DOI: 10.1007/s11165-011-9222-9

Taneri, P.O. (2010). Implementation of constructivist life sciences curriculum: A case study (Unpublished dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Cankaya Ankara, Turkey.

Teig, N., Scherer, R., & Nilsen, T. (2018). More isn’t always better: The curvilinear relationship between inquiry based teaching and student achievement in Science. Learning and Instruction, 56 , 20-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.02.006

Unlu, Z.K., Dokme, I. & Tufekci, A. (2015). An action research on teaching science through technology supported-inquiry-based learning: a pilot study. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences. 46-52.

Weiland, S.M. (2012). Investigation of inquiry based Science pedagogy among Middle level Science teachers: A qualitative study (Unpublished thesis). Marywood University, Scranton, Pennsylvania.

Zezekwa, N. (2011). Students’ attitudes towards advanced level Physics practical work. Journal of Education. 1(2). 31-35. ISSN.2249-5517

Zion, M., & Mendelovici. (2012). Moving from structured to open inquiry: Challenges and limits. Science Education International, 23 (4), 383-399.