Information synthesis

Literature explaining the origins, purposes and application of Guided Inquiry abounds.  The following essay is a short synthesis of some of this literature as it pertains to my inquiry learning activity (ILA) for middle school students in the subject Social Studies in Society (SOSE).

Kuhlthau, Caspari & Maniotes (2007) explain how Guided Inquiry (GI) is grounded in the constructivist approach based on the major educational theorists and researchers Dewey, Brunes, Kelly, Vygotsky and Piaget.  These theorists emphasise the significant role that emotions often play in learning experiences.  During GI-based learning the teacher facilitates and guides students to their own understandings. Kuhlthau (2007) emphasises that for people to survive and thrive in the 21^st century they need to become discerning lifelong learners that can negotiate their way around abundant, constantly changing information. Guided inquiry assists students in this skill development.

The importance of delivering GI units correctly is paramount.  Most teachers need to learn to teach in ways that they did not learn themselves (McLaughlin (1997)in (Hargreaves, 2000). Realising the inherent advantages of Inquiry didactic methods the temptation remains to “teach to the test”, citing pressures from leadership to improve NAPLAN or other standardised test scores as the cause (Blanchard et al (2010). This attitude to learning and teaching is counterintuitive to inquiry methods and produces regurgitation of facts that are quickly forgotten (Blanchard et al (2010). Duffy and Raymer (2010) warn against the many pitfalls that can be encountered when the inquiry process is incorrectly delivered. 

Inquiry learning can be seen on a continuum from level 0 (teacher directed) to level 4 (open inquiry) Blanchard et al (2010). Guided inquiry with fairly extensive scaffolding is recommended by many authors including Harrington (2010) and Blanchard et al (2010). Harrington recommends “guiding without being meddlesome” and cautions that middle school students are at an age where they need independence.  She shows how using creativity and role playing can help them develop information literacy and problem solving skills (Harrington, 2010). 

Abilock emphasises developing ethical researchers who are information literate and who acknowledge the work of others, providing a number of strategies (Abilock, 2009). This requirement of information literacy (IL) is also stressed by Lupton & Bruce (2010) in their GeST model where IL is taught by practising search strategies, internet skills, ICT skills and referencing. Coffman (2009) explains how GI helps students become information literate when they are actively involved in inquiry activities during problem solving. 

GI methods connect the student’s world to the curriculum using many different resources. Books, the internet, teachers, librarians, colleagues, parents and other members of the community help students see the object of their learning from a number of different viewpoints (Nayler, 2005).

 GI methods help students develop tenacity through reflection. The more they encounter the cycles of doubt, frustration, optimism and elation that are commonly felt during research tasks, the more they will develop the resilience necessary to persevere during periods of frustration (Kuhlthau, 2007). Questioning what went well and how to do things differently next time guides students to discover facts and develop higher order thinking (Kuhlthau, 2007). Coffman (2009) describes inquiry learning as a cyclical process of questioning and hypothesising. Central to this process is reflection as well as feedback from the teacher.

Coffman stresses creating both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation in students. To develop critical thinking and good inquiry activities teachers should develop activities that provide students with opportunities to apply, analyse, synthesise and evaluate important concepts and themes (Coffman (2009). She advocates a project structure before beginning the inquiry saying that good planning begins with an idea that aligns with the instructional standard (Coffman, 2009). The process of lesson planning and implementation is as important as the final result and should not be overlooked according to Lattimer & Riordan (2011) as well as Duffy & Raymer (2010).  Harrington (2006) recommends role play to help develop the extrinsic and intrinsic motivation required by students during inquiry learning projects.  

The Queensland Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Framework (QCAR) espouse many ideals of Inquiry learning for Studies of Society & Environment (SOSE) in “Ways ofWorking”. These range from identifying a research focus and designing questions, to planning investigations, analysing data, supporting conclusions and communicating findings. Nayler (2007) agrees with these ideals stressing participation, reflection, creation and actively constructing meaning using questions and a socially critical approach. She emphasises the need for students to ask strategic questions and provides many examples, as does Coffman (2009). The QCAR directive for SOSE students is to understand the importance of inquiry and major social and environmental ideas for investigating issues in contexts that range from local to global settings. (QCAR QSA 2007). 

A selection of the literature advocating inquiry methods has been reviewed for the purpose of developing a SOSE unit on the “Ecological footprint” for middle year students. The construction of deep levels of understanding, knowledge and perseverance are essential to any student. Using thought provoking, carefully structured inquiry based lessons will assist students to develop the qualities needed by the 21^st century learner. 

References

Abilock, D. (2009) Guiding the gifted to honest work. Knowledge Quest, 37, 12-15.

Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., Osborne, J. W., Sampson, V. D., Annetta, L. A., & Granger, E. M. (2010). Is inquiry possible in light of accountability?: A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction. Science Education, 94(4), 577-616.

 Coffman, T. (2009). Engaging Students through Inquiry-Oriented Learning and Technology. Maryland: R&L Education

Duffy, T.M & Raymer, P.L. (2010) A practical guide and a constructivist rationale for inquiry based learning.  Educational Technology, 50(4) 3-15.

Hargreaves, A. (2000). Four ages of professionalism and professional learning. Teachers and teaching: theory and practice, 6(2), 151-182.

Harrington, L. (2006). Guided Research in Middle School: Mystery in the Media Centre. Santa Barbara: Linworth.

Hernandez-Ramos, P., De La Paz, S. (2009) Learning History in Middle School by Designing Multimedia in a Project-Based Learning Experience. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 151-173

Kuhlthau, C.C. , Maniotes, L.K. & Caspari, A.K. (2007). Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st century. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

Kuhlthau, C. C., & Maniotes, L. K. (2010). Building Guided Inquiry Teams for 21st-Century Learners. School Library Monthly,  26(5) 18-21.

Lattimer, H., Riordan, R.  (2011) Project-based learning engages students in meaningful work. Middle School Journal, 43(2), 18-23

Lupton, Mandy & Bruce, Christine S. (2010) Windows on information literacy worlds: generic, situated and transformative perspectives. In Practising Information Literacy: Bringing Theories of Learning, Practice and Information Literacy Together. Centre for Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, N.S.W., pp. 4-27.

Nayler, J. (2005). Inquiry Approaches in Secondary Studies of Society and Environment Key Learning Area. Occasional paper prepared for Queensland School Curriculum Council.