Abstract
Inquiry-based learning (IBL) is an educational approach in which learning is facilitated by engaging students in complex, authentic questions, or problems. In IBL, students typically apply methods and practices comparable to those of professional scientists. These methods and practices include the formulation of research questions and hypotheses and the testing of said hypotheses by means of observation or empirical tests and experimenting. This process guides learners toward discovering new causal relations. Learning in IBL is based on an active construction of knowledge, and the learner’s own responsibility for discovering new information is emphasized. The role of the professor or teacher is usually that of a facilitator. The effectiveness and efficacy of IBL have been continuously challenged over the past decades. Critics have proposed that IBL does not provide sufficient structure to help learners understand and apply important concepts and procedures of science. This chapter comes to the conclusion that it is essential to employ some level of guidance within IBL settings to help learners accomplish subtasks and overarching goals, and to effectively learn from the IBL activities. For IBL in Higher Education, the conclusions of this chapter highlight the importance of departmental and institutional support for transiting from teacher-led, traditional instructional approaches to IBL, with a focus on fostering dialogue about IBL principles and IBL effectiveness.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0021017.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Prospects and challenges for inquiry-based approaches to learning. In H. Dumont, D. Istance, & F. Benavides (Eds.), The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice (pp. 199–225). Paris, France: Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (OECD).
Bell, T., Urhahne, D., Schanze, S., & Ploetzner, R. (2010). Collaborative inquiry learning: Models, tools, and challenges. International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 349–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802582241.
Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead, UK: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Bittinger, M. L. (1968). A review of discovery. The Mathematics Teacher, 61(2), 140–146. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Boyer Commission. (1999). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research universities. Stony Brook, NY: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Bredderman, T. (1983). Effects of activity-based elementary science on student outcomes: A quantitative synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 499–518. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053004499.
Brew, A. (2006). Research and teaching: Beyond the divide. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bruce, B. C., & Casey, L. (2012). The practice of inquiry: A pedagogical ‘sweet spot’ for digital literacy? Computers in the Schools, 29(1–2), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2012.657994.
Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31(2), 21–32.
Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1956). A study of thinking. New York, NY: Wiley.
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness (pp. 88–89). Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS.
Chang, C.-Y., & Mao, S.-L. (1999). Comparison of Taiwan science students’ outcomes with inquiry-group versus traditional instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 92(6), 340–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220679909597617.
Chen, Z., & Klahr, D. (1999). All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. Child Development, 70(5), 1098–1120. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00081.
Corlu, M. A., & Corlu, M. S. (2012). Scientific inquiry based professional development models in teacher education. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(1), 514–521.
D’Angelo, C., Rutstein, D., Harris, C., Bernard, R., Borokhovski, E., & Haertel, G. (2014). Simulations for STEM learning: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Menlo Park: SRI International.
De Jong, T., & Lazonder, A. W. (2014). The guided discovery learning principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 371–390). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
de Jong, T., & Njoo, M. (1992). Learning and instruction with computer simulations: Learning processes involved. In E. De Corte, M. C. Linn, H. Mandl, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Computer-based learning environments and problem solving (pp. 411–427). Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
De Jong, T., & Van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068002179.
De Vries, B., Van der Meij, H., & Lazonder, A. W. (2008). Supporting reflective web searching in elementary schools. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 649–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.021.
Duschl, R. A. (2003). Assessment of inquiry. In J. M. Atkin & J. Coffey (Eds.), Everyday assessment in the science classroom (pp. 41–59). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268–291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371.
Edelson, D. C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 355–385. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3%3C355::AID-TEA1010%3E3.0.CO;2-M.
European Commission: Science, Economy, and Society. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111.
Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300–329. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206.
Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2009). Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. In Research report to the higher education academy. York, UK: Higher Education Academy.
Hermann, G. (1969). Learning by discovery: A critical review of studies. Journal of Experimental Education, 38(1), 58–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1969.11011167.
Hmelo, C., & Day, R. (1999). Contextualized questioning to scaffold learning from simulations. Computers & Education, 32(2), 151–164.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368.
