Possibilities of Inducing Pupils’ Inquiry Activities during Instruction

Jiří Dostál

, Prasart Nuangchalerm

, Ján Stebila

and Belgin Bal

Faculty of Education, Palacký University in Olomouc, Zizkovo ná,. 5, Olomouc, Czech Republic

Faculty of Education, Mahasarakham University, Maha Sarakham, Thailand

Faculty of Natural Sciences, Matej Bel University, Banská Bystrica, Slovak

Faculty of Education, Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkey

Keywords: Inquiry based Learning, Education, Pupil, Instruction.

Abstract: The contemporary tendences emphasize the use of so-called inquiry-based learning (IBL). However, there

remains a question – by which ways should be the active inquiry of pupils induced? The author of this article

finds the answer in the union of the theory learning tasks and theory of the inquiry-based instruction. Via the

analytical and comparative approaches, it turns out that two categories of the inquiry tasks can be used. The

first one was provisionally marked as “instructive inquiry tasks”, the second one as “inquiry tasks with internal

activation”. Both stated tasks have different essence in how are the pupils induced to perform the inquiry

learning activities.

1 INTRODUCTION

In the education, we can be encounter a long-term

emphasized requirement of the development of the

individual thinking and increase of pupils’ activity

and creativity, which is still nowadays considered

important. In the context of these social requirements

on education, the crucial question is by which ways

should be the inquiry learning situations created and

how should pupils’ inquiry activities be induced

efficiently. We strive to search for a possible answer

by the union of the theory learning tasks and theory

of the inquiry-based instruction.

There comes a wide range of variables into the

process of the inquiry activities’ induction, mainly the

individuality of a pupil, specificity of the subject

matter, the base of teaching aids which have to be

taken into consideration. It is a task of a teacher to

have these variables under control and to influence

them appropriately to improve the quality of the

learning process. However, this is not always simple

and the increased effort is necessary, while the use of

teacher’s didactically-psychological knowledge and

skills is assumed. The teacher’s attitudes and

expectations are also significant. These can be called

as factors that make condition the success of teacher´s

activityconsiderably.

The learning activities may be realized only in

appropriate conditions that, as a whole, create the

learning situation. A classification of these

conditionals is largely influenced by the learning

tasks that are considered a driving force of the

acquisition of the new knowledge. Therefore, they

are, in the fields of educational science and didactics,

an important theme which was dealt by many authors,

both from the Czech Republic and from abroad, e.g.:

Vyšín, 1971; Tollingerová, 1971, Tollingerová &

Knězů, 1966; Wahla, 1978; Kuřina 1978; Mareš,

1980; Holoušová, 1987; Ellis, 2003; Molnár, 1990;

Nikl, 1997; Chupáč, 2007; Vaculová, Trna, and Janík,

2008; Slavík, Dytrtová, and Fulková, 2010; Slavík &

Lukavský, 2012; Mareš, 2013; and Knecht, 2014.

Many of the mentioned authors strove to define the

term learning task. Therefore, it is possible to

encounter definitions that basically understand

learning tasks as assignments contained in textbooks

and collections of tasks, but they can be also

understood as opportunities to learn (cf. Knecht,

Janík, Najvar, Najvarová, and Vlčková, 2010). This

broader definition seems to be the one bearing for the

mutual connection with the theory of the inquiry-

based instruction.

In relation to the theory of learning tasks, we

encounter Professor Tollingerová, who contributed

significantly to its development – the taxonomy of

learning tasks and process of taxation is connected to

her name. However, there were other authors that

continued with her research and her theory is still

elaborated and improved. If we analyze key areas of

the theory of learning tasks, our research would be,

Dostál, J., Nuangchalerm, P., Stebila, J. and Bal, B.

Possibilities of Inducing Pupils’ Inquiry Activities during Instruction.

In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2016) - Volume 2, pages 107-111

ISBN: 978-989-758-179-3

107

while solving the given issues, based on the two:

parameters of the learning tasks and projecting the

learning tasks.

2 METHODS USED

Those scientific methods were used while processing

the study in accordance with the current approaches

used in the field of study, cf. N. C. Kettley (2010), M.

Bray, B. Adamson and M. Mason (2007), M. G.

Lodico, D. T. Spaulding and K. H. Voegtle (2006), L.

Cohen, L. Manion, K. Morrison (2003). Those

include mainly theoretical methods which are based

on the study of published scientific treatises, research

reports, curricular documents and strategic

governmental documents.

