Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning to Research Through Inquiry-Based Learning - A Field Report from Exploratory Sexual Research in Psychology

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Towards a Hybrid, Flexible and Socially Engaged Higher Education (ICL 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems ((LNNS,volume 899))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 107 Accesses

Abstract

Research is a challenging aspect for students for several reasons: Research is a complex process that is usually addressed in many small-scale steps in a wide variety of courses. However, students often fail to see the big picture. This paper describes a competence-oriented inquiry-based learning approach to improve psychology students’ research skills. In a capstone project, students are guided by the instructor through a complete research process in which they define their own research question, decide independently on the research design, and conduct and document the research. They conduct guided interviews on “explorative sexual research”. Evaluation shows the high gain of competence for students. At some point, students ask for a little more assistance for example by preparing a research report.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rózsa, J., Bauer, S., Edinger, S.: CORE-Gerechte Modulkonzeption. SRH Hochschule Heidelberg, Heidelberg (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bandura, A.: Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Adv. Behav. Res. Ther. 1, 139–161 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Arnold, R. (ed.): Lebendiges Lernen. Schneider, Baltmannsweiler (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Mertens, D.: Schlüsselqualifikationen. Thesen zur Schulung für eine moderne Gesellschaft. Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung 7, 36–43 (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Arnold, R.: Bildung nach Bologna!: Die Anregungen der europäischen Hochschulreform. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-08978-8

  6. Sedelmaier, Y., Landes, D.: Active and inductive learning in software engineering education. In: 37th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 418–427 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sedelmaier, Y., Landes, D.: Software engineering body of skills. In: 5th IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), pp. 395–401. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sedelmaier, Y., Landes, D.: Practicing soft skills in software engineering. In: Yu, L. (ed.) Overcoming Challenges in Software Engineering Education, pp. 161–179. IGI Global (2014). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-5800-4.ch009

  9. Sedelmaier, Y., Landes, D.: A multi-level didactical approach to build up competencies in requirements engineering. In: Penzenstadler, B., Gregory, S., and Landes, D. (eds.) 8th Int. Workshop on Requirements Engineering Education & Training Co-located with 22nd International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE 2014), pp. 26–34. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Karlskrona, Schweden (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sedelmaier, Y., Landes, D.: A multi-perspective framework for evaluating software engineering education by assessing students’ competencies: SECAT—a software engineering competency assessment Tool. In: 44th IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), pp. 2065–2072. IEEE, Madrid (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Sedelmaier, Y., Landes, D.: Evaluating didactical approaches based upon students’ competences. In: 7th IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), pp. 527–536. IEEE (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2016.7474603

  12. Sedelmaier, Y.: Basics of Didactics for Software Engineering. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, London (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bell, T., Urhahne, D., Schanze, S., Ploetzner, R.: Collaborative inquiry learning: models, tools, and challenges. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 32, 349–377 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802582241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Huber, L.: Warum Forschendes Lernen nötig und möglich ist. (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Reich, K.: Konstruktivistische Didaktik: das Lehr- und Studienbuch mit Online-Methodenpool. Beltz, Weinheim Basel (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Siebert, H.: Pädagogischer Konstruktivismus: Lernzentrierte Pädagogik in Schule und Erwachsenenbildung. Beltz, Weinheim (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Holzkamp, K.: Wider den Lehr-Lern-Kurzschluß. In: Arnold, R. (ed.) Lebendiges Lernen, pp. 21–30. Schneider, Baltmannsweiler (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schwab, J.J., Brandwein, P.F. (eds.): The Teaching of Science: The Teaching of Science as Enquiry. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Banchi, H., Bell, R.: The many levels of inquiry. Sci. Child. 46, 26–29 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  20. DGP.: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychologie e.V. Psychologische Rundschau. 74, 24–80 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1026/0033-3042/a000619

  21. DGPs.: Empfehlungen des DGPs-Vorstands zu Bachelor- und Masterstudiengängen in Psychologie (2021). https://www.dgps.de/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/Empfehlungen/Empfehlungen_des_Vorstands_Bachelor_und_Master_15_12_14.pdf

  22. EFPA.: EuroPsy—the European certificate in psychology. EFPA Regulations on EuroPsy and Appendices (2021). https://www.europsy.eu/_webdata/europsy_regulations_december_2021_virtual_ga.pdf

  23. Mager, R.F.: Preparing Instructional Objectives. Kogan Page, London (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Arnold, R., Erpenbeck, J.: Wissen ist keine Kompetenz: Dialoge zur Kompetenzreifung. Schneider, Baltmannsweiler (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Roth, H.: Entwicklung und Erziehung: Grundlagen einer Entwicklungspädagogik. Schroedel, Hannover (1971)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Birk, A., Dingsoyr, T., Stalhane, T.: Postmortem: never leave a project without it. IEEE Softw. 19, 43–45 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2002.1003452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Stang, P., Rico-Dresel, D.: Einfluss eines vierwöchigen achtsamkeitsbasierten Trainings auf die Lebenszufriedenheit. PPmP—Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie (2023). https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2050-3633

  28. Stang, P., Köllner, M., Weiss, M.: Fachtag Psyche und Gesundheit im Einklang, Fürth (2023)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Stang, P., Wüchner-Fuchs, M.: Sexualität und Geschlecht im Kontext von Menschen mit Behinderung. In: Versorgungsstrukturen von Menschen in vulnerablen Lebenslagen. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Schneider, D., Doganay, C.: Sexuelle Zufriedenheit bei jungen Männern in verschiedenen Beziehungsstadien (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Derogatis, L.R., Melisaratos, N.: The DSFI: a multidimensional measure of sexual functioning. J. Sex Marital Ther. 5, 244–281 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1080/00926237908403732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Irmer, J.: Die Rolle des Sexuallebens in einer romantischen Partnerschaft für die Beziehungszufriedenheit. Der Fragebogen zum Erleben von Sexualität in engen Partnerschaften (FESP). J. Fam. Res. 20, 229–246 (2008). https://doi.org/10.20377/jfr-244

  33. Mayring, P.: Qualitative Content Analysis. SAGE Publications Ltd, London (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Firnges, A., Hofer, H., Maier, A.: Empirisches Forschungsseminar (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Bucher, T., Hornung, R., Buddenberg, C.: Sexualität in der zweiten Lebenshälfte: Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung. Z Sex-Forsch. 16, 249–270 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2003-43537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Schönbucher, V.: Sexuelle Zufriedenheit von Frauen: psychosoziale Faktoren. Z Sex-Forsch. 20, 21–41 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-960559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Prentki, D.: Sexuelle Zufriedenheit von Frauen. Eine Studie zum Vergleich verschiedener Altersgruppen. Diplomica, Hamburg (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Karl, N., Schuster, I.: Empirische Forschungsarbeit (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Renaud, C., Byers, E.S., Pan, S.: Sexual and relationship satisfaction in Mainland China. J. Sex Res. 34, 399–410 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Reinwald, T., Tursic, L.: Empirisches Forschungsprojekt zur emotionalen Nähe und sexuellen Zufriedenheit (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Øverup, C.S., Smith, C.V.: Considering attachment and partner perceptions in the prediction of physical and emotional sexual satisfaction. J. Sex. Med. 14, 134–143 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.11.310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Soeder, M.: Fragebogen zur sexuellen Zufriedenheit (SZ) (2007). https://www.praxis-fuer-maenner.de/organisation/php/syntax_sz.php

  43. Byers, E.S.: Beyond the birds and the bees and was it good for you?: thirty years of research on sexual communication. Can. Psychol./Psychol. Can. 52, 20–28 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Schmiedeberg, C., Schröder, J.: Does sexual satisfaction change with relationship duration? Arch. Sex. Behav. 45, 99–107 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0587-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Büsing, S., Hoppe, C., Liedtke, R.: Sexuelle zufriedenheit von frauen—entwicklung und ergebnisse eines fragebogens. Psychother. Psychosom. Med. Psychol. 51, 68–75 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2001-10757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lawrance, K.-A., Byers, E.S.: Sexual satisfaction in long-term heterosexual relationships: the interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction. Pers. Relat. 2, 267–285 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00092.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We thank all participating students, Cenk Doganay, Anouk Firnges, Hannah Hofer, Natascha Karl, Anne Maier, Tita Reinwald, Daniel Schneider, Isabell Schuster, and Leonie Tursic, as well as the subjects.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. SRH Wilhelm Loehe University of Applied Sciences, Merkurstraße 19, 90763, Fuerth, Germany

    Philipp Stang & Yvonne Sedelmaier

  2. University of Applied Sciences Coburg, Friedrich-Streib-Straße 2, 96450, Coburg, Germany

    Yvonne Sedelmaier

Authors
  1. Philipp Stang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yvonne Sedelmaier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yvonne Sedelmaier .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CTI Global, Frankfurt, Germany

    Michael E. Auer

  2. UTN—FRBA, Mozart, Argentina

    Uriel R. Cukierman

  3. DISA, Technical University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain

    Eduardo Vendrell Vidal

  4. UPM, ETSII, Madrid, Spain

    Edmundo Tovar Caro

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Stang, P., Sedelmaier, Y. (2024). Learning to Research Through Inquiry-Based Learning - A Field Report from Exploratory Sexual Research in Psychology. In: Auer, M.E., Cukierman, U.R., Vendrell Vidal, E., Tovar Caro, E. (eds) Towards a Hybrid, Flexible and Socially Engaged Higher Education. ICL 2023. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 899. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51979-6_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation