Journal of Science Teacher Education

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 257–279 | Cite as

Dilemmas of Teaching Inquiry in Elementary Science Methods

  • William J. NewmanJr.
  • Sandra K. Abell
  • Paula D. Hubbard
  • James McDonald
  • Justine Otaala
  • Mariana Martini
Article

Abstract

Because various definitions of inquiry exist in the science education literature and in classroom practice, elementary science methods students and instructors face dilemmas during the study of inquiry. Using field notes, instructor anecdotal notes, student products, and course artifacts, science methods course instructors created fictional journal entries to represent the experiences of both the instructors and students during instruction on inquiry. Identified dilemmas were varying definitions of inquiry, the struggle to provide sufficient inquiry-based science-learning experiences, perceived time constraints, determining how much course time should be slated for science instruction versus pedagogy instruction, instructors' and students' lack of inquiry-based learning experiences, grade versus trust issues, and students' science phobia. Instructors' attempts at dealing with these dilemmas included using analogies, increased field-experience time, modeling, and detailed rubrics.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abell, S. K., & Bryan, L. S. (1997). Reconceptualizing the elementary science meth-ods course using a reflection orientation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 153–166.Google Scholar
  2. Abell, S. K., Bryan, L. A., & Anderson, M. A. (1998). Investigating preservice elementary science teacher reflective thinking using integrated media case-based instruction in elementary science teacher preparation. Science Education, 82, 491–510.Google Scholar
  3. Abell, S. K., George, M. D., & Martini, M. (2002). Instructional strategies for teaching phases of the moon in elementary methods. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 85–100.Google Scholar
  4. Abell, S. K., Martini, M., & George, M. D. (2001). “That's what scientists have to do”: Preservice elementary teachers' conceptions of the nature of science during a moon investigation. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 1095–1109.Google Scholar
  5. Abell, S. K., & Smith, D. C. (1994). What is science? Preservice elementary teachers' conceptions of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 16, 475–487.Google Scholar
  6. Allen, S. (1997). Using scientific inquiry activities in exhibit explanations. Science Education, 81, 715–734.Google Scholar
  7. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989). Science for all Amer-icans: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 1–12.Google Scholar
  10. Andersen, H. O., & Speece, S. (1995). The national science education standards: Program standards. The Hoosier Science Teacher, 21, 38–45.Google Scholar
  11. Ash, D., & Kluger-Bell, B. (1999). Identifying inquiry in the K–5 classroom. Foundations (Vol. 2, NSF Rep. No. NSF99148, pp. 79–85). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  12. Bianchini, J. A., & Colburn, A. (2000). Teaching the nature of science through inquiry to prospective elementary teachers: A tale of two researchers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 177–209.Google Scholar
  13. Bloom, J. W. (2000). Creating a classroom community of young scientists: A desktop companion. Toronto, Ont., Canada: Irwin.Google Scholar
  14. Caton, E., Brewer, C., & Brown, F. (2000). Building teacher-scientist partnerships: Teaching about energy through inquiry. School Science and Mathematics, 100, 7–15.Google Scholar
  15. Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. ScienceScope, 23(6), 42–44.Google Scholar
  16. Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 916–937.Google Scholar
  17. Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 391–450.Google Scholar
  18. Gallas, K. (1995). Talking their way into science. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  19. Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 631–645.Google Scholar
  20. Keys, C. W., & Kennedy, V. (1999). Understanding inquiry science teaching in context: A case study of an elementary teacher. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10, 315–333.Google Scholar
  21. Kluger-Bell, B. (1999). Recognizing inquiry: Comparing three hands-on teaching techniques. Foundations (Vol. 2, NSF Rep. No. NSF99148, pp. 39–50). Wash-ington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  22. Lederman, N. G., & Niess, M. L. (2000). Problem solving and solving problems: Inquiry about inquiry. School Science and Mathematics, 100, 113–116.Google Scholar
  23. Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  24. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 163–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Luft, J. A. (1999). Assessing science teachers as they implement inquiry lessons: The extended inquiry observation rubric. Science Educator, 8(1), 9–18.Google Scholar
  26. Marshall, J. A., & Dorward, J. T. (2000). Inquiry experiences as a lecture supplement for preservice elementary teachers and general education students. American Journal of Physics, 68(7), S27–S36.Google Scholar
  27. Martini, M., & Abell, S. K. (2000). The influence of studying the moon on preservice elementary teachers? Conceptions of science teaching and learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  28. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  29. National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  30. Ogle, D. M. (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564–570.Google Scholar
  31. Rossman, A. D. (1993). Managing hands-on inquiry. Science and Children, 31(1), 35–37.Google Scholar
  32. Schwandt, T. A. (1997). Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: In-terpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 189–214). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Stoddart, T., Abrams, R., Gasper, E., & Canaday, D. (2000). Concept maps as assessment in science inquiry learning: A report of methodology. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1221–1246.Google Scholar
  35. Trowbridge, L. W., & Bybee, R. W. (1996). Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing scientific literacy (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.Google Scholar
  36. von Glasersfeld, E. (1996). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  37. Whitin, P., & Whitin, D. J. (1997). Inquiry at the window: Pursuing the wonders of learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • William J. NewmanJr.
    • 1
  • Sandra K. Abell
    • 2
  • Paula D. Hubbard
    • 3
  • James McDonald
    • 4
  • Justine Otaala
    • 3
  • Mariana Martini
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Science EducationIllinois Institute of TechnologyChicagoU.S.A
  2. 2.Southwestern Bell Science Education CenterUniversity of Missouri-ColumbiaColumbiaU.S.A
  3. 3.Department of Curriculum & InstructionPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteU.S.A
  4. 4.Department of Teacher Education and Professional DevelopmentCentral Michigan UniversityMt. PleasantU.S.A

Personalised recommendations