top of page

PME 801:  Collaborative Inquiry Problem Solution Brief

Submitted on:  20 November 2017

Professor:  Kathy Witherow

INQUIRY

How do facilitators meet curriculum outcomes while still supporting Collaborative Inquiry in the classroom?

Prepared By:

​

Paul Baloukas-Apokatanidis

​

Jill Handrigan

​

Sari Martin

​

Corinne Whitney

​

Problem Brief

Introduction

Whether preparing for college or for a career, the ability to successfully work together to solve problems and create new material is a critical skill that students must be given as an opportunity to practice inside the classroom. In addition, studies have shown that working in a collaborative manner does not only produce higher test-scores, but is more engaging as well. 

Creating opportunities for collaboration falls to the teacher and requires thorough planning with enough maneuverability, explicit instruction and an open mind. The importance of collaborative inquiry is shown in the 1995 School Restructuring Study, conducted at the Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools by Fred Newmann and colleagues at the University of Wisconsin, where 2,128 students in twenty-three schools were found to have significantly higher achievement on challenging tasks when they were taught with collaborative inquiry-based teaching, showing that involvement leads to understanding. (Barron, B. Darling-Hammond, L. 2008). These practices were found to have a more significant impact on student performance than any other variable, including student background and prior achievement.  Small group learning (students working together in a group small enough so that each individual can participate on a collective task) has been the subject of many studies. Much of the research arrived at the same conclusion; there are noticeable benefits for students who work together on learning activities. “In one comparison by Zhining Qin, David Johnson, and Roger Johnson, of the four types of categories for problems presented to individuals and cooperative teams, researchers found that teams outperformed individuals on all types and across all ages”(Barron, B. Darling-Hammond, L. 2008). Furthermore, researchers stated “low-income students, urban students, and minority students benefited even more from cooperative group work, a finding repeated over several decades” (Barron, B. Darling-Hammond, L. 2008).

Understanding this importance, it is even more imperative for teachers to weave collaborative learning into their syllabi and lesson plans.  With this in mind, however, based on some of the following research, collaborative inquiry-based learning is done ideally through quite fluid lessons in which the objectives should be derived based on the learning needs of that particular class, in that moment, from their interests and knowledge gaps.  It is this understanding that creates dissonance when teachers are faced with pre-determined curriculum objectives created by Ministries of Education, especially in senior high classes.

 

“Inquiry-based learning is an approach to teaching and learning that places students’ questions, ideas and observations at the centre of the learning experience. Educators play an active role throughout the process by establishing a culture where ideas are respectfully challenged, tested, redefined and viewed as improvable, moving children from a position of wondering to a position of enacted understanding and further questioning (Scardamaglia, M. 2002). Underlying this approach is the idea that both educators and students share responsibility for learning.” (Inquiry Based Learning. May, 2013)

 

According to the Ministry of Education in Ontario, the above indicates that collaborative inquiry-based learning in the classroom is created through the students’ interests and questions.  What is facilitated stems from the curiosities and knowledge gaps of students, and the teacher is responsible for recognizing conceptual inadequacies and then arranging activities to further explore those inadequacies with shared responsibility from the students. (Scardamaglia, M. 2014, p. 400) This seems quite counterintuitive to pre-determined curriculum outcomes. Inquiry-based learning in its purest form is an organic, ever-changing classroom, where the curriculum is open-ended and originates from the students.   

 

Although problem-based/collaborative inquiry is a proven teaching/learning method that yields results, many teachers across the globe face time constraints, a loaded curriculum, and Ministry tests/exams that have traditionally influenced  teacher-driven instruction.  Bell, Urhahne, Schanze and Ploetzner highlight that, “Knowledge is considered as ‘inert’ when there is a lack of knowledge transfer in problem-solving situations that demand the use of already acquired knowledge (Renkl, Mandl, & Gruber, 1996). By inquiring complex problems, knowledge may become less inert and more applicable (Edelson, 2001)” (Bell, 2010, p. 350). However, when the learning goals are content-based, such as in Quebec’s grade 10 history course, the skills needed seem limited. For example, one of the learning goals that is expected to be achieved requires the student to  “name the federal law which applies to Native peoples: the Indian Act” (The first occupants, 1.a). The challenge remains ever-present: instructors must seek to adjust class time in order to incorporate collaboration strategies while engaging with the content needed for an upcoming exam.

