Keywords

Introduction

This famous quote by Benjamin Franklin truly explains the importance of participation of learners in the knowledge creation and the entire teaching–learning process. It clearly conveys an idea that learning cannot be imposed and it has to come from within, only when there is a complete involvement and participation of learner in the knowledge creation process. One such teaching approach is learning through inquiry (inquiry-based learning).

“Inquiry” is defined as a quest “for truth, information, or knowledge…seeking information by questioning” (Exline, 2004, 31). All of us are involved in inquiry process throughout our lives. Children begin learning about their environment through curious observations at an early stage. Inquiry-based learning is all about the process of self-discovery by the learners.

Over the past few years, various definitions of IBL have been proposed. Few of those definitions are presented below:

  • IBL is seen as ‘a cluster of strongly student-centered approaches to learning and teaching that are driven by inquiry or research.’ Levy, Little, Mckinney, Nibbs and Wood (2010, 6).

  • Within the realms of ‘inductive teaching’, defined as teaching that begins by ‘presenting students with a specific challenge, such as experimental data to interpret, a case study to analyse, or a complex real-world problem to solve.’ Prince and Felder (2007, 14).

  • IBL is seen as a teaching approach in which ‘some form of problem or task serves as a catalyst for student engagement and participation; learning comes as a consequence of the information processing that occurs as students work to explore the problem setting and to seek a solution.’ Oliver (2008, 288).

  • IBL refers to ’a range of instructional practices that promote student learning through student-driven and instructor-guided investigations of student-centered questions.’ Justice et al. (2007, 202) and finally

  • Further core elements of IBL were conceptualized to be driven by questions or problems; based on seeking new knowledge and understanding; and student-centered & directed, with teachers acting as facilitators. Spronken-Smith, Angelo, Matthews, O’Steen, and Robertson (2007).

Though IBL is widely advocated, there is little research about the use of same in higher education. This has however begun to change as various studies have been undertaken to develop conceptual frameworks (Healey 2005; Levy et al. 2010; Sproken-Smith et al. 2007); detailed case studies comprising different forms of IBL (Sproken-Smith & Walker, 2010); examination of students’ experiences of IBL (Ellis, Goodyear, Brilliant, & Prosser, 2007; Ellis et al., 2005; Levy and Petrulis 2011); and impact on student learning outcomes (Justice, Rice & Warry, 2009).

Most of the researches have been case studies of specific instances of IBL (e.g. Andrews & Jones, 1996; Justice et al. 2007; Oliver 2008; Rogers & Abell, 2008; Sproken-Smith et al., 2011). Even in Indian context, there are a few case studies with regard to IBL in higher education at micro-level (Jojo & Yeshudas, 2019). Thus, there is a dearth of systematic knowledge about the kinds of tasks that university teachers consider as inquiry-based, different forms of IBL that are practiced or the educational objectives that teachers intend to achieve through IBL. An interesting study was undertaken by Aditomo et al. (2013) in Australia to map the varieties of tasks that university teachers regarded as being inquiry-based. In their study, attempt was made to identify various patterns unique to each discipline to foster specific teaching–learning through IBL (Healey, 2005). The study suggests that university teachers made use of a wide variety of strategies such as scholarly research (focusing on specific research skills and processes), simplified research (to help student investigate answer to basic questions), applied research (which is more contextualized in and related to practical problems), developing intervention plans (in disciplines such as medicine), role playing, composing novels and poems (literature students) and also developing computer programs. It was found that a variety IBL teaching strategies helped students develop skills related to inquiry, critical thinking and basic research skills. These wide range of projects also helped students develop presentation and communication skills along with developing a positive attitude for inquiry. Thus, various scholars have argued that IBL as a standard pedagogical approach should be mainstreamed in all universities (Brew, 2003; Healey, 2005; Sproken-Smith et al., 2007).

Different Forms of IBL

Various IBL strategies have been grouped under broader categories of problem-based, project-based and case-based teaching (Mills & Treagust 2003; Prince & Felder, 2007) (Table 4.1).

