which has a greater effect on student performance, …melissk/classroombasedresearch.pdfmparente -...

Which Has a Greater Effect on Student Performance, Guided Inquiry or Structured Inquiry?

A classroom-based research report

By Melissa K. Parente Leadership for Middle Level Science, EDUC545:631

University of Pennsylvania April 7, 2007

Email: [email protected] Cell phone: (484) 368-9562

MParente - Guided Inquiry vs. Structured Inquiry 2

Which Has a Greater Effect on Student Performance, Guided Inquiry or Structured Inquiry? Abstract:

The purpose of this classroom-based research project was to determine which type of inquiry was more effective, Guided Inquiry or Structured Inquiry in the classroom. I chose this topic because inquiry is a complex style of learning and is still being researched. Based on my own experiences, I wanted to measure the effects of these styles of inquiry with middle school students in Earth Science. I feel that through discovery learning, students will use prior knowledge and retain more information through observations. Eighteen, eighth grade students were randomly selected from two classes to be included in this study. Nine of the students were placed in Group A, which was a structured inquiry group. The other nine students were placed in Group B, which was a guided inquiry group. There were two labs performed by both groups, each lab taking two, forty-five minute class periods to complete. The first lab was to have students use their observations and skills to identify some minerals. The second lab was a performance-based lab where students used their prior knowledge and new knowledge gained from the first lab.

As a result, there was not a significant difference between the two groups in relation to understanding and skill. There were slightly higher scores in Group A (Structured Inquiry) but overall the students were all within the same range. My results may need to be researched further due to the missing lab reports, excessive absences, and student pull outs. Background:

When preparing for my eighth grade science classes on geology and minerals, it occurred to me that my students might have some challenges when identifying minerals using various materials. Part of the School District of Philadelphia core curriculum, incorporates the use of inquiry, but I was uncertain which type of inquiry would be more successful, guided inquiry or structured inquiry. Guided inquiry, according to Beacon Learning Center, is when “the teacher provides the problem for investigation as well as the necessary materials. Students are expected to devise their own procedure to solve the problem (1997).” Structured inquiry, according to Beacon Learning Center is when “the teacher establishes parameters and procedures for inquiry. Students are provided with a hands-on problem to investigate as well as the procedures and materials necessary to complete the investigation (1997).” There was a culminating lab, as well as a performance-based assessment lab at the end of this chapter. I wondered if my students would be more successful going through the lab by themselves in their groups (Guided Inquiry), or engaged in step-by-step procedures as a class with me (Structured Inquiry). This gave me the idea for my classroom-based research project. The purpose of my project was to determine which type of inquiry was more effective in the classroom. The objective of each lab was to measure students’ understanding based on questions and tables in the labs. My goal was to determine if students were able to better understand the main concepts of mineral identification with or without teacher guidance.


The students in this study were from my two eighth grade science classes that totaled approximately forty students. The data focused on only eighteen students due to excessive absences, students being pulled out of the classroom and missing lab reports. This was a flaw with my report due to the fact that students failed to turn in their labs or never made up the lab. The table below includes student information for both eighth grade classes. Group A (structured

inquiry) Group B (guided inquiry)

Females 8 5 Males 1 4 African American 5 3 Asian 3 5 Caucasian 1 0 Latino 0 1 Free or reduced lunch 9 9

All classes came into my classroom and sat in groups of three or four. The topic that I chose to use followed the Philadelphia Science Core Curriculum. I sent home consent papers for both the students and parents to sign. I acknowledged to them that they would not be penalized, if their parent(s) did not consent. During our first report card conferences, I explained to the parent(s) or guardian(s) of the students that participated in my research that this was a study I was performing for my graduate class. I made them aware that it would not be published and would only be viewed by those involved in my program. The strategies that I planned to use to protect the participants’ privacy and confidentiality were not to include their real names or any descriptive characteristics that could reveal their identity.

When learning about geology, students seemed to lose interest in the topic, until they were able to discover geology through hands-on activities. Through this hands-on experience, students are more focused and retain more information just from their experiences and observations. As teachers, we are always being reminded to make connections into the children’s everyday lives in order for them to understand and make connections. When preparing lessons, it is important to incorporate children’s prior knowledge. This also allows the teacher to acknowledge children’s misconceptions. Learning about the rocks and minerals in their local environment, can help children to make connections with rocks and minerals around the world. Using this understanding, children will be able to identify the various characteristics of individual rocks and minerals. Literature Review:

Studies have shown that inquiry-based instruction enhances student performance and attitudes in science (Jarrett, 1997). Studies have also shown that although inquiry-based instruction helps students to learn more observable ideas, they are still weak in understanding how scientists are able to explain the results (Colburn, 2001). Having an inquiry-based classroom can be challenging but it is also a “community of inquiry,” where the teacher and the students are both responsible (Jarrett, 1997). Inquiry within science, engages students in investigations that stimulate curiosity. Using inquiry in content areas such as science, enables students to


understand scientific concepts through experiences. Students tend to be able to use inquiry to ask questions, think critically, and use appropriate materials to gather data (Dyasi, 2000). Studies say that when children are engaged in activities incorporating inquiry, teachers are able to observe the children’s thinking and ask them questions to check for understanding (Dyasi, 2000).

