An Overview of the Inquiry Practices of an Experienced Teacher: A Case Study

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 10 , 122 - 129, 12.09.2018

Sertac Arabacıoglu Ayse Oguz Unver

Öz

This study examined the
inquiry-based science practices of a teacher and the 20 students in his class. The
purpose of this case study is to identify how this teacher adapts scientific
inquiry into his practices and to understand what kind of training needs he
has. The data set out here were collected with the videos during a class visit
and interviews with the teacher. Four classroom observation were planned for a
teacher with his own IBSE activities and pre-determined activities. The interviews
and video recordings were analyzed and interpreted qualitatively by using a
diagnostic observation protocol. The results showed that the teacher apply the
activities with one or two indicators of inquiry learned from in-service
trainings, beyond applying them as a scientific process in a holistic manner.
The analysis of the interviews showed that the teachers understanding of
inquiry could be shaped as partially, inadequate or sometimes with
misunderstandings via intensive trainings. This case shows us a ground to
approach in-service trainings in a different way.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

Inquiry-based science education, In-service teacher, A case study, Classroom observation

Kaynakça

• Asay, L. D., & Orgill, M. K. (2010). Analysis of essential features of inquiry found in articles published in the science teacher, 1998-2007. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(1), 57–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9152-9 Beerer, K., & Bodzin, A. (2004). Promoting Inquiry-Based Science Instruction: The Validation of the Science Teacher Inquiry Rubric (STIR). In Paper presented at the 2004 Association for the Education of Teachers of Science (AETS) Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN, January 8-11. Borda Carulla, S. (2012). Tools for Enhancing Inquiry in Science Education Tools for Enhancing Inquiry in Science Education. Montrouge, France: Fibonacci Project. Retrieved from http://fibonacci-project.eu/ Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. a. (2013). Inquiry-Based Professional Development: What does it take to support teachers in learning about inquiry and nature of science? International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 1947–1978. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.760209 Cohen, J., & Goldhaber, D. (2016). Building a More Complete Understanding of Teacher Evaluation Using Classroom Observations. Educational Researcher, 45(6), 378–387. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16659442 Council, N. R. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. (S. Olson & S. Loucks-Horsley, Eds.). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9596 Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to Teach Science as Inquiry in the Rough and Tumble of Practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(9), 613–642. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea Crawford, B. A. (2016). Supporting Teachers in Inquiry/Science Practices, Modeling, and Complex Reasoning in Science Classrooms. Southern African Association for Research in Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education (SAARMSTE), (JANUARY). Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916–937. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200011)37:9<916::aid-tea4>3.0.co;2-2 Huffman, D. (2006). Reforming pedagogy: Inservice teacher education and instructional reform. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(2), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9014-7 Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). The Next Generation Science Standards: Implications for Preservice and Inservice Science Teacher Education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 141–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9382-3 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. a. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Evaluation and Program Planning. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7189(96)88232-2 Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B. K. (2009). Conceptualization, Measurement, and Improvement of Classroom Processes: Standardized Observation Can Leverage Capacity. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09332374 Piburn, M., Sawada, D., & Turley, J. (2000). Reformed teaching observation protocol (RTOP) reference manual. ACEPT Technical Report No. IN00-3. https://doi.org/ED419696 Rubba, P. A. (1992). The Learning Cycle as a Model for the Design of Science Teacher Preservice and Inservice Education, 3(4), 97–101. Sheerer, M. (2000). Shifting the Perspective on the Professional Development of Inservice Teachers and Teacher Educators. Action in Teacher Education, 22(3), 30–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2000.10463017 Smith, M. K., Jones, F. H. M., Gilbert, S. L., & Wieman, C. E. (2013). The classroom observation protocol for undergraduate stem (COPUS): A new instrument to characterize university STEM classroom practices. CBE Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 618–627. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-08-0154 Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research. Basics of. Qualitatice Research 2nd Edition. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153 Windschitl, M. (2002). Inquiry Projects in Science Teacher Education: What Can Investigative Experiences Reveal about Teacher Thinking and Eventual Classroom Practice? Science Education, 87(1), 112–143. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10044 Zhang, M., Parker, J., Koehler, M. J., & Eberhardt, J. (2015). Understanding Inservice Science Teachers’ Needs for Professional Development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(5), 471–496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-015-9433-4