Standardized testing is another challenge in some contexts. In Ontario, there are three standardized testing points of literacy and math skills and the Ministry of Education assesses these scores and makes comparisons locally, nationally, and internationally. Teachers often feel pressure to create lessons that ‘teach to the test’ when faced with standardized tests. These types of lessons contribute to passive learning which is the opposite goal of collaborative inquiry-based learning.

“In the pure sciences and scholarly disciplines, however, the top-level goals of knowledge creation are typically understanding and explanation. These are also top-level goals of school subjects, increasingly so as standards and achievement tests shift away from emphasis on recall to emphasis on evidence of understanding” (Scardamaglia, M. 2014, p. 401).  Although the emergence and inclusion of collaborative inquiry-based learning is underway, it is met with existing systems that counteract its effects. The existing systems have not caught up with the pedagogical mindset of inquiry yet, nor has it received full commitment from policy makers. “With the Knowledge Building approach we aim to provide a relatively clear-cut way of going beyond programs focused on assessing and teaching 21st-century skills. By engaging students and teachers as active participants, along with researchers, engineers, and policy makers, we aim to establish pedagogical models and technologies that provide an alternative with potential to exceed existing curriculum standards and expectations” (Scardamaglia, M. 2014, p, 401).

In Newfoundland and Labrador, there are provincial public exams at the end of high school but there are also common District exams for grades 10-11. This means that all students in the region write the same final exam that is constructed by a team of teachers. The exams are often perceived as high stakes testing that create anxiety for teachers because the final results are compared within and among schools. Some teachers feel they are being forced to ‘teach to’ these high stakes summative tests but not talking about the data in useful ways. Add to that the inner conflict of having students complete a paper/pencil test that can count for up to 50% of their final grade (in grade 12). Too often it seems like teachers in Newfoundland high schools spend two to three years prior to grade 12 ‘getting ready for’ this high stakes test. So what ends up happening in some classes is very repetitive. In addition, students do not get very much choice in what types of texts they read/listen to/watch or in how they respond to them. Many of the curriculum guides do provide lots of suggestions to support more student-initiated learning but it does not always translate into reality.

Other group members have experienced post-secondary curriculum creation with scaffolded knowledge from one level to the next, containing outcomes that are both specific and well-defined to complex and ill-structured. Post-secondary courses also do not have the luxury of time on their side as some courses are only 14 weeks in length and in some cases condensed into 7 weeks. Many post-secondary courses are preparing students for profession-related licensing and exams; specific course outcomes are necessary to prepare students for such exams.

In a senior high class, the ideal state of collaborative inquiry-based learning is comprised of the educator setting a theme or problem that is taken preferably from students’ interests and questions, creating an atmosphere where ideas and idea creation is central, giving students new questions to guide them further into their inquiry, and fostering an environment where educators and students are the co-creators of the learning experience, recognizing inadequacies or knowledge gaps, while accepting mutual responsibility for the planning and assessment of learning.  How do teachers of young adults infuse this pedagogy into the classroom with Ministry-driven curriculum outcomes and standardized testing?  What strategies can teachers use to mitigate the tension points between being accountable for curriculum outcomes while remaining true to the pedagogy of collaborative inquiry-based learning?