When teaching about rocks and minerals, students will learn to understand a school-based

accurate definition of rocks but lack a more everyday perspective on rocks. There are misconceptions about the rock cycle and its purpose but studies say that more research is needed (Ford, 2003). Students need to be able to extend their understandings to think of the rocks and minerals outside of their own environment. As an example students could trace a rock from their environment, back to its original origin and then make connections. Ford mentioned that in many elementary and middle school earth science curricula, connections are not made between earth history, landforms, and rock and mineral identification. Instead they are taught separately (2003). Methodology: Research question: Which has a greater effect on student performance, Guided Inquiry or Structured Inquiry?

My plan was to use the same lab from the student textbook entitled “Mysterious Minerals.” My method was to have one eighth grade class work on the lab in their cooperative groups without the help of the teacher. The other eighth grade class would work on the lab step by step with me, where everyone was on the same step at the same time. All groups were responsible for answering the lab questions and filling in the data tables in their notebooks. Approximately one week later, I gave each class a Performance-Based Assessment, where they were tested on the properties of minerals. In both labs, the classes worked in their cooperative groups to complete the rest of the labs. For homework, they independently completed the last two parts of their reports: Analyze Results and Draw Conclusions, independently. This assessment allowed me to collect data to see which class was able to use their observations from the first lab and apply them to the second lab.

On Wednesday and Thursday, January 10th and 11th, each class was given their materials on a tray in the center of the tables. Using their textbooks, Holt Science & Technology: Inside the Restless Earth, they opened to pages 180-181 to the chapter one Skills Practice Lab- Mysterious Minerals. They copied the Mineral Summary Chart into their notebooks. I went over the objectives and safety symbols with both classes before starting the lab. Group B (Guided Inquiry Group), continued working independently with their cooperative groups, while Group A (Structured Inquiry Group), proceeded to the next step with me. This lab took two, forty-five minute periods. Group B, being the guided group, was to follow the step-by-step procedures in the text using the identification key on page 181. Then Group B was to summarize what they learned about the various characteristics of each mineral sample they identified. Group A was given the materials required and as a whole class, we followed the step-by-step procedures in the text, everyone being on the same step at the same time. At the end of the lab, Group A also summarized what they learned about the various characteristics of each mineral sample they identified.


The following Wednesday and Thursday, January 17th and 18th, both classes conducted another experiment, except this time, they worked in their cooperative groups and finished the last two sections independently. Each class was provided a lab sheet and given the objective, which was to test the properties of minerals to identify five common minerals. This lab also took two, forty-five minute class periods.

After collecting both labs, one on a lab sheet and the other from their notebooks, I assessed how they were able to use their observations and prior knowledge to answer the ending questions. I created a 3-2-1-0 rubric for each response: a score of 3 meant complete and correct, a score of 2, meant complete with some incorrect components, 1 meant partially completed with errors, and zero- incomplete and demonstrates no understanding. I also included my own observations from both classes into the analysis. From each lab in both classes, I looked for evidence that showed which group, if any, was more successful in analyzing and drawing conclusions from the labs. Compiling all of my data, it showed that neither guided inquiry nor structured inquiry was more effective than the other. Rubric 3 2 1 0 Completely

answered and accurate.

Completely answered with some incorrect components.

Partially completed with some errors.

Incomplete and demonstrates no understanding.

Findings:

After analyzing the data from the two labs, the students in Group A had a slightly better understanding of the concept than the students in Group B. Although there wasn’t a huge difference, there could be factors involved that may affect the reason behind this. I think that in the group working with me as a class, students were able to get a visual idea of what each characteristic was and could incorporate that into their summaries. Sometimes working in independent groups and relying on each other can have its good points and bad points. For example, there is usually at least one person who likes to take charge and order everyone else around. Others tend to like to work quickly and not necessarily grasp the concept, which does not help those students who really do want to understand. When each group wrote their conclusions for the second lab, it was obvious that the students overall were still lacking some understanding of mineral identification. This is an area that, as a teacher, I need to revisit and provide more modeling to help them understand the key points to work on when looking back at their data in a lab.


Skills Practice Lab: Mysterious Minerals Mineral Summary

Chart On a separate sheet of paper,

summarize what you learned about the various characteristics of each mineral

sample you identified.

Group A (structured group)

1a 3 2 2a 3 3 3a 3 3 4a 3 1 5a 3 2 6a 3 3 7a 3 2 8a 3 1 9a 3 1

Mineral Summary Chart

On a separate sheet of paper, summarize what you learned about the various characteristics of each mineral

sample you identified.

