This page sets out to answer the most obvious and important question about S-TEAM: what is it that we are trying to spread acroos the world of science teaching? The immediate answer is "Inquiry based science teaching & Education" but this is not a simple or unproblematic concept. If it was, then the perceived problem of low motivation towards science might not exist.
There are, of course, many different opinions about what constitutes 'inquiry' and whether any of its manifestations in teaching are effective in promoting pupil learning or increasing pupil motivation. The two are not necessarily correlated and some researchers (e.g. Kirschner et al, 2006) suggest that 'liking' and 'learning' are not synonymous. We also have to think about 'learning' in relation to a body of scientific knowledge which is too large for any individual pupil, teacher or curriculum to grasp as a whole. This leads to the idea of teaching about scientific thinking, processes or methods rather than scientific knowledge itself.
The Kirschner et al paper was controversial even within Educational psychology. Some responses can be found in Hmelo-Silver et al (2007) and Schmidt et al (2007), and in Sweller, Kirschner & Chinn (2007), a reply to their critics. An up to date review paper on the effectiveness of IBST is Minner et al (2009).
There were some interesting responses from S-TEAM participants when the Kirschner paper was circulated. Jim NcNally comments:
The paper makes a good case, though it is polarised and lacking in understanding of practice (such as Sinclair's?), but of course we are not promoting inquiry over conventional instruction or good traditional teaching - only responding to its rather pervasive absence within a wider and potentially more sophisticated (advanced) pedagogy. The naive embrace of inquiry without an adequate knowledge base (of teachers and their pupils) is destined to fail (in Science at least) in all hands but those of the most inspired and dedicated of teachers. Given the conditions of confidence in that knowledge and some other teacherly instincts, would the writers advocate that teachers ignore the legitimate questions of children arising from their work, or the small, feasible challenges that teachers themselves might pose, secure in their own knowledge, achievement and status?
Is there to be no risk at all, no fun?
Costas comments that This is a very misguided paper partly because it confuses IBSE with discovery learning. Cindy Hmelo-Silver wrote a rebuttal which is both interesting and useful... this discussion is productive
(The following paragraph comes from the S-TEAM proposal)
S-TEAM recognises that inquiry-based teaching is complex and that specialist aspects such as argumentation skills or disciplinary differences need to be taken into account. Inquiry based learning methods allow scientific knowledge, processes and contexts to interact in the science classroom to promote scientific literacy. These methods are very demanding of teachers, requiring skills which are not necessarily addressed in current teacher education practices. Teachers also need to be able to manage debate and argumentation in the classroom to achieve learning objectives whilst allowing the kind of curiosity and intellectual freedom characteristic of genuine scientific inquiry.
Generally, inquiry-based science teaching and education engages students in:
authentic, problem-based learning activities where there may not be a correct answer
(ii) experimental procedures, experiments and "hands on" activities, including searching for information
(iii) self-regulated learning sequences where student autonomy is emphasised
(iv) discursive argumentation and communication with peers ("talking science")