Justice, C., Warry, W., Cuneo, C., Inglis, S., Miller, S., Rice, J., & Sammon, S. (2002). A grammar for inquiry: Linking goals and methods in a collaboratively taught social sciences inquiry course. The Alan Blizzard Award Paper: The Award Winning Papers. Canada: MrGraw-Hill Ryerson.
Kanari, Z., & Millar, R. (2004). Reasoning from data: How students collect and interpret data in science investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(7), 748–769. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20020.
Keselman, A. (2003). Supporting inquiry learning by promoting normative understanding of multivariable causality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(9), 898–921. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10115.
Kilpatrick, W. H. (1918). The project method. Teachers College Record, 19(4), 319–335.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.
Klahr, D. (2000). Exploring science: The cognition and development of discovery processes. Cambridge, UK: The MIT Press.
Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1201_1.
Klahr, D., Fay, A. L., & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 25(1), 111–146. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1993.1003.
Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 15(10), 661–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00737.x.
Koerber, S., Sodian, B., Kropf, N., Mayer, D., & Schwippert, K. (2011). The development of scientific reasoning in elementary school age: Understanding theories, designing experiments, interpreting data. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 43, 16–21. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/A000027.
Koerber, S., Sodian, B., Thoermer, C., & Nett, U. (2005). Scientific reasoning in young children: Preschoolers’ ability to evaluate covariation evidence. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 64(3), 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185.64.3.141.
Krajcik, J. S., Czerniak, C., & Berger, C. (1999). Teaching children science: A project-based approach. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill College.
Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, UK: Harvard University Press.
Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O’Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Kuhn, D., & Franklin, S. (2006). The second decade: What develops (and how). In W. Damon, R. M. Lerner, D. Kuhn, & R. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 2. Cognition, Perception, and Language (6th ed., pp. 953–994). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Kuhn, D., & Dean, J. (2008). Scaffolded development of inquiry skills in academically disadvantaged middle-school students. Journal of Psychology of Science and Technology, 1(2), 36–50.
Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681–718. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366.
Lee, V., Greene, D., Odom, J., Schechter, E., & Slatta, R. W. (2004). What is inquiry guided learning? In V. S. Lee (Ed.), Teaching and learning through inquiry: A guidebook for institutions and instructors (pp. 3–16). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Lehtinen, E. (2003). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An approach to powerful learning environments. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwisthle, & J. Van Merrienboer (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions (pp. 35–54). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2004). Education and the changing job market. Educational Leadership, 62(2), 80–84.
Lingnau, A., Kuhn, M., Harrer, A., Hofmann, D., Fendrich, M., & Hoppe, H. U. (2003). Enriching traditional classroom scenarios by seamless integration of interactive media. In V. Devedzic, J. Spector, D. Sampson, & D. Kinshuk (Eds.), Advanced learning technologies: Technology enhanced learning (pp. 135–139). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.
Manlove, S., Lazonder, A. W., & de Jong, T. (2007). Software scaffolds to promote regulation during scientific inquiry learning. Metacognition and Learning, 2(2–3), 141–155.
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19.
Mulder, Y. G., Lazonder, A. W., De Jong, T., Anjewierden, A., & Bollen, L. (2012). Validating and optimizing the effects of model progression in simulation-based inquiry learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 722–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.08.001.
Mulder, Y. G., Lazonder, A. W., & De Jong, T. (2014). Using heuristic worked examples to promote inquiry-based learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.08.001.
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Ruddock, G. J., O’Sullivan, C. Y., & Preuschoff, C. (2009). TIMSS 2011 assessment frameworks. Amsterdam, NL: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2001). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NCREL. (2003). 21st century skills: Literacy in the digital age. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL). Retrieved December 19, 2019, from https://pict.sdsu.edu/engauge21st.pdf
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). (2009). Annual report. Published under responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. Retrieved December 19, 2019, from https://www.oecd.org/newsroom/43125523.pdf
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Leijen, Ä., & Sarapuu, T. (2012). Improving students’ inquiry skills through reflection and self-regulation scaffolds. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 9(1–2), 81–95.
