Instructional Science

, Volume 39, Issue 5, pp 721–735 | Cite as

Redesigning a curriculum for inquiry: an ecology case study

  • R. A. Spronken-Smith
  • R. Walker
  • K. J. M. Dickinson
  • G. P. Closs
  • J. M. Lord
  • T. Harland
Article

Abstract

This article reports on an interdisciplinary ecology degree that was redesigned to provide more research activity for undergraduates. A case study approach explored how the teaching team constructed a curriculum that used inquiry activities. The development of an inquiry curriculum was enabled by a University audit focusing on the links between teaching and research, a Programme Review that signalled a need for change, and a Programme Director and group of academics committed to change. In addition, curriculum planning discussions were facilitated by an academic staff developer, who developed a shared vision for an inquiry approach during extended conversations amongst the planning group. Consequently, the new programme progressively develops inquiry skills in four out of five core courses (papers/modules). At stages 1 and 2, structured, guided and open inquiry activities lead to an open inquiry capstone course at stage 3.

Keywords

Curriculum change Ecology Inquiry-based learning Undergraduate research 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by a New Zealand Ministry of Education ‘Teaching Matters Forum’ grant under contract 3651-005/5.

References

  1. Ai, R., Bhatt, M., Chevrier, S., Ciccarelli, R., Grady, R., Kumari, V., Li, K., Nazarali, N., Rahimi, H., Roberts, J., Sachs, J., Schepmyer, A., Wang, M., & Wong, H. (2006). Choose your own inquiry. Unpublished report, University of McMaster.Google Scholar
  2. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning—An approach to medical education. New York: Springer Publishing Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  3. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university (3rd ed.). Maidenhead, Berkshire: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Boyer Commission. (1999). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research universities. Stony Brook, NY: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  5. Brew, A. (2003). Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 22(1), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Guerra-Bobo, M., & Brough, T. E. (2010) Neighbour density, body size and anti-predator hiding time in the New Zealand mud-crab Austrohelice crassa. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. doi: 10.1017/S0025315410001049.
  8. Harden, R., & Stamper, N. (1999). What is a spiral curriculum? Medical Teacher, 21(2), 141–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching to benefit student learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29(2), 183–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hubball, H., & Gold, N. (2007). The scholarship of curriculum practice and undergraduate program reform: Integrating theory into practice. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 112(Winter), 5–14.Google Scholar
  11. Hyman, M., & Luginbuhl, G. (2004). Inquiry-guided learning and the undergraduate major in the department of microbiology. In V. S. Lee (Ed.), Teaching and learning through inquiry: A guidebook for institutions and instructors (pp. 129–141). Sterling. VA: Stylus.Google Scholar
  12. Jenkins, A., Breen, R., Lindsay, R., & Brew, A. (2003). Re-shaping higher education: Linking teaching and research. London: Routledge-Falmer.Google Scholar
  13. Jenkins, A., Healey, M., & Zetter, R. (2007). Linking teaching and research in disciplines and departments. York: The Higher Education Academy.Google Scholar
  14. Johnston, M. (2006). Implementing curricular change. Computing in Science and Engineering, 2006, 32–37.Google Scholar
  15. Justice, C., Rice, J., & Warry, W. (2009). Academic skill development—Inquiry seminars can make a difference: Evidence from a quasi-experimental study. International Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
  16. Justice, C., Rice, J., Warry, W., Inglis, S., Miller, S., & Sammon, S. (2007). Inquiry in higher education: Reflections and directions on course design and teaching methods. Innovative Higher Education, 31(4), 201–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics’ conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7(3), 255–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Lee, V. S., Greene, D. B., 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.Google Scholar
  20. Lee, V. S., Hyman, M. R., & Luginbuhl, G. (2007). The concept of readiness in the academic department: A case study of undergraduate education reform. Innovative Higher Education, 32, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Levy, P. (2008). Working Paper, CILASS Third Mondays Research Seminar Series, 17 November 2008. Accessed May 1, 2009, from http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/cilass/resources/thirdmondays.html.
  22. Levy, P. (2009). Inquiry-based learning: A conceptual framework. Centre for Inquiry-based Learning in the Arts and Social Sciences, University of Sheffield. Accessed May 1, 2009, from http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/cilass/resources.
  23. Maurer, D. (2007). Teaching inquiry at McMaster: The impact on the instructor. In C. Knapper (Ed.), Experiences with inquiry learning: Proceedings of a symposium at McMaster University, October 1–3, 2004 (pp. 81–88). Hamilton, ON: Centre for Leadership in Learning, McMaster University.Google Scholar
  24. New Zealand Government. (1989). Education Act. Wellington: Government Printer.Google Scholar
  25. Prince, M. J., & Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 123–138.Google Scholar
  26. Roy, D., Borin, P., & Kustra, E. (2007). Assisting curriculum change through departmental initiatives. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 112, 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Spronken-Smith, R. A., & Harland, A. (2009). Learning to teach with problem-based learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 10, 138–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Spronken-Smith, R., & Walker, R. (2010) Can inquiry-based learning strengthen the links between teaching and disciplinary research? Studies in Higher Education, 35(6), 723–740.Google Scholar
  29. Spronken-Smith, R., Walker, R., Batchelor, J., O’Steen, B., & Angelo, T. (2010a). Enablers and barriers to the use of inquiry in undergraduate education. Teaching in Higher Education (in press).Google Scholar
  30. Spronken-Smith, R., Walker, R., Batchelor, J., O’Steen, B. & Angelo, T. (2010b). Evaluating student perceptions of learning processes and intended learning outcomes under inquiry approaches. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2010.496531.
  31. Spronken-Smith, R. A., Walker, R., Batchelor, J., O’Steen, B., Angelo, T., & Matthews, H. (2008). Inquiry-based learning. Prepared for the New Zealand Ministry of Education, July 2008. Accessed June 10, 2009, from http://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/projects/inquiry-based-learning.
  32. Staver, J. R., & Bay, M. (1987). Analysis of the project synthesis goal cluster orientation and inquiry emphasis of elementary science textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 629–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wolf, P. (2007). A model for facilitating curriculum development in higher education: A faculty-driven, data-informed, and educational developer-supported approach. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 112, 15–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. A. Spronken-Smith
    • 1
  • R. Walker
    • 1
  • K. J. M. Dickinson
    • 2
  • G. P. Closs
    • 2
  • J. M. Lord
    • 2
  • T. Harland
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Higher Education Development CentreUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand
  2. 2.Ecology Degree ProgrammeUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations