I
recently asked how my district was using the term inquiry with
respect to student learning and how this term was used in relation of other terms currently in vogue in education. These are usually
attached to the word -based, pedagogical concepts like problem-based or
project-based or resource-based learning and, most recently, challenge-based
learning, associated with Apple and Discovery Education. What is the
difference and how much depth of understanding is there amongst educators about
when it is appropriate to use one term over another? More importantly, I
would like to know if some concepts are being used interchangeably and thus
incorrectly, whether some students are more receptive to one over another, and so on.
Let me
be honest. My real concern is that the
word inquiry is being enthusiastically embraced and over-used in a very shallow and cursory way with respect
to student learning. I can certainly
explain what inquiry-based learning is.
It is a student-centred learning approach; it is designed to prompt
students’ good questions and to scaffold them through to meaningful learning,
not just to find answers but to discover their powers of learning for
themselves. It is not so much a linear process
as a way of learning that is recursive, thoughtful, collaborative, and
powerful. Inquiry-based learning is deeply
linked to developing skills that are grounded in information literacy --
including such things as seeking and evaluating sources of information and
making choices about which tools and strategies work best for arriving at, organizing,
and sharing the findings. It is also a
way of teaching in which the teacher moves “to the side” and trusts the process
enough, knowing that deeply engaged students will find answers that the teacher
may not already know. Good inquiry-based
learning is observable -- students are engaged -- and it owes something to Czikszentmihalyi!
There
are many models, some of which have been around since the 1990s when I
completed my TL diploma: Kuhlthau et al's Guided Inquiry, Eisenberg and Berkowitz's commercial Big6, BC-based Points of Inquiry (Ekdahl et al, based on
the Stripling model with a nod to Kuhlthau), the Alberta Focus on Inquiry or Ontario Together for Learning models and so on. The Writing Process and the Scientific Method
align perfectly with Inquiry. All are essentially
the same except for terms and numbers of steps. And each does something slightly different:
Kuhlthau, for example, identified the affective dimension – students engaged
in inquiry will likely experience some anxiety during the inquiry process, and
that’s okay.
I become
more concerned about whether the current use of the term inquiry is
"deep" enough when I hear it described as students asking good questions
and then going to Google to find the answers.
Or they ask good questions and are sent to the textbook to find the
answers. Or once I heard, “You just
google and google deeper!” I have also
had teacher-librarians’ use of the inquiry model discounted and cast aside as
“just research” by a very keen academic newly discovering inquiry or as “just
for teacher-librarians.” Mostly these
comments reveal the need for deeper conversations.
TLs have
been using one or another of the inquiry models for years. What I know is
that one model in a district is both sufficient and optimal ... kids learn early to think about
one model and apply it across the disciplines and through the grades, simply
becoming more sophisticated inquirers at they move from K to 12. There
should be as few steps as possible (a 12-step model such as one I saw not
long ago is surely too much to expect kids to remember) and clear, simple terms
that trigger considerations of which skills, strategies, tools, and resources
to choose.
Teacher
Inquiry works exactly the same way.
Unquestionably, teachers who engage in their own professional inquiry,
pursuing questions about their own work that are personally meaningful and
important, trusting the process, and weathering the anxieties, are better
prepared to support their students through the challenges of inquiry.
We need
to undertake the conversation and unpack these concepts, not only to
be clear about the terms and to distinguish which works best in whatever situations with which kinds of learners,
not only to understand the full potential for engaging young learners in new
kinds of learning, but to illuminate and share in what is exciting about making the
instructional shift.
No comments:
Post a Comment