RESEARCH PAPER
Efficacy of Inquiry-Based and “Cookbook” Labs at Human Physiology Lessons at University Level - Is There an Impact in Relation to Acquirement of New Knowledge and Skills?
,
 
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, Faculty of Education, Department of Biology, CZECH REPUBLIC
 
 
Publication date: 2020-10-29
 
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2020;16(12):em1909
 
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The main objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of inquiry-based science education in Human biology lessons at the university level and compare this efficacy with traditional laboratory works using “cookbook” manuals written by teachers. Pre-tests and post-tests were used to measure the level of students’ knowledge and scientific skills before the set of laboratory works and after. By knowledge, we understand the content knowledge of Human physiology, e.g., understanding of terms and phenomena, and by scientific skills, we understand operations students need to know to be able to design their own experiments, interpret their findings and set final conclusions. Biology major (N = 53) and non-biology major (N = 115) students of the University were involved in this study. They attended a one-term course and were divided into two groups, an experimental one (N = 98) with an inquiry-based science education (IBSE) approach and a control group (N = 70) based on traditional laboratory works where students follow step-by-step the instructions by the teacher. We found that IBSE led to a similar or slightly higher acquirement of knowledge in comparison to traditional labs, but this effect was not statistically different. A significant change was found in relation to the level of new skills acquirement of students where students from the experimental group with IBSE approach achieved better results. We also compared efficacy among non-biology and biology major students and no differences in IBSE efficacy based on the type of the study programme were found there.
REFERENCES (69)
1.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., & Hofstein, A., et al. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397-419. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10....
 
2.
Akuma, F. V., & Callaghan, R. (2018). Teaching practices linked to the implementation of inquiry-based practical work in certain science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56, 64-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21....
 
3.
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015....
 
4.
Banchi, H., & Bell, R. (2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and Children, 46(2), 26-29.
 
5.
Berg, C. A. R., Bergendahl, V. C. B., Lundberg, B. K. S., & Tibell, L. (2003). Benefiting from an open-ended experiment? A comparison of attitudes to, and outcomes of, an expository versus an open-inquiry version of the same experiment. International Journal of Science Education, 25(3), 351-372. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
6.
Blanchard, M., Southerland, S. A., Osborne, J. W., Sampson, V. D., Annetta, L. A., & Granger, E. M. (2010). Is inquiry possible in light of accontability?: A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction. Science Education, 94(4), 577-616. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20....
 
7.
Blazar, D., & Kraft, M. A. (2017). Teacher and Teaching Effects on Students’ Attitudes and Behaviors. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 146-170. https://doi.org/10.3102/016237....
 
8.
Blazek, R., & Prihodova, S. (2016). Mezinarodni setreni PISA 2015: Narodni zprava - prirodovedna gramotnost [PISA 2015: National report - scientific literacy]. Prague: Czech School Inspectorate.
 
9.
Blazek, R., Janotova, Z., Poztuznikova, E., & Basl, J. (2019). Mezinarodni setreni PISA 2018. Narodni zprava [PISA 2018: National report]. Prague: Czech School Inspectorate.
 
10.
Boudova, S., Stastny, V., Basl, J., Zatloukal, T., Andrys, O., & Prazakova, D. (2020). Mezinarodni setreni TALIS 2018. Narodni zprava [TALIS 2018: National report]. Prague: Czech School Inspectorate.
 
11.
Brown, A., & Campione, J. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In: K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom Lessons: Integrating Cognitive Theory and Classroom Practice (pp. 229-270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
 
12.
Bruder, R., & Prescott, A. (2013). Research evidence on the benefits of IBL. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45, 811-822. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858....
 
13.
Buck, B. L., Bretz, S. L., & Towns, M. H. (2008). Characterizing the level of inquiry in the undergraduate laboratory. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38(1), 52-58.
 
14.
Chall, J. S. (2000). The academic achievement challenge. New York: Guilford.
 
15.
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/10.1080/002206....
 
16.
Chraska, M. (2011). Metody pedagogickeho vyzkumu: Zaklady kvantitativniho vyzkumu [Methods of pedagogical research: Foundations of qualitative research]. Prague: Grada.
 
17.
Cobern, W. W., Schuster, D., Adams, B., Applegate, B., Skjold, B., Undreiu, A., Loving, C. C., & Gobert, J. D. (2010). Experimental comparison of inquiry and direct instruction in science. Research in Science & Technological Education, 28(1), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/026351....
 
18.
Dolin, J., & Evans, R. (2018). Transforming Assessment: Through an Interplay Between Practice, Research and Policy. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-....
 
19.
Domin, D. S. (1999). A review of laboratory teaching styles. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 543-547. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p....
 
20.
Duran, M., & Dökme, I. (2016). The effect of the inquiry-based learning approach on student’s critical-thinking skills. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(12), 2887-2908. https://doi.org/10.12973/euras....
 
21.
Dylevsky, I., Stastny, F., & Trojan, S. (1984). Prakticka cviceni ze somatologie [Practical laboratory works from somatology]. Prague: Avicenum.
 
22.
Eastwell, P. (2009). Inquiry learning: Elements of confusion and frustration. The American Biology Teacher, 71(5), 263-264. https://doi.org/10.1662/005.07....
 
23.
Eurydice (2011). Science education in Europe: National practices, policies and research. Brussels: European Commission. https://doi.org/10.2797/7170.
 
24.
Fitzgerald, M., Danaia, L., & McKinnon, D. H. (2019). Barriers Inhibiting Inquiry-Based Science Teaching and Potential Solutions: Perceptions of Positively Inclined Early Adopters. Research in Science Education, 49, 543-566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165....
 
25.
Furtak, E. M. (2006). The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90(3), 453-467. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20....
 
26.
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, 300-329. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465....
 
27.
García-Carmona, A. (2019). Pre-service Primary Science Teachers’ Abilities for Solving a Measurement Problem Through Inquiry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763....
 
28.
García-Carmona, A. (2020). From Inquiry-Based Science Education to the Approach Based on Scientific Practices. Science & Education, 29, 443-463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191....
 
29.
García-Carmona, A., Criado, A. M., & Cruz-Guzmán, M. (2018). Prospective primary teachers’ prior experiences, conceptions, and pedagogical valuations of experimental activities in science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(2), 237-253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763....
 
30.
Gibson, H. L. (1998, April). Case studies of an inquiry-based science programs’ impact on students’ attitudes towards science and interest in science careers. Paper presented at annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 19. - 22. 4. 1998, San Diego, CA.
 
31.
Hazelkorn, E., Ryan, C., Beernaert, Y., Constantinou, C., Deca, L., Grangeat, M., … Welzel-Breuer, M. (2015). Science education for Responsible Citizenship (No. EUR 26893). Brussels: European Commission - Research and Innovation.
 
32.
Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). Expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38, 23-31. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326....
 
33.
Ketelhut, D. J. (2007). The impact of student self-efficacy on scientific inquiry skills: An exploratory investigation in River City, a multi-user virtual environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956....
 
34.
Khishfe, R., & Abd-Al-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10....
 
35.
Kim, M., Tan, A-L., & Talaue, F. (2013). New vision and challenges in inquiry-based curriculum change in Singapore. International Journal of Science Education, 35(2), 289-311. https://doi.org/0.1080/0950069....
 
36.
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/s15326....
 
37.
Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 15, 661-667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956....
 
38.
Lederman, N. G., Abell, S., & Akerson, V. (2008). Students’ knowledge and skills with inquiry. In E. Abrams, S. A. Southerland & P. Silva (Eds.), Inquiry in the classroom: Realities and opportunities (3-38). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
 
39.
Levy, A. J., Minner, D. D., & Jablonski, E. S. (2007, April). Inquiry-based science instruction and students’ science content knowledge: A research synthesis. Paper presented at annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 15. - 18. 4. 2007, New Orleans, LA, USA.
 
40.
Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. (2004). Internet environments for science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/978141....
 
41.
Llewellyn, D. (2011). Differentiated Science Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
 
42.
Lord, T., & Orkwiszewski, T. (2006). Moving from didactic to inquiry-based instruction in a science laboratory. The American Biology Teacher, 68(6), 342-345. https://doi.org/10.2307/445200....
 
43.
Mattheis, F. E., & Nakayama, G. (1988). Effects of a laboratory-centered inquiry program on laboratory skills, science process skills, and understanding of science knowledge in middle grades students [online, cit. 4. 7. 2019]. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fullt....
 
44.
Matthews, K. E., Adams, P., & Goos, M. (2010). Using the principles of BIO2010 to develop an introductory, interdisciplinary course for biology students. CBE-Life Science Education, 9, 290-297. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10....
 
