After reading chapter one I gained a greater understanding of inquiry instruction. I agree that this type of instruction is more effective than just teaching the facts through lecture and note taking. The example of the teacher letting the children touch the leaves seems much more effective than the teacher just telling them about leaves. Students must definitely be actively involved in order to gain better understanding of their experiences. I liked how the steps in this teaching process do not make the student feel like information is being shoved at them. The book gave an example of a lesson on magnets. I loved how the teacher had the students work in groups and play with the magnets, as they generated questions about the magnets. She later wrote the rules of magnets on the board. This makes science fun. I was relieved that when at the end of page 21, the book mentioned that the pursuit of science, for most scientists, is sheer fun. Looking back, I did well in the classes that followed inquiry based instruction because they were fun and engaging. Few classes, that just showed overheads of notes upon notes, were not as exciting and felt like a chore. If I learned anything, it was facts that I applied to the test. These facts were soon forgotten.
I was stumped when the book said that educators need to encourage wonder. How do you encourage wonder? What do you do when there is a student that does not have that curiosity or rage to learn? How do you construct your lesson plan so that all students are actively participating? I agree with the statement that successful inquiry teaching depends on a group of additional teaching variables. I have witnessed this firsthand in an eighth grade classroom that I worked in last year. The teacher tried to implement inquiry based learning, but was faced with many other variables like classroom management issues and different learning levels. I also felt like he was rushing to get all the text book material covered. This leads me to some other questions. How does inquiry instruction relate to the text book? Does it only introduce the subject? Do textbooks offer an inquiry based activity to go along with the topic? Is it easier to implement this instruction in earlier grades, rather than in a middle school that is more content driven?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Francesca,
ReplyDeleteI think the authors do a good job of introducing the inquiry approach to teaching science. You know from your own experience that being actively involved in the learning process makes all the difference. And if scientists are in their field because of the “sheer fun” of it, then isn’t it incumbent on us, as teachers, to help students access the pleasure of pursuing science?
I have a sign that I keep next to my office door. It reads—"Give me the eyes of a child who looks at the world with wonder and embraces everything with loving enthusiasm." I think this is the attitude we want to promote amongst our students. But, you ask rightly—How? I think the answer is both simple and complex.
I’ll give you the simple answer first. If you, as the teacher, have the eyes of a child—that sense of wonder—then that will resonate with your students. You will, in effect, give them permission to tap into their own sense of wonder about the world.
The complex aspect of answering this question has to do, on the one hand, with the teacher’s own unique qualities as well as the diverse needs of the students in the class, as you yourself suggest.
Is inquiry teaching more suited to the early elementary grades? I don’t think so. But a person can’t simply be told this. They have to discover this for themselves.
I think that most teachers feel the pressure to cover content. But if we remember that our primary goal is to teach thinking, then the pressure for coverage can be lessened.
What about the use of science textbooks in an inquiry classroom? This is a great question. This will be something we will discuss in class. What do you think?