The excerpted findings were subjected to

comparative analysis and critical assessment in order

to put them into a context and new theoretical

framework. In certain sections, we strove to describe

issues linked to phenomena which occur within the

society, or in the educational theory and practice.

Additionally, analytically-synthetic approaches

were used in order to understand relationships which

are valid in the educational systems. Marginal

findings were abstracted during the process of

analysis which enabled their interpretation in new

meaning.

3 THE BOND BETWEEN THE

INQUIRY-BASED

INSTRUCTION AND THE

LEARNING TASKS

The opinions on the application of the inquiry-based

instruction differ. The ones mentioned below are the

more positive ones, however, it has to be mentioned

that there exist also the more critical ones that are

analyzed in more detail in the work of J. Dostál

(2015a). However, the criticism is not a complex one,

but the work mainly deals with conditions of its

successful implementation into the school education.

We see one of the basic assumptions of a successful

instruction in induction of situations which motivate

a pupil to perform the inquiry activities and, by that,

not only to acquire knowledge, skills and habits, but

also methods of how to acquire, use, enrich and

broaden the knowledge independently. As it was

already indicated above, one of the most significant

means to induce the learning situations is seen in the

learning tasks.

The mutual connection of the inquiry-based task

is clearly distinct in works of D. Tollingerová (cf.

Tollingerová, 1971). The starting point should be

searched in the taxonomy of the learning tasks that

the author created (ibidem). She created a category of

“Creative tasks” where she classified 5 types of tasks:

1) Tasks focused on the practical application;

2) Solving of problem situations;

3) Questions asking and tasks forming;

4) Discovery-based tasks based on one’s own

observation;

5) Discovery-based tasks based on one’s own

considerations.

The taxonomy significantly differentiated the

inquiry tasks that are based on discovery. Moreover,

she classified these tasks into two categories:

Discovery-based tasks based on one’s own

observation and Discovery-based tasks based on

one’s own considerations. Knecht (2014) similarly

highlighted the difference between the inquiry and

problem tasks. Nevertheless, there still exists an

overlap that is symbolized in the diagram below.

Figure 1: Overlap of the inquiry and problem tasks.

In case of the problem tasks, the crucial factor is

a “problem”, which is, as it is well-known, typical by

a disruption of the internal balance of an individual.

It is linked to the experiencing of a not-wanted state,

or difficulties. The disruption of the balance is in the

education seen as a motivational factor. The

boundaries of the balance disruption differs among

pupils and therefore the same task may one pupil

consider a problem task and another not (cf. Dostál,

2015b). In contrast to that, the inquiry tasks are not

based on experiencing difficulties. Their focus lies in

discovery, search, investigation… which has to be

taken in account during its projection and

preparations.

In the intersection, there are tasks that cause

among the pupils the experiencing of a not-wanted

state, feeling of difficulties (of both the theoretical or

practical nature), although, the essence of their

CSEDU 2016 - 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

108

(re)solution is in the discovery of new approaches or

results. They belong to the most difficult ones and for

their solving, the pupils must be ready in a form of

acquired skills to solve tasks of a lower cognitive

difficulty.

The tasks applicable during the inquiry-based

instruction can be divided into three groups:

1) cognitive ones;

2) practical ones;

3) creative ones , see the graph on the next page.

Figure 2: Division of inquiry tasks.

The most significant role in the inquiry concept of

instruction is played by the tasks includible in the

third category. By the given graph, we suggest that to

teach by inquiry means to use only the creative

learning tasks. The typical example is performance of

the laboratory tasks whose purpose is to introduce

pupils to the applicability of the inquiry methods and

verification of findings’ validity.

In the right part of the image, the application into

the fields of technology may be noticed. The tasks

focused on the technical constructing may be seen as

a top-tasks where new technical objects are created.

A long way is necessary to achieve of this level – it is

necessary to develop special effort from the side of a

pupil. Only some students can achieve it.

4 ACTIVATION APPROACHES

TO THE INDUCTION OF

PUPILS’ INQUIRY ACTIVITIES

The essence of the induction of pupils’ inquiry

activities, i.e. in the school education, can be seen in

learning tasks which can be presented to pupils in a

written form, but also in other ones. It remains a

question though, how should they be framed in order

to achieve the aim to which the task was created for.

It is necessary to mention here that the measuring of

the level of aim achievement (evaluation) in the

inquiry tasks is not easy and it is always a long-term

process.

