a practice perspective on the challenges of inquiry based learning
TRANSCRIPT
Challenges in IBL design, implementation and research methodology
A practice perspective
F.R. Prinsen, Open University of the Netherlands
Inquiry research trajectoryPhD: Differences in participation and learning outcomes in CSCL
Postdoc: Institute for Knowledge Innovation and Technology
Knowledge Building International
Working Environment with Social and Personal Open Tools for Inquiry-Based Learning
The collective nature of science
Research concerns
• Access to knowledge (communities)• Learner identity development and motivation• Developing learner agency (related to
structure)
Definitions matter…“Inquiry science is a hands-on constructivist approach to science education. Students address teachers’ and students’ questions about natural phenomena or events by conducting scientific investigations in which they collaboratively develop plans, collect and explain evidence, connect the explanations to existing scientific knowledge, and communicate and justify the explanations” (Anderson, 2002).
Challenges in IBL
• Student motivation, • Accessibility of investigation techniques,• Background knowledge & skills, and • Practical constraints in the learning context*
Why do students not respond to our pedagogical and technological IBL designs in the way we anticipate?
*Edelson, Gordin, & Pea (1999!)
Reframing these challenges
In our IBL designs, implementation and research… to what degree do we regard IBL as a practice?
For instance, do we consider the necessary change in the culture of learning? [Re: Yael Kali]
Inquiry Based Learning (Practice)
• Engagement in continuous, immersive and meaningful inquiry activities,
• organised around recognised and shared goals, • applying a repertoire of skills and attitudes necessary
for participation in a community of inquiry, • while negotiating, mastering and appropriating its
cultural tools.
Darwin:
"there is grandeur in this view of life"
Factors to consider
(Tool) Design issues
Take the practice of IBL as a starting point; • Examine existing social learning processes encouraged in the
classroom• Use adaptable toolsets (so teachers can act as co-designers; agile
design [Re: Camillia Matuk]) • Make sure that the system allows for scaffolding, feedback, and
reflection• Consider pedagogical usability• Apply and negotiate evaluation structure, e.g. Social learning
Analytics (at appropriate level of analysis [Re: Dillenbourg; Erkens])
Agile software development
• Iterative evaluation workshops with teachers• Trac tickets (trac.wespot.nl) and • Sprint meetings
#37
Quote from Workshop
[To] divide learners in smaller or larger groups [or even] double groups in some cases for discussing input.
Trac-ticket #
615
Context of the "Quote" Response of the participant to the question "which additional activities would you carry out during the phases "Data collection and data analysis"?
Status CLOSED (fixed)
Proposed solution Provide the possibility to “copy” an inquiry so that different groups can work together. This should be adaptable, i.e. it should be possible to add / exclude students from such group inquiries.
Source OUNL1
Implementation Group / user management has been improved: The inquiry owner (usually the teacher) can either clone an inquiry (i.e. duplicate it) or create several sub-inquiries. Individuals or groups of students can be invited to these sub-inquiries. This enables them to work together on a particular inquiry (including collaborative discussions on input from peers or the teacher).
Configuration interface
Dojo IBL mobile app
Angel Suarez (PhD)
Learning dashboard
Methodological issues accounting for CoP
• Follow students’ activities in context and over time [Re: Dillenbourgh’s orchestration graphs; C.P. Rosé & Gaesevic ProSolo and DALMOOC]
• Focus on students’ interaction trajectories* [Re C.P. Rosé DALMOOC; Erkens Social Networks; Jennifer Tan Social Reading networks]
• Provide for feedback and reflection on collective understanding, preceptions and views
[Re: Jennifer Tan; e.g. feedback from peripheral participants as evidenced by Learning Analytics]
* Ludvigsen et al., 2011
Implications
• Developing a new view on knowledge and learning
[Re: C. Krist; Shifts in epistemological considerations]
• How do we study student response to design?
Reflection
• Is all the uncertainty, discomfort and hard work that go into supporting IBL as a practice worth it?
• What level of authenticity can we provide in and outside the classroom?
• Authentic learning challenges, according to Knight et al. (2014), provide the opportunity for developing transferable skills and competencies, and the qualities needed to thrive in complexity and uncertainty
Discussion
• Do we examine students’ proximal knowledge of the Nature of Science (Hogan 2000; Sandoval 2005) and their Practical epistemology (Wu & Wu, 2011; in terms of nature of knowledge, approach of production, and criteria of evaluation)?
[Re: Bereiter] • Are the learning opportunties we are providing equitable
in access and quality? (Also - Prinsen, 2012; Prinsen, Terwel, Zijlstra, & Volman, 2013; Schreiner & Sjøberg, 2007; Costa, 1995; Bøe, Henriksen, Lyons & Schreiner, 2011; Hung and Chen, 2007)