Table 4.1 Problem-based, project-based and case-based teaching/learning
Full size table

Educational Objectives Associated with IBL

IBL aims towards developing students’ metacognitive knowledge and self-regulated learning skills together with skills such as critical thinking and problem-solving (Justice et al. 2007; Spronken-Smith & Walker 2010). These goals are also linked with affective dimensions such as ‘love of learning’ (Justice, Rice, & Warry, 2009).

Another set of objectives is related to research capabilities of students. As per the Boyer commission (1998), IBL is capable of developing spirit of inquiry amongst students. Justice and colleagues (2007) wrote that inquiry can promote students’ ability ‘to think critically and reflectively about the production of knowledge’.

IBL is also associated with goal of developing students’ skills in communication and collaboration. For instance, Justice et al. wrote of developing students’ oral and written communication and collaborative learning skills (Justice et al., 2007), while the Boyer Commission (1998, 13) wrote about the ‘skill of communication that is the hallmark of clear thinking as well as mastery of language’.

In short, IBL is associated with variety of learning objectives ranging from metacognition skills, enhancing research and communication skills to addressing affective domains also.

To foster learning through inquiry among students, specific roles of educators and learners have been mentioned, and also, the relevance of learning environment has been discussed in the following section.

Role of Educators

It is needless to say that an IBL classroom is more complex than a traditional classroom where an educator provides information in a unidirectional mode and learners just listen, taking notes in a passive manner, whereas in an IBL framework, educator is more of a facilitator of the learning activity, promoting student discussion and offering guidance rather than directing the activity (Herron, 2009; Uno, 1990; Wood, 2009). Primary function for an educator in IBL classroom is to create an environment which is most conductive to the learning, where students are encouraged to develop meaningful questions and explore the resources, actions, knowledge and skills required to help answer those questions. Furthermore, in order to be able to practice IBL as pedagogy in the classroom and other settings, teachers themselves need to have a democratic orientation having firm belief in each student’s ability to take ownership of self-directed learning. Educator serves as a guide and mentor providing democratically supportive learning environment to learners to facilitate their engagement in the inquiry and reflection processes. Highlighting the role of educator, Hoover argues that rather than being the “sage on the stage”, in a transmission mode of teaching, constructivist teachers should act as a “guide on the side” (Hoover, 1996). IBL appropriate teaching strategies also foster empowerment of learners through self-initiative and higher order thinking.

Role of Learners

IBL is intrinsically more participatory and authentic approach. Within IBL approach, learners are required to take increased ownership for their learning while working collaboratively with their instructors and peers to answer the questions or solve the problems related to the learning activities. In the process of answering those questions, learners develop many cognitive benefits such as critical and creative thinking, use of logic, reasoning and presentation of arguments in an effective manner. In nutshell, it can be said that IBL is a holistic learning strategy which help learners develop not only psychological, social and behavioural qualities but also adopt skills required for higher order thinking and lifelong learning.

Social Work Education in India

Social work is a discipline that is developed out of humanitarian and democratic ideals, and its values are based on equality, worth and dignity of people from all walks of social life. Human rights and social justice constitute its core. Social work profession is mandated to enhance wellbeing of people with specific focus to issues of empowerment of vulnerable groups who are already at the margins of society and living in abject poverty. Using methods of direct practice, community organization, research and advocacy, social workers strive to end discrimination, exploitation and various other forms of social and economic injustice. In order to engage with people and bring changes in their lives, it is essential that students of social work develop higher order skills, whereby they are in a position to align themselves with marginalized sections of society. At the same time, it is also required that students develop ability to critically review larger socio-political context and challenge the structure and system. Thus, social work education demands that learners are engaged in more meaningful way, whereby instead of rote learning and transmission of information, learners are involved in the process of analysis of issues and developing questions about structural issues both in classroom and field practicum processes.

As we all know that social work education is located within the national education systems of each country, there may however be variation in its content, pedagogy and practice as per socio-economic and political context of a particular nation. As there is no universal pattern of social work education, new set of Global Standards for the Education and Training of the Social Work Profession (2004) has been developed by the International Association for Schools of Social Work in consultation with the International Federation for Social Workers which provide guidelines for social work education and its practice all over the world (Baikady, Pulla, & Chanaveer, 2014).

In India, there seem to be vast distinctions both in the content and curriculum of social work education across institutes of social work mainly in the absence of unifying guidelines about social work education. On an average, Bachelor’s in social work degree carries 80 credits both in theory and fieldwork, and there is no provision of block placement at BSW level; however, study tours (or rural camps) are there with supervised instructions by the faculty and stated educational objectives. At PG level, also, there are wide variations in terms of contents of curriculum, and specializations offered by schools also vary. Master’s course carries 80–90 credits across four semesters, one-third of which is reserved for fieldwork practicum. There is also a month long block placement within the structure of masters degree mainly to provide students with on-the job experience and equipping them with the requisite skills to deal with job-related expectations (Baikady et al., 2014). Social work curriculum in India remains rather westernized and seems to be lacking the components of indigenized social work (Botcha, 2012). While this book is based on social work education in India and Australia, it becomes essential to provide a broader overview of social work education in Australia too. In Australia, BSW is a four-year programme, a basic requirement for entry into social work profession. All the courses are recognized by Australian Association of Social Workers (AASW, 2010). Social work education in Australia is generalist in nature having major thrust on core and common knowledge, skills, values and attitudes which are applicable to multiple practice settings. BSW programme is geared towards preparing graduates to be self-initiating, critically reflective and innovative along with being able to deal with diverse set of issues in multiple contexts and settings (AASW, 2010, p. 1). As per AASW Code of Ethics, social work profession in Australia is committed towards pursuit of social justice, enhancement of quality of life and also towards maximizing the potential of individual, family, group, community and society (2010).

IBL in Social Work Education

IBL is an innovative instructional model. It is closer to the academic approach in field instruction (Royse, Dhoppa, & Rompf, 2012). Professor Miriam Freeman in the College of Social Work, University of South Carolina, is a pioneer in using inquiry-based learning in social work education. In this method, educator facilitates the learning process by helping learners generate questions, investigate, construct knowledge and reflect. It is also to be noted that here, most of the prominent universities and schools of social work in India (Tata Institute of Social Sciences, University of Delhi, etc.) do follow a paradigm of education which is closely aligned with IBL pedagogical approaches. It is not a new invention in social work education; rather, social work discipline builds through inquiry and reflective processes, and the present essay is geared towards showcasing the efforts of social work educators in College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan, while engaging with IBL approaches. There are three major components in any social work programme across the globe, namely a standard theory base (with both the social sciences as foundation courses and core social work methods courses), a research project and field practicum or fieldwork. In College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan, a great amount of emphasis is placed on fieldwork and research along with theoretical inputs in the classroom spaces. It is also to be reiterated here that the richness of social work education draws itself from the constant and continuous interaction of these three components. In the following section, an attempt has been made to explore and analyse the application of IBL vis-à-vis three components of social work education and training (classroom teaching, field practicum and research project).

IBL in Social Work Classroom Teaching

It is to be noted here that the classrooms (both at undergraduate and postgraduate levels) in social work education are quite different from the typical classroom set-up in any other college. There are several differentiating criterions such as limited number of students in a social work classroom and also their diverse background representing various languages, regions and religions within the country. The entire social work education framework thus is much more individualized in approach respecting and appreciating these diversities and also ensuring that the students learn to imbibe the value base and principles of social work profession.

In order to achieve these objectives, social work education programme is designed with student induction and orientation programme (beginning of the academic year) along with classroom teaching and field practicum being structured within the training. Initial phase (through orientation programme and fieldwork skills laboratory sessions) is mainly geared towards helping students develop better self-awareness along with learning about their peers and develop bonding in the classroom situations. As part of these sessions also, students are engaged in a process of continuous self-reflection through various simulation games and group exercises.