45.
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction - What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
 
46.
Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load in novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32, 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC....
 
47.
NIE (2007). Ramcovy vzdělávací program pr ogymnazia [Framework Education Programme for grammar schools]. Prague: National Institute for Education.
 
48.
NIE (2017). Ramcovy vzdělávací program pro zakladni vzdelavani [Framework Education Programme for Elementary Education]. Prague: National Institute for Education.
 
49.
OECD (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework. Science, reading, mathematic and financial literacy. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/978926....
 
50.
OECD (2020). PISA 2024: Strategic Vision and Direction for Science (Final draft) [online, cit. 16. 6. 2020]. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publ....
 
51.
Osborne, J. F., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections [cit. 4. 7. 2019]. https://doi.org/10.2777/12626.
 
52.
Papacek, M., Cizkova, V., Kubiatko, M., Petr, J., & Zavodska, R. (2015). Didaktika biologie: didaktika v rekonstrukci [Biology Didactics: didactics in reconstruction]. In I. Stuchlikova & T. Janik (Eds.), Oborove didaktiky: vyvoj - stav - perspektivy (225-257). Brno: Masaryk University.
 
53.
Radvanova, S. (2017). Efektivita vybranych vzdelavacich postupu ve vyuce biologie [The efficiency of selected educational practices in biology teaching]. PhD thesis. Prague: Charles University, Faculty of Education.
 
54.
Ramnarain, U. (2018). Scientific literacy in East Asia: Shifting toward an inquiry-informed learning perspective. In Primary science education in East Asia (pp. 201-213). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-....
 
55.
Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Wahlberg-Henrikson, H., & Hermmo, U. (2007). Science education NOW: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission.
 
56.
Rönnebeck, S., Bernholt, S., & Ropohl, M. (2016). Searching for a common ground-A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities. Studies in Science Education, 52(2), 161-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/030572....
 
57.
Russell, C. B., & Weaver, G. C. (2008). Student perceptions of the purpose and function of the laboratory in science: A grounded theory study. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsot....
 
58.
Sadeh, I., & Zion, M. (2009). The development of dynamic inquiry performances within an open inquiry setting: A comparison to guided inquiry setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10), 1137-1160. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
 
59.
Schlatter, E., Molenaar, I., & Lazonder, A. W. (2020) Individual Differences in Children’s Development of Scientific Reasoning Through Inquiry-Based Instruction: Who Needs Additional Guidance? Frontiers in Psychology, 11(904), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.....
 
60.
Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2002). Performance of students in project-based science classrooms on a national measure of science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(5), 410-422. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10....
 
61.
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, 44, 1436-1460. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
 
62.
Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N., Khishfe, R., Lederman, J. S., Matthews, L., & Liu, S. (2002, January). Explicit-reflective instructional attention to nature of science and scientific inquiry: Impact on student learning. Paper presented at annual International Conference of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science, 10. - 13. 1. 2002. Charlotte, NC, USA.
 
63.
Sjøberg, S. (2018). The power and paradoxes of PISA: Should Inquiry-Based Science Education be sacrificed to climb on the ranking? NorDiNa, 14(2), 186-202. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordin....
 
64.
Skoda, J., & Doulik, P. (2009). Vyvoj paradigmat prirodovedneho vzdelavani [Science paradigms development]. Pedagogicka orientace, 19(3), 24-44.
 
65.
Smith, A. (1995). The Usborne big book of experiments. London: Usborne Publishing Ltd.
 
66.
Tsivitanidou, O.E., Gray, P., Rybska, E., Louca, L., & Constantinou, C.P. et al. (2018). Professional Development for Inquiry-Based Science Teaching and Learning. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-....
 
67.
Vacha, Z., & Rokos, L. (2017). Integrated Science and Biology Education as Viewed by Czech University Students and their Attitude to Inquiry-Based Scientific Education. The New Educational Review, 47(1), 241-252. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.....
 
68.
Vohra, F. C. (2000). Changing trends in biological education: An international perspective. Biology International, 39, 49-55.
 
69.
Vorholzer, A., & von Aufschnaiter, C. (2019). Guidance in inquiry-based instruction - an attempt to disentangle a manifold construct. International Journal of Science Education, 41(11), 1562-1577. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top