Literature Review – Potential Solutions

Project Based Learning

Project-based learning (PBL) is described as projects that are complex based on challenging questions on problems (inquiry).  The students are in control of the problem-solving, which means decision-making and investigative activities.  The end result is realistic and authentic products or presentations.  Central concepts include authentic assessment, teacher facilitation but not direction, cooperative learning, reflection, the use of 

cognitive, technology-based tools, a community of inquiry, and adult/real-world skills. (Thomas, J.W. 2000).  The most important feature related to this problem brief is the inclusion of explicit educational goals. PBL is central to the curriculum in that PBL is the central teaching strategy where students encounter and acquire knowledge that are part of the subject and its curriculum outcomes through the project.  So the problem or inquiry given to the students comes from the curriculum rather than the knowledge gaps of the students organically arising.  This feature separates PBL slightly from the purest form of collaborative inquiry. PBL is also a strategy that can be applied to most subjects and disciplines as the projects can take on many forms such as presentations, products, role plays, debates, designs, etc. (Thomas, J.W. 2000).

Design Based Approaches

Design-based instruction is based on the premise that children learn deeply when they create products that require understanding and application of knowledge. Design activity involves stages of revisions as students create, assess, and redesign their products. The work often requires collaboration and specific roles for individual students, enabling them to become experts in a particular area. Design-based approaches can be found across many disciplines, including science, technology, art, engineering, and architecture. An example of a design-based approach is in a 2000 study by researchers C.E. Hmelo, D.L Holton, and J.L. Kolodner, where sixth-grade students designed a set of artificial lungs and built a partially working model of the respiratory system. The learning-by-design students viewed the respiratory system more systemically and understood more about the structures and functions of the system than the control group.  Overall, design-based approaches differ from project-based learning in that they are designs or creation based-projects. They are a subsection of PBL strategies and work well with the science, technology and engineering disciplines. PBL can include a wide variety of projects and not just creation and design. (Hmelo-Silver, C.E. 2004)

Makerspaces

Makerspaces is a combination of design-based learning and project-based learning in that makerspaces are setting up classroom environments where creation, design, and engineering naturally occur but there should be some parametres based on the intersections of students’ interests and curriculum.  For young adults, Makerspaces often rely heavily on technology and media where much of the discovery, collaboration, and design occur. For young learners, a Makerspace includes the physical environment setup for collaboration but includes a variety of materials for building such as popsicle sticks, glue, modelling materials, etc. Much of the work in class is hands-on, while technology broadens the experimentation, discovery and creation to outside the classroom.  A makerspace classroom has many authentic materials and props with tables and desks set up as discovery or workstations where collaboration can easily occur.  Overall, it is about keeping classrooms viable to the modern world.  (West-Puckett, S. September 13, 2013)

Stages of Inquiry

Students New to Inquiry

​

When students first begin the inquiry process it is best to ease them into it. Teachers should limit the number of new concepts and skills that will be introduced. The teacher picks a topic too, so that students can begin inquiry directly, without being overwhelmed.

​

At this stage students should be able to:

  • Choose from a set of concrete topics that have been pre-selected.

  • Connect the topic to their personal experiences and work on it.

  • Talk to others to gather information and go through informational texts.

  • Use note-taking skills to record their information.

  • Begin to use technology to locate, organize, and create presentations.

  • Create a basic report or presentation based on specific guidelines.

Limited Inquiry Experience Learners

​

Students who already have an idea of how inquiry-based learning functions can be allowed more freedom in picking a topic and directing the inquiry process. While guiding students at this level, the teacher should watch for certain signs as a mark of development in the inquiry process and in the student.

 

At this stage students should be able to:

  • Select a topic within the general curriculum theme.

  • Build basic understandings based on background knowledge.

  • Talk to others to gather information.

  • Find guides, such as online library catalogues, online subject directories, and keyword and subject searches.

  • Create a basic report or presentation.

  • Use technology to locate graphics and media to enhance their report.

 

Reasonable Inquiry Experience Learners

​

At this stage, teachers are able to direct the students and then help them take charge of the inquiry process. Students are specifically taught note-taking skills, including highlighting techniques, interviewing skills using graphic organizers and the teacher helps students with their topic direction.

 

At this stage students should be able to:

  • Select issues-based topics, arguing for or against it.

  • Build on their general background understandings of the theme.