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., et al. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003.
Piekny, J., Gruber, D., & Maehler, C. (2014). The development of experimentation and evidence evaluation skills at preschool age. International Journal of Science Education, 36(2), 334–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.776192.
Piekny, J., & Maehler, C. (2013). Scientific reasoning in early and middle childhood: The development of domain-general evidence evaluation, experimentation, and hypothesis generation skills. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31(2), 153–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.2012.02082.x.
Pinkwart, N. (2003). A plug-in architecture for graph based collaborative modeling systems. In U. Hoppe, F. Verdejo, & J. Kay (Eds.), Shaping the future of learning through intelligent technologies. Proceedings of the 11th conference on artificial intelligence in education (pp. 535–536). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.
Pinkwart, N. (2005). Collaborative modeling in graph based environments. Berlin, Germany: dissertation.de.
Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education. London, UK: Routledge/Falmer.
Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students’ scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5–51. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1201_2.
Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic support for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345–372. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10130.
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago, IL: Open Court.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0303_3.
Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Duschl, R. A., Schulze, S., & John, J. (1995). Students’ understanding of the objectives and procedures of experimentation in the science classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), 131–166. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0402_1.
Schmidt, H. G. (1983). Problem-based learning: Rationale and description. Medical Education, 17(1), 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1983.tb01086.x.
Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Tolson, H., Huang, T. Y., & Lee, Y. H. (2007). A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 44(10), 1436–1460. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20212.
Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475–522. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1604_4.
Shadish, W., Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Shymansky, J. A., Hedges, L. V., & Woodworth, G. (1990). A reassessment of the effects of inquiry-based science curricula of the 60’s on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(2), 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660270205.
Slotta, J. D. (2004). The web-based inquiry science environment (WISE): Scaffolding knowledge integration in the science classroom. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 203–231). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Slotta, J. D., Jorde, D., & Holmes, J. (2007). Learning from our peers in international exchanges: When is worth doing, and how can we help it succeed? Unpublished Manuscript.
Sodian, B., Zaitchik, D., & Carey, S. (1991). Young children’s differentiation of hypothetical beliefs from evidence. Child Development, 62(4), 753–766. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1991.tb01567.x/.
Spronken-Smith, R., Walker, R., Batchelor, J., O’Steen, B., & Angelo, T. (2011). Enablers and constraints to the use of inquiry-based learning in undergraduate education. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2010.507300.
Steinke, P., & Fitch, P. (2011). Outcome assessment from the perspective of psychological science: The TAIM approach. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2011(149), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.377.
van Joolingen, W. R., de Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Savelsbergh, E. R., & Manlove, S. (2005). Co-Lab: Research and development of an online learning environment for collaborative scientific discovery learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(4), 671–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.039.
Varma, K. (2014). Supporting scientific experimentation and reasoning in young elementary school students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(3), 381–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9470-8.
Veenman, M. V. J., Wilhelm, P., & Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills from a developmental perspective. Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 89–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.004.
Wecker, C., Kohnle, C., & Fischer, F. (2007). Computer literacy and inquiry learning: When geeks learn less. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00218.x.
Weinstein, T., Boulanger, F. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1982). Science curriculum effects in high school: A quantitative synthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19(6), 511–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660190610.
White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1601_2.
Zumbach, J. (2003). Problembasiertes Lernen (problem-based learning). Münster, Germany: Waxmann Verlag.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Lippmann, M. (2021). Inquiry-Based Learning in Psychology. In: Zumbach, J., Bernstein, D., Narciss, S., Marsico, G. (eds) International Handbook of Psychology Learning and Teaching. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26248-8_59-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26248-8_59-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-26248-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-26248-8
eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education
Publish with us
Chapter history
-
Latest
Inquiry-Based Learning in Psychology- Published:
- 27 September 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26248-8_59-3
-
Inquiry-Based Learning in Psychology
- Published:
- 10 December 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26248-8_59-2
-
Original
Inquiry-Based Learning in Psychology- Published:
- 06 March 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26248-8_59-1