As we all know that social work education aims at building a cadre of professionals who are able to critically reflect on the situation and are in a position to challenge exploitative social structures and systems. Students are provided with various opportunities of reflection and critical thinking as part of the teaching of various courses and fieldwork practicum. Thus, it wouldn't be wrong to say that social work education has components of IBL such as reflection and critical thinking engrained within itself.

IBL in Classroom Processes

Over the last few years, the author has been teaching two primary method courses at MSW 1st year level (Work with Individuals and Families and also Work with Groups). Both these courses require participatory pedagogies in which learners are provided with opportunities to reflect on their own values, stereotypes and biases and at the same time encounter with a new set of value base which is based on dignity and worth of all individuals. The author believes that most of these things cannot be taught in a lecture mode, therefore requiring various collaborative group exercises and discussions. Emphasis is placed on assisting students to undertake self-inquiry and also develop critical thinking skills. A case-based approach (refer problem-based, project-based and case-based forms of IBL) therefore is adopted while dealing with the topics of social work values and principles in the classroom teaching. Every year, there are almost 55 students in MSW class 1st year, for case-based learning and project-based learning; also, students are divided in smaller groups of 6–7 members in each group so that much more intensive discussion and reflection take place in a smaller group (utilizing group as a vehicle for self-reflection and self-improvement). Most discussions cannot be completed in the same class hour, and they tend to take additional time in subsequent lectures. Students (in different groups) are provided with various situations posing ethical dilemmas (such as encountering LGBT groups, HIV/AIDS-affected people, live-in relationship and pre-marital sexual engagement), whereby they are required to reflect and reveal their own biases about these case scenarios and address strategies to overcome those biases. Consequent to discussions in smaller groups, learners are required to share in the larger group (in front of the cohort). It is through this process that students are able to learn about their own biases, stereotypes, myths and misconceptions, also exhibit willingness to adopt a new set of value base respecting the basic worth and dignity of all individuals and also the choices which they make for their lives. Following is an example of few of the initiatives which the author has attempted to carry out within the classroom teaching using different forms of IBL (Table 4.2).

Table 4.2 Different forms of IBL in classroom teaching (case-based and project-based)
Full size table

Field practicum is an integral and unique component in social work education. It is a guided process of learning, whereby students are helped to engage with different realities of life and also enabled to apply principles and methods of social work as taught in classroom settings. However, it is the fieldwork instructor who has to provide opportunities to ensure that such learning takes place. In College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan, MSW final year students are expected to undertake a project work (as part of their fieldwork) in their fourth semester. The project work is an individual assignment of MSW second year student which is assessed at the end of academic year; the assessment pattern for this project work has both internal faculty marks along with viva-voice which is conducted by external panelists. Students are assessed on the basis of their presentation skills, clarity of thought, knowledge about the subject content and final report of the project work. Using the project work as a base, author (field instructor) attempted towards facilitating students’ learning using Justice et al. (2002) framework of inquiry in IBL. Justice et al. (2002) framework of inquiry is a five-stage process. It starts by engaging with a topic and developing basic literature review on it. At the second stage, questions are developed and data is gathered at the third stage which is then followed by analysis. At fourth stage, new knowledge is synthesized and communicated to wider audience followed by evaluation of the output. At all stages, participation of both the learners and instructors is ensured within the IBL framework. Here, an attempt has been made to present an account of project work of one of the MSW 2ndyear students with the author facilitating the use of Justice et al. (2002) framework of inquiry. One of the MSW second year students (Mr. Cyril Gaikwad) undertook a qualitative research study of problems faced by Child Welfare Committees in Mumbai in the academic year 2017–18 as part of his field practicum project work. Student was guided to use Justice et al. (2002) framework of inquiry and author as his fieldwork guide facilitated the entire process. Initially, though student was little hesitant to do extra readings and analysis, over a period of time, he developed interest in the process and came out with interesting analysis of the issue at hand (Table 4.3).