  • Carefully select and evaluate a variety of resources.

  • Use search guides and the internet appropriately.

  • Create a report based on guidelines provided in the planning phase.

  • Use technology appropriately to enhance their presentations and reports.

 

Advanced Inquirers

​

When students have been following the inquiry-based approach over a period of time, they are able to understand its significance and also how they must go about it in a manner that is productive. By the time students get to this stage (usually Grade 10 to 12 and beyond) teachers can allow them greater control over the inquiry process.

 

At this stage students should be able to:

  • Select specific topics, develop and support a position or point of view for thesis-based inquiry.

  • Build on their general background understandings of their topic.

  • Carefully select and evaluate a variety of resources.

  • Use search guides and the internet, conduct interviews.

  • Record information using note-taking strategies and create a report in response to the needs and interests of the audience.

  • Use technology creatively to enhance their presentations and reports.

  • Monitor and adapt inquiry skills and strategies during the process. (How can teachers implement inquiry based learning in the classroom? n.d.)

Inverted Classrooms

Generally, students acquire fixed knowledge and learning outcomes through lectures, readings, and other standard sources outside the classroom and most likely online. However, inside the classroom, students are working on more challenging, high-level collaborative tasks when more of the instructor’s help is available. With lectures posted in recorded video outside the classroom, students can re-listen as many times as needed, and overall work at their own pace. In class, they can internalize the information with help from peers and facilitator through discussion, discovery, experimentation, and collaboration. (Talbert, R. 2012)

Outreach Programs & Further Steps

Fostering a Culture of Creativity by Suzie Boss centers on the Calgary Science School, in its 13th year, which has had a consistent focus on problem-based and inquiry-based teaching and learning. Furthermore, “Authentic, student-centered learning is embedded across all subject areas, and much of the learning is supported by innovative and powerful uses of technology and outdoor education” (Boss, S. 2011). Neil Stephenson, the director of professional development and collaborative outreach for the school states that “The name 'Calgary Science School' can be a bit misleading. We focus on more than just science education. Rather, we're trying to embed the disposition of a scientist into everything we do – we want everyone in our community doing research, critically thinking, and collaboratively building knowledge" (Boss, S. 2011). The learning does not stop in the classroom, as part of their outreach program every project that is completed is posted to the blog and hopes to inspire future research or learning. Recent posts have discussed the benefits of using Edmodo where students, reflected on a ninth-grade identity project that led to publication of a digital poetry anthology, and described development of a digital inquiry resource to help students explore questions about the Renaissance.

Proposed Solution

Complex Instruction

Stanford University’s Elizabeth Cohen and her colleagues reviewed research and focused on internal group interaction around tasks. She and her colleagues proposed “complex instruction” and described it as “one of the best-known approaches, which uses carefully designed activities requiring diverse talents and interdependence among group members” (Barron, B., Darling-Hammond, L. 2008).  Roles are assigned to students to encourage equal participation such as such as recorder, reporter, materials manager, resource manager, communication facilitator, and harmonizer. Teachers pay attention to unequal participation, a frequent result of status differences among peers, and are given strategies to bolster the status of infrequent contributors. Furthermore, it is ideal for teachers to decide the roles for their students based on their strengths. Ideally, an instructor would choose someone with strong interpersonal skills to be the facilitator and help manage the group’s ideas, questions and concerns.

Complex Instruction as a Solution

Complex instruction fits the lesson plan aims and outcomes as it addresses a number of factors. Firstly, applied students could be new to inquiry-based Learning and according to the article “How can teachers implement inquiry based learning in the classroom?”, complex instruction allows slightly more facilitation by the instructor. (How can teachers implement inquiry in the classroom. n.d.) Secondly, the content requires discussion more than problem-solving or experimentation.  By offering roles, it helps ensure the sharing of ideas, the adjusting of existing knowledge and assumptions, and opportunity for negotiation with all group members’ input and participation.  Overall, complex instruction is an ideal strategy that can easily be infused into a lesson plan. The strategy fosters the fundamentals of collaborative inquiry by following a student-centered approach to learning, collaborating with others and demonstrating learning in a deep and meaningful way.