The meaningful inquiry is composed of many

individual steps that follow each other and their

sequence cannot be changed (cf. Dostál, 2015a). The

pupils go through different fragments of the process

of inquiry during their inquiry activities, which was

described in works S. Ch. Kong and Y. Song (2014,

p. 129) who set a model called “5E” (5E inquiry-

based learning model). The projected model is

composed by these following fragments:

- [to] engage in the inquiry topics and questions;

- [to] explore via the inquiry methods and

processes;

- [to] explain the results of the inquiry process;

- [to] evaluate the process of inquiry and the

results;

- [to] extend the topic of inquiry and questions.

During the process of projecting the inquiry

learning tasks, it has to be considered the question to

what extent the content is it going to be complex, i.e.

whether every pupil has to take part in all fragments

or in just some of them. Mainly during the group

work, it is necessary to divide the activities with

respect to the individual educational needs among the

individual pupils.

The first analyzed approach here will be

provisionally called instructive inquiry tasks. This

category of tasks is characterized by more or less

specific, exact instructions that lead pupils to perform

inquiry activities. The induction of the activities is

mainly caused “from the outside”. The activities are

used mainly in cases where there is desirable to

expect which way would the pupil’s inquiry go, what

course would it have, and what results would be

reached. The pupil gets instructions that he/she, at

first, has to identify with and then they comes to the

stage of performing them, i.e. they explores,

discovers and acquires new knowledge and skills. In

some cases, the attitudes are even formed.

However, it cannot be stated that the instructive

inquiry tasks would be worthless thanks to the focus

of pupils’ activities by the instruction stated before

the activity itself. They are didactically valuable

mainly in the phase when the pupils are learning how

to perform the inquiry. Based on the works by R. J.

Rezba, T. Auldridge and L. Rhea (1999), who classify

the inquiry of many forms (according to Banchi and

Bell, 2008), then this type of the inquiry tasks

induces:

- confirming inquiry – a question and a method

of solution are given to pupils, results are

Possibilities of Inducing Pupils’ Inquiry Activities during Instruction

109

known, the purpose is to prove it by the

practice itself;

- structured inquiry – the teacher tells pupils

question and possible method of solution –

based on that, pupils formulate explanation of

the studied phenomenon.

The second approach can be called inquiry tasks

with internal activation. This category of learning

tasks is characterized by their possibility to start the

“internal motor” of a pupil without any instruction

that would instructively induce their inquiry activity.

The essence is based in placing of the pupil in a

conflict between their current knowledge, skills,

attitudes and behavior, and a form of the real world

and/or needs that cannot be satisfied by the current

cognition of the pupil, the level of the pupils’ skills

and their readiness to solve the occurring situation.

The pupil is led by the conflict, activated to the

inquiry, to search for ways of how to resolve the given

state, how to reach new cognition and to place the

current level of cognition into the balance with the

surrounding world. In order to let the pupil feel the

conflict, they can be led by artificial situations created

via learning tasks. They do not instruct pupil, they

suitably set the situational conditions. Additionally,

also the inner motives, causing the sceptical view at

the world, and stimuli that they cognizes or comes

into interaction with, may activate the pupil. This is

typical mainly for the informal and non-formal

education.

It is important to create conditions on whose base

a need to cognize and to adopt the ways of human’s

behavior and thinking is developed. The conditions

that cause the intellectual difficulties are based in a

fact that a pupil is unable to accomplish the given task

by known ways. In order to accomplish it, they has to

find a new way to (re)solve the task.

5 CONCLUSIONS

The induction of inquiry activities may be seen as one

of the crucial phases of inquiry-based instruction. It

would be positive if the inquiry is started by pupils

spontaneously, without any obvious external cause;

however, we encounter this in a real instruction

rarely. The activity needs to be induced more

frequently.

In the article, we have not focused on the

motivation to perform the inquiry, but on the ways,

how the pupils’ inquiry activities may be induced.

Based on the theory of learning tasks, two approaches

(marked as instructive inquiry tasks and inquiry tasks

with internal activation) were described. The result of

both types of learning tasks is the inquiry and the

inquiry induced by both ways may cause positive

effects.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The paper was created i.a. in the project "Mezi

adorací a rezistencí: vnímání a možnosti využití

informačních a komunikačních technologií ve

vzdělávání z pohledu učitelů" (Between the Adoration

and Resistance: perception and posibilities of ICT in

the education from the teachers' perspective), which

was fund by the means of Palacký University,

Olomouc.

