Levels of Inquiry

Looking at a typical classroom “research” activity, there are essentially three stages involved: 1. the research question, 2. the research process, and 3. the product. Each of these three stages may be completed by the student or the teacher. The following matrix illustrates three different scenarios.
 

  The first scenario represents “full” inquiry in which the student frames the research question, plans the research process and creates a final product. Although perhaps the most valuable and authentic, this type of classroom activity is not very common. It requires a great deal of effort from both teachers and students as well as an extended period of time to conduct. It also challenges traditional classroom roles of students receiving knowledge from their teacher.

The second scenario represents “guided” inquiry. Rather than letting students select their own research questions, teachers are able to select valuable, answerable questions related to the curriculum and subject-area standards while still challenging students to act as problem solvers as they weigh various approaches to the question. It is a nice compromise between direct instruction and full inquiry.

The third scenario is not inquiry in the strictest sense. At best it is an open-ended, guided activity. The teacher defines the research question and the process, leaving only the creation of the final product to the student. Although there may be more than one “right answer” it is still a rather traditional model. In my opinion, most WebQuests fall into this category due to the prescriptive nature of the WebQuest format. After all, the task and process are usually defined by the teacher. Although this prescriptive format is one of the attractions of WebQuests, I see it as a restrictive limitation. However, with some minor modifications most WebQuests can approach higher levels of inquiry. In the following poster, I shall describe my modifications to the traditional WebQuest called the WebQuery.

Defining “Inquiry”

Inquiry learning by its very nature is motivating to students. Not only are students more actively engaged, they have the ability to explore phenomena that interest them while employing higher-order thinking skills. It stands to reason that increased engagement can result in students actually retaining what they have learned. Proponents of inquiry learning do not claim that it should be used exclusively, nor that every lesson lends itself to this method, instead, they suggest that the value of inquiry learning lies in the fact that when involved in this sort of activity students learn academic content and problem-solving strategies in an authentic context and that this ought to be part of any curriculum. In the case of a science class, students learn about what scientists actually do, not just what scientists have already learned. The shift from learning known content to discovering new information is one of the distinguishing and more exciting features of inquiry learning. It is also a significant part of the current national science education standards (National Research Council, 1996). Constructivist teaching assumes that usable knowledge is best developed when students create multiple representations of ideas and engage in activities that require application of that knowledge (Krajcik et. al., 2000). Throughout the inquiry process, students are applying their knowledge in "real world," authentic tasks and constructing knowledge for themselves. Ultimately, inquiry learning focuses on depth of understanding by promoting development and representation of ideas, often through conversation with others, thus encouraging the social aspect of learning as well as practicing communication skills.

Essential Elements

In order for an activity to be considered inquiry learning students must: 1. Engage in scientifically oriented questions 2. Give priority to evidence 3. Formulate explanations from evidence 4. Connect explanations to existing scientific knowledge and 5. Communicate and justify their explanations (National Research Council, 2000). Please note that "scientifically-oriented questions" are not necessarily about science, but those that may be tested and supported with evidence and thus investigated in a scientific manner, rather than based on faith such as the presence of God. Of course, in order for such an activity to be conducted, it must also be feasible with respect to time and resources available.

WebQuery vs. WebQuest: what to keep and what to change

On most counts, I recognize that WebQuests fit the description of inquiry activities, however to truly engage in scientific questions, a student should formulate and revise them or at the very least interpret them and strategize a method for answering them. I see WebQuery as a way to take the best elements of WebQuests while handing over more control to the student, thus increasing the level of inquiry. What follows is a brief description of which elements of WebQuests are preserved intact and which are changed slightly:

Lesson Format
Without question, WebQuests are one of the most popular lesson formats for integrating technology in K-12 classrooms today. The WebQuest format is an easily adapted plan that nearly any teacher can use to encourage their students to weigh evidence and synthesize a final project demonstrating higher-order thinking. I believe the template has a great deal to do with the popularity of WebQuests. For this reason, WebQuery uses the same template with some minor modifications.

Resource List
WebQuests are designed to push students beyond simply scouring the Internet for facts and presenting them. In fact, by providing students with a set of hyperlinks, teachers can ensure that students have easy access to reputable, age-appropriate, accurate information. Rather than spending their time searching, students attend to sifting, interpreting, and synthesizing information from quality sources. To turn students loose on Google or Yahoo can be a mistake if the act of searching is not one of the instructional goals. Certainly, students will spend an inordinate amount of time searching on their own and may never actually find quality sources. To give them links that the teacher has already approved points them in the right direction. WebQuery retains the resource list, although it needs to be more extensive in order to accommodate the variety of research questions and processes that students may pursue. In fact, the resource list itself could serve as a lunching pad for students to develop their research questions.

Task, Process, Rubric
In many respects, a WebQuery looks just like a WebQuest. Where they differ are in the task, process, and rubric sections. One might assume that these parts of the template could be left blank for the student to fill in, however, I propose that depending upon the amount of guidance that the teacher wishes to give, these parts ought to include either a list of examples or some prompting questions to help students formulate their research questions and strategies as well as defining for themselves how they would like to be evaluated. When it comes down to it, the introduction and conclusion could be skipped if the teacher prefers or simply updated to reflect the chosen research question and process.

Additional Suggestions for Implementing WebQuery

• Provide a broad topic that relates to your planned curriculum and resource list and has strong potential for inquiry activities.
• Provide a great deal of support to students as they formulate their research questions and develop their research strategies.
• Strive to maximize opportunity for authentic activities, student to student dialogue, and the use of evidence
• Allocate plenty of time for the activities.
• Involve students in the lowest level of inquiry before introducing them to guided and full inquiry. Let them master the process and practice it.
• Remember that when inquiry learning is the organizing principle for a lesson or unit, teachers will find themselves valuing exploration.

References

Krajcik, J., Blumenfeldt, P. Mark, R., & Soloway, E. (2000). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for learning in science classrooms. In J. Minstrell, & E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 283-315). Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.