Table 4.3 Research-based and problem-based inquiry as part of field practicum
Full size table

It is through this process that student was not only able to develop inquiry, analysis and communication skills but also got a platform to engage with CWCs within the child protection mechanism in Mumbai city. To begin with, student is engaged with the topic and issue at a much deeper level (by undertaking a thorough review of the literature) followed by articulating a problem statement and data collection to go deeper into the issue using case-based method. The methodology adopted by student was more of qualitative in nature; he interviewed four CWC members from each of the CWCs in Mumbai district. A thematic analysis was thereafter carried out, and report was compiled and then presented in the college along with submitting findings to the appropriate authority. Along with learning about systematic process of engaging with an issue, student also fostered creative thinking and reflective skills while undertaking a problem-based inquiry as part of his project work in MSW final year field practicum.

It is thus clear that in social work discipline (through classroom teaching and field practicum), there is an ample scope to incorporate different forms of IBL approaches and facilitate holistic learning among students. As illustrated in above instances, use of IBL requires conscious efforts from educators and also a firm belief in the immense potential of young learners and practitioners. Students at master’s level come with lot of enthusiasm and zeal to bring about change. Using IBL within classroom and field settings, their positive energies could be directed towards self-reflection (necessitating to bring changes in their own selves first) and then learning about change strategies at other levels (e.g. beneficiaries and government and non-government setting in which they are placed for their fieldwork). IBL undoubtedly facilitated development of inquiry skills but also inculcated a passion for inquiry in addition to improving better communication and presentation skills.

However, in a country like India where education (both school and higher education) largely is still situated within the traditional paradigm of teaching and learning, effective implementation of inquiry-based pedagogies can prove to be quite challenging. Teachers still believe in transmission of information without any kind of participation from the learners and expect students to reproduce the same information in their assessments. Questioning, reflection, and critical thinking on the part of learners are rare things; rather, they are encouraged to be passive recipients of information in the classroom processes. Overall grades and academic performance are still a predominant criterion for assessment of students’ ability. Students coming as products out of such a system find difficult to engage with an issue whereby they are expected to reflect, analyse and develop their own set of questions as part of IBL pedagogical approaches. Self-expression and presentation skills also got restricted and limited in such situations. Also, these students find extremely difficult to engage in extra readings or undertake a thorough review of the literature for analysis of issues. Furthermore, generally, MSW classrooms have students coming from all walks of life representing diversities in terms of caste, class, gender, religion, region etc; being able to provide enough space for individual learning to each of the students is really a big challenge. Semester-based teaching is another serious constraint, whereby integrating IBL approaches with a large group of students from varied backgrounds is a severe challenge which most teachers find difficult to handle and then therefore resort to purely lecture mode of teaching.

Social work educators across the country are trying out various strategies to overcome various challenges, it here that the author would like to highlight some of the strategies which are being tried out at NN, could pave the way for effective implementation of IBL approaches in our classroom and fieldwork-related spaces. Social work educators in the entire process play a very important role; they do not function as content expert rather act as facilitator, working collaboratively with the students in the process of knowledge creation and reflection. Using collaborative learning approach within the classroom situations helps students develop better understanding about each other and address issues of subgroups and biases among students. It is also required that social work educators create such learning opportunities in the classroom so that students coming from vernacular and deprived backgrounds do not get alienated in the entire process; rather, they are involved as equal partners in co-creation of knowledge. Regarding students as active participants and having continuous dialogues in classroom, encouraging self-reading and presentation on behalf of students help foster creative and reflective thinking skills. It is to be noted here that learners are co-inquires in social work education as their contributions are informed by their experiences with reality mainly through field practicum. Thus, it becomes imperative for the social work educator to encourage learners to strengthen the teaching–learning processes by sharing their fieldwork experiences. It is clear from the above discussion that these strategies are meant not only to facilitate effective implementation of IBL approaches but also themselves constitute a range of IBL-based pedagogical approaches to make way for the holistic development of learner in the co-creation of knowledge and also play a vital role in their life-long and life-wide learning.