REFERENCES

Banchi, H. and BELL R., 2008. The Many Levels of

Inquiry. Science and Children. Vol. 46, Issue 2, p. 26 –

29.

Bray, M., Adamson, B. and Mason, M., 2007. Comparative

education research : approaches and methods. Hong

Kong, China: Comparative Education Research Centre,

the University of Hong Kong : Springer, 444 p.

Chupáč, A., Úlohy z chemie pro základní školy. MSD, 66 p.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K., 2003. Research

methods in education. London; New York:

RoutledgeFalmer, 446 p.

Dostál, J., 2015b. Badatelsky orientovaná výuka:

Kompetence učitelů k její realizaci v technických a

přírodovědných předmětech na základních školách.

Univerzita Palackého, 254 p.

Dostál, J., 2015a. Badatelsky orientovaná výuka: Pojetí,

podstata, význam a přínosy. Univerzita Palackého, 151

Ellis, R., 2003. Task-based Language Learning and

Teaching. Oxford Applied Linguistics.

Holoušová, D., 1987. Příspěvek k srovnávací analýze

marxistických teorií učebních úloh. 1st Ed. Univerzita

Palackého.

Kettley, N. C. (2010). Theory building in educational

research. New York: Continuum International Pub.

Group, 210 s. ISBN 9781441110084.

Knecht, P., 2014. Příležitosti k rozvíjení kompetence k

řešení problémů v učebnicích a ve výuce zeměpisu. 1st

Ed. Masarykova univerzita, 207 p.

Knecht, P., Janík, T., Najvar, P., Najvarová, V. and

Vlčková, K., 2010. Příležitosti k rozvíjení kompetence

k řešení problému ve výuce na základních školách.

Orbis scholae, Vol. 4, no. 3, s. 37-62.

Kong, S. C. and SONG, Y., 2014. The Impact of a

Principle-based Pedagogical Design on Inquiry-based

Learning in a Seamless Learning Environment in Hong

Kong.

Educational Technology & Society. Vol. 17,

Issue 2, p. 127 – 141.

CSEDU 2016 - 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

110

Kuřina, F., 1978. Geometrické praktikum: (Pro učit. 1.

stupně zákl. šk.). 1st Ed. Hradec Králové.

Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T. and Voegtle, K. H., 2006.

Methods in educational research : from theory to

practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 413 p.

Mareš, J., 1980. Fridmanova teorie učebních úloh.

Pedagogika, Issue 5, p. 595 - 610.

Mareš, J., 2013. Pedagogická psychologie. 1st Ed. Portál,

702 p.

Molnár, J. (ed), 1990 Extremální a kombinatorické úlohy z

geometrie: Pro 4. roč. gymnázií se zaměřením na

matematiku. 1st Ed. Praha,

Moore, R., Lopes, J., 1999. Paper templates. In

TEMPLATE’06, 1st International Conference on

Template Production. SCITEPRESS.

Nikl, J., 1997. Metody projektování učebních úloh. 1st Ed.

Gaudeamus, 71 p.

Rezba, R. J., Auldridge T. and Rhea. L., 2014. Teaching &

learning the basic science skills. In: Virginia.gov

[online]. Available at: http://www.pen.k12.va.us/

VDOE/instruction/TLBSSGuide.doc.

Slavík, J., Dytrtová, K. and Fulková. M. 2010. Konceptová

analýza tvořivých úloh jako nástroj učitelské reflexe.

Pedagogika. Vol. 60, p. 223-24.

Smith, J., 1998. The book, The publishing company.

London, 2

edition.

Tollingerová, D. and Knězů, V., 1996. Programované

učení. 1st Ed. Praha.

Tollingerová, D., 1971. Úvod do teorie a praxe

programované výuky a výcviku. Praha,

Vaculová, I., Trna, J. and Janík, T., 2008. Učební úlohy ve

výuce fyziky na 2. stupni základní školy: vybrané

výsledky CPV videostudie fyziky. Pedagogická

orientace, Vol. 18, Issue 4, p. 35–56.

Vyšín, J., 1971. Vybrané úlohy z matematické olympiády.

1st Ed.. Praha.

Wahla, A., 1978. Zeměpisné úlohy a cvičení a jejich

frekvenční analýza, formulační a operační analýza. In

Studia geographica. No 50. GÚ ČSAV, p.129 - 130.

Possibilities of Inducing Pupils’ Inquiry Activities during Instruction

111