Last year I attended a one day
workshop on creating inquiry labs. At the start of the workshop there was a
disclaimer. The instructor had attended intense week long course to learn how
do to inquiry lessons and there was much more to it that what we could cover in
a day. She was a great instructor, the lessons were clear and examples were
understandable. We created questions to answer, planned an experiment, and made
observations. The instructor stayed back and did not interject unless invited
by someone in the group. Occasionally, there was some gentle encouragement to
let us know we were heading in the right direction. Each group shared their observations and
defended their conclusions. I left feeling that I was ready to try an inquiry
lab.
This summer I am taking a course on
inquiry learning. My instructor last summer was correct, I did not have enough
information to design and execute an inquiry lesson that could be a great
learning experience. Inquiry learning is a flexible student-centered process
that is facilitated by a teacher. What I
did not realize is there is a lot more planning than creating an open ended
question and letting the students go learn some science. Students need some knowledge and skills before
attempting an inquiry lesson. The process should be ask a question, investigate
and plan the experiment, make observations and gain knowledge, discuss the
process and results with others, and finally analyze all of the information and
make conclusions or create a new question.
 |
| SRD Students' Energy Experiment |
One of the courses I teach is
called Scientific Research and Design (SRD). This is the perfect place to try
new methods. The SRD students are high school seniors who love science but did
not want to take an advanced placement science. They have had a year of
biology, chemistry and physics. They come to class with curiosity and knowledge
and are often working before the tardy bell rings. SRD is a great course to
attempt an inquiry lesson. So I gave them the following challenge: show
mechanical energy is conserved in a system. They had five days to complete the
task. After seven days of hard work most of the groups had proven energy was
not conserved, some had even broken physics and created energy. Even so, this
was not a bad lesson for either me or the students.
I refer to this experience as a
personal example while learning more about inquiry lessons. I have asked myself
is this a good inquiry lesson. It was
fun and I would like to do it again next year, but I do not feel the learning
outcome would be similar in a different group of students. The starting
question was fair, open and answerable. Students had already learned about
energy in previous courses and I provided review materials for those that
needed reminding. They had the skills required to collect data, until they
decided to use a new application they found for their iPhones. Students
designed their experiments. I did not limit their creativity so some of the
experiments were elegantly simple others were doomed for frustration if not
failure. I tried to encourage the students with over complicated procedures to
simplify, but they chose not to change and I did not insist. The data was
collected and students started having conversations about what they were
seeing. Only one group had the expected data. The whole class had great discussions
on why the data was different than expected and contradicted what they knew to
be true. They understood that unexpected results were not wrong, just
unexpected. We had already had lessons where real world applications did not
meet theoretical expectations. They knew to analyze their procedure and
determine where the issues may have arisen. All arrived at reasonable
conclusions where ignoring or minimizing a real world issue the data would have
shown conservation of energy. The real beauty was the different way each group
experimented and the discussions that came out of the different methods. Over
all it was a good energy lesson, but mostly because I was lucky and the SRD
students are flexible and curious.
Based on what I am now learning
about the process I would make some changes. The start of the lesson follows
the inquiry process, but there are a number of places this can become a botched
lesson. Next time I will have had them learn the new data collecting application
and then collect the data separately. Doing both at once was a mistake. I will
have to decide if I will allow more time or limit the complicated procedures.
If possible, the additional time would allow some groups the opportunity to
move forward with another or refined question while the others deal with their
complicated but interesting methods. The product needs more definition, as in a
video, demonstration or presentation of their experiment and findings. I would
like to learn more ways to capitalize on the discussion portion of the lesson.
I am inquiring into inquiry
learning and proving I need to learn more. I will plan more thoroughly, refine
my question and procedure and try again. So, the process works for me.
“Our definition of Inquiry.” Inquiry Page. (1998). Retrieved June
27, 2013 from http://www.cii.illinois.edu/InquiryPage/inquiry/definition.html
“Key Components of the Inquiry
Process.” Retrieved Jun 27, 2013 from http://www.neiu.edu/~middle/Modules/science%20mods/amazon%20components/AmazonComponents2.html#components
No comments:
Post a Comment