Loop Learning

“According to Mezirow (2000) transformative learning refers to the process by which we transform our taken-for granted frames of reference (meaning perspectives, habits, or mind-sets) to make them more inclusive, discriminating, open, emotionally capable of change, and reflective so that they may generate beliefs and opinions that will prove more true or justified to guide action. (pp. 7–8)” (Nicolaides, A., Dzubinski, L. 2016, p. 122) Mezirow stated that learning is a change in assumptions. He also noted that transformation occurs through rational critical self-reflection and communicative discourse leads to reflectively and critically taking action on the transformed frame of reference.

Loop learning provides a framework focused on the degree of transformative change a learner experiences.  Classified into three three levels:  single loop learning, double loop learning and triple loop learning,  each loop is distinct.  What differentiates one loop from another is the level of  the level of inquiry, engagement and change a learner experiences in the learning process.

 

Single Loop Learning is focused on behavioural adjustments through linear question and answer, or action – result. The behaviour is adjusted to achieve different outcomes without adjusting the habit of mind therefore, this style of learning lacks reflection or awareness of metacognition. Students look to past achievement and response to task is routine (what/how they would typically do) but change to one’s knowledge of the topic based on positive or negative results does not really impact greater view or habits of action.

Double Loop Learning is focused on exploration and revision of underlying assumptions for meaning making. The change is to “structure or strategy” of assumptions, not just a change in our knowledge base. In other words, the change occurs in our problem solving process as well as our knowledge base. There is inquiry into the development of action (rethinking how you engage with other people, rethinking purpose of collaboration).

Triple Loop Learning is the most complex and can be likened to awareness in action. A student’s awareness about how one’s intentions, actions and impacts are aligned. Triple loop learning manifests itself as a shift in attention or vision but is  unpredictable/uncontrolled learning.  It is completely up to the learner how he/she seeks out and makes meaning and then acts on values and beliefs, meaning it involves questioning whether the mutual discovery process worked, analyzing right and wrong, analyzing internal resistance to collaboration, etc. (Nicolaides, A., Dzubinski, L. 2016).

Loop Learning as a Solution

In considering proposed solutions to our problem, loop learning is a well defined framework which provides learning facilitators an added means of differentiated assessment.  Assessing collaborative inquiry output against expected learning goals helps to measure how transformative a student's experience is (or has been) and in doing so, facilitators will have the ability to manipulate classroom activities and construct a plan to better engage students in collaborative inquiry .

 

Additionally, a collaborative inquiry rubric (based on loop learning benchmarks) is a means of providing feedback and an opportunity to discuss and promote self reflection (for the learner).  Reflection is a key component to growth and Schon’s reflective practice theory, reminds us that, “Reflection is a conscious and rational action that can lead to reframing the problem (when the frame is not satisfactory), the making of new moves, or attending to new issues (naming, when the reflection leads to satisfaction) (Valkenburg, R. Dorst, K. 1998).  The rubric helps to establish gaps in a learners participation in collaborative inquiry thus helping them to understand areas where they might improve on performance.

 

In terms of the collaborative inquiry rubric, learners at the developing or satisfactory level are likely operating as single loop learners.  Their engagement with learning material is limited to familiar terms and practices and they are not comfortable nor compelled to explore unconventional ideas or concepts.  At the skilled level, second loop learning is likely more prevalent.  Learners are more grounded in their knowledge and in their ability to represent their ideas to the group.  They see connections in the shared knowledge and see the value in working as a team toward a shared goal.  Triple loop learners are the “masters”.  They are reflective in their collaborative participation and are keenly aware of the role that they play.

 

Loop learning concepts seemed to tie in very well as a solution to our problem.  In building a collaborative inquiry rubric based on these concepts, we believe that facilitators have a tool to effectively measure learning outcomes as they related to collaborative inquiry in the classroom.

bottom of page