RESEARCH PAPER
Provision of Inquiry Instruction and Actual Level of Practice as Perceived by Science Teachers and their Students
Hassan Tairab 1  
,  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
United Arab Emirates University, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Online publish date: 2017-11-15
Publish date: 2017-11-15
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(1):397–412
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to examine science students’ and teachers’ views of the provision and implementation of inquiry-based instruction in UAE secondary school science classes. Two instruments were developed and validated to collect participants’ views of the provision and practice of inquiry-related activities. The findings suggested that both students and teachers believed that the curriculum materials lend themselves to supporting inquiry instruction, judging by the relatively high mean scores for both groups of participants with regard to the provision of inquiry activities, as described by the essential features of inquiry-based instruction. However, compared with their students, science teachers showed a statistically significant higher mean score with regard to the provision of curriculum materials in supporting implementation of inquiry instruction and a lower mean score with regard to the provision of integrated science processes in curriculum materials. Other similar trends were also detected, with teachers reporting statistically significant higher mean scores than their students with regard to opportunities to plan investigations, ask questions during instruction and use of science process skills. Demographic variables of gender, teaching experience and subject taught showed no impact on teachers’ views. Challenges and obstacles that are likely to impede inquiry-based instruction were also identified.
 
REFERENCES (48)
1.
Al-Naqbi, A. K. (2010). The degree to which UAE primary science workbooks promote scientific inquiry. Research in Science and Technological Education, 28(3), 203-223.
 
2.
American Association for the Advancement of Science AAAS. (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
 
3.
American Association for the advancement of Science AAAS. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
 
4.
Anderson, R.D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry? Journal of science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12.
 
5.
Aoki, J., Foster, A., & Ramsey, J. (2005). Inquiry perceptions held by responding Greater Houston-Area science supervisors. The Texas Science Teacher, 34(2), 17-22.
 
6.
Asay, L. D., & Orgill, M. K. (2009). Analysis of essential features of inquiry found in articles published in the science teacher, 1998-2007. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 57-79.
 
7.
Australian Education Council. (1994). A national statement on science for all Australian schools: A joint project of the states, territories, and commonwealth of Australia initiated by the Australian Education Council (AEC). Carton, Vic: Curriculum Corporation.
 
8.
Axinn, W., & Pearce, L. (2006). Mixed method data collection strategies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
 
9.
Blanchard, M. R., Annetta, L. A., & Southerland, S. A. (2008). Investigating the effectiveness of inquiry-based versus traditional science teaching methods in middle and high school laboratory settings. Paper presented at the annual conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Baltimore, MA.
 
10.
Brandon, P., Donald, Y., Pottenger, F., & Taum, A. (2009). The inquiry science implementation scale: Development and applications. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 1135–1147.
 
11.
Brown, S. L., & Melear, C.T. (2006). Investigation of secondary science teachers’ beliefs and practices after authentic inquiry-based experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(9), 938-962.
 
12.
Bruner, J. S. (1977). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
 
13.
Cain, S. (2002). Sciencing. (4th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
 
14.
Carin, A., Bass, J. & Contant, T. (2005). Teaching science as inquiry. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
 
15.
Choi, S. & Ramsey, J. (2009). Constructing elementary teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and practical knowledge through an inquiry-based elementary science course. School Science and Mathematics, 109(6), 313–324.
 
16.
Cianciolo,J., Flory, L., & Atwell, J. (2006). Evaluating the use of inquiry-based activities: Do student and teacher behavior really change? Journal of College Science Teaching, 36, 50-55.
 
17.
Crawford, B. (2007). Learning to Teach Science as Inquiry in the Rough and Tumble of Practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613–642.
 
18.
DeBoer, G. E. (2004). Historical perspective on inquiry teaching in schools. In L. Flick & N. Lederman (Eds.) Scientific inquiry and the nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp. 17-35). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
 
19.
Edelson, D. C, Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of Learning Sciences, 8, 391-450.
 
20.
Gejda, L., & LaRocco, M. (2006). Inquiry-based instruction in secondary science classrooms: A survey of teacher practice. Paper presented at the 37th Annual Northeast Educational Research Association Conference, Kerhonkson, NY.
 