Group B (guided group) 1b 3 2 2b 2 0 3b 2 2 4b 2 0 5b 3 1 6b 3 0 7b 2 1 8b 2 1 9b 3 1

Performance-based Assessment Form

Hypothesis Test Hypothesis Mineral

Properties Table

Draw Conclusion

Group A (structured)

1a 3 3 2 3 2a 3 3 2 0 3a 3 3 2 1 4a 3 2 2 1 5a 3 3 2 3 6a 0 2 2 0 7a 3 2 3 3 8a 3 2 2 3 9a 3 2 3 2


Form Hypothesis

Test Hypothesis Mineral Properties Table

Draw Conclusion

Group B (guided)

1b 0 2 2 2 2b 3 3 2 3 3b 3 3 2 3 4b 3 3 2 2 5b 3 3 2 3 6b 3 3 2 1 7b 0 2 2 2 8b 3 2 2 3 9b 3 2 2 0 Conclusion:

In conclusion of this study, I learned that inquiry is important in science. As a result of my research, I found that neither guided inquiry nor structured inquiry was more effective than the other. I feel that my students benefit from inquiry in cooperative groups, but still lack the processing skills to analyze results. As a teacher, I need to continue developing student-focused labs, where the students are able to make discoveries in their cooperative groups. One of my observations during this research was that students identified more with each other than with me. It was evidently shown as I facilitated around the room that students felt more confident asking each other questions.

If I had to do this research again, I would choose a larger amount of students to participate in this study in order to obtain a wider variety of data. I would be interested to compare what I found in this study to a study that involved a larger group of students. I would also consider changing the performance-based lab. Instead I would administer a pretest on characteristics and properties of minerals then would follow up with the “Mysterious Minerals” lab from the text. In addition, I would also incorporate a posttest to find out if either style of inquiry was more effective.

Overall, I found that the results from this research were not significantly different by using either style of inquiry, guided inquiry or structured inquiry. I feel that students do learn more through discovery and hands-on activities but are not able to analyze the data in such a way, where they can draw conclusions at a scientifically literate level.


References

Beacon Learning Center (n.d.). Just Science Now. Retrieved April 15, 2007, from http://www.justsciencenow.com/about.htm

Colburn, Alan (2001). What Teacher Educators Need to Know about Inquiry-Based Instruction.

Retrieved January 15, 2007, from http://www.csulb.edu/~acolburn/AETS.htm Dyasi, Hubert (2000). What Children Gain by Learning Through Inquiry. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2000/nsf99148/ch_2.htm Ford, Danielle J. (2003). Sixth Graders' Conceptions of Rocks in their Local Environments. Journal of Geoscience Education, 51(4), 373-377. Retrieved January 19, 2007, from http://serc.carleton.edu:81/files/nagt/jge/abstracts/Ford_v51n4.pdf Hanauer, D.I., Jacobs-Sera, D., Pedulla, M., Cresawn, S., Hendrix, R., & Hatfull, G. (2006).

Inquiry Learning: Teaching Scientific Inquiry. Science, 314(5807). Retrieved February 26, 2007, from http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/314/5807/1880

Haury , David L (2003). Teaching Science through Inquiry. ERIC Clearinghouse for Science,

Mathematics, and Environmental Education. Retrieved January 15, 2007, from http://www.science-class.net/Research/research_inquiry.htm

Jarrett, Denise (1997). Inquiry Strategies for Science and Mathematics Learning [Electronic

version]. It’s Just Good Teaching,1-37. Retrieved April 12, 2007, from http://www.nwrel.org/msec/images/resources/justgood/05.97.pdf

Kusnick, Judi (2002). Growing Pebbles and Conceptual Prisms- Understanding the Source of

Student Misconceptions about Rock Formation. Journal of Geoscience Education, 50(1), 31-39. Retrieved January 19, 2007, from http://www.nagt.org/files/nagt/jge/abstracts/Kusnick_v50n1p31.pdf

Stevenson, Steve (2001). Inquiry Based Methodology of Teaching. Retrieved January 19,

2007, from http://www.cs.clemson.edu/~steve/CW/Info/inquiry-based.htl

Szesze, Michael (2001). MCPS Science- Inquiry Description. Retrieved April 12, 2007, from http://www.mcps.k12.md.us/curriculum/science/instr/inq3levels.htm

Teacher's Guide: Information about the Process of Scientific Inquiry (2005). Doing Science-

Information about the Process of Scientific Inquiry. NIH, NIGMS, BSCS. Retrieved January 20, 2007, from http://science.education.nih.gov/supplements/nih6/inquiry/guide/info_process-a.htm

which has a greater effect on student performance, …melissk/classroombasedresearch.pdfmparente -...

Documents