21.
Goodrun, D., Hackling, M., & Rennie, L. (2000). The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools. A research report prepared for the Department of education, Training and Youth Affairs. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
 
22.
Haney, J., Czerniak, C., & Lumpe, A. (1996). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation of science education reform strands. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(9), 971 – 993,.
 
23.
Kim, M., Tan, A.L., & Talue, F.T. (2013). New vision and challenges in inquiry-based curriculum change in Singapore. International Journal of Science Education, 25(2), 289-311.
 
24.
Lakin, J., & Wallace, C. (2015). Assessing dimensions of inquiry practice by middle school science teachers engaged in a professional development program, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(2), 139–162.
 
25.
Lederman, N., Lederman, J., & Wickman, P.-O. (2008). An international, systematic investigation of the relative effects of inquiry and direct instruction: A replication study. Paper presented at the annual conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Baltimore, MA.
 
26.
Lewis, S. E., & Lewis, J. E. (2008). Seeking effectiveness and equity in a large college chemistry course: An HLM investigation of a peer-led guided inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(7), 794–811.
 
27.
Linn, M.C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87, 517-538.
 
28.
Lucero, M, Valcke, M, & Schellens, T. (2013). Teachers’ beliefs and self-reported use of inquiry in science education in public primary schools. International Journal of Science Education, 35(8), 1407-1423.
 
29.
Marshall, J., Horton, R., Igo, B., & Switzer, D. (2009). K-12 science and mathematics teaches’ beliefs about and use of inquiry in the classroom. International Journal of science and Mathematics Education, 7(3), 575-596.
 
30.
Martin, L. (2010). Relationship between teacher preparedness and inquiry-based instructional practices to students’ science achievement: Evidence from TIMSS 2007 (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
 
31.
Marx, R., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., Geier, R., & Tal, R. (2004). Inquiry-based science in middle grades: Assessment of learning in urban systemic reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1063-1080.
 
32.
Meador, K. (2003). Thinking creatively about science. Gifted Child Today, 26(1), 25- 29.
 
33.
Meyer, X. (2014). Productive disciplinary engagement as a recursive process: Initial engagement in a scientific investigation as a resource for deeper engagement in the scientific discipline. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 184–198.
 
34.
Minelli, W.S. (2012). Investigation of inquiry-based science pedagogy among middle level science teachers: A qualitative study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Dissertation, Marywood University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 542 525).
 
35.
Ministry of Education. (2001). National science curriculum framework. UAE. Ministry of Education.
 
36.
Ministry of Education. (2014). National science curriculum framework. UAE. Ministry of Education.
 
37.
National Research Council. (1996). National science educational standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
 
38.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science educational standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
 
39.
National Research Council. (2005). How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom. Committee on how people learn, A targeted report for teachers, M.S. Donovan and J.D. Bransford, Editors. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academic Press.
 
40.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crossing concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
 
41.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
 
42.
Osborne, J. F., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. A Report to the Nuffield Foundation.
 
43.
Park, S. M. (1996). Research, teaching, and service: Why shouldn’t women’s work count? The Journal of Higher Education, 67(1), 46-84.
 
44.
Robin, B. R., & Harris, J. B. (1998). Correlates among computer-using teacher educators’ beliefs, teaching and learning preferences, and demographics. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 18(1), 15-35.
 
45.
Roth, W. M. (1995). Authentic school science. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
 
46.
Settlage, J., & Southerland, S.A. (2007). Teaching science to every child: Using culture as a starting point. New York: Routledge.
 
47.
Songer, N. B., Lee, H-S, & Kam, R. (2002).Technology-Rich Inquiry Science in Urban Classrooms: What are the Barriers to Inquiry Pedagogy? Journal of research in Science Education, 39(2), 128-150.
 
48.
Zhou, G., & Xu, J. (2007). Adoption of educational technology: How does gender matter? International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(2), 140 – 153.
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215