The fact that inquiry-based science teaching has been defined in various ways makes claims about its effectiveness with students difficult to synthesize. In this meta-analysis, the authors generate a two-dimensional framework to analyze studies of the effectiveness of inquiry-based science instruction in improving student learning outcomes.
This study examined the validity of the Draw-A-Scientist Test (DAST), which is commonly used to capture students’ perceptions of scientists. Findings suggest that the DAST is not valid as a sole measurement. The originally identified stereotypical traits are no longer widely held by students.
Current science education policy advocates for engaging students in scientific practices of inquiry as the best way for students to learn science. McConney et al.’s analysis of PISA data unexpectedly found a negative correlation between frequency of inquiry-based instruction and high levels of student scientific literacy. The analysis confirmed a positive correlation between frequency of inquiry-based instruction and high levels of interest and of engagement in science.
Researchers examined how conducting an authentic science investigation in a bilingual classroom and weaving in discussions about the nature and culture of science affected students. They found that this process supported students’ growth in understanding of the scientific enterprise and made the culture of science more approachable.
The new standards posit that “scientific argumentation,” in which students use data to argue from evidence, is a key practice for student science learning. However, a mismatch in expectations about the purpose of classroom discussions can inhibit productive forms of argumentation. Berland and Hammer compare forms of class discussions to identify how best to support students’ engagement in argumentation.
What do images communicate about humans’ place in nature? Medin and Bang posit that the artifacts used to communicate science—including words, photographs, and illustrations—commonly reflect the cultural orientations of their creators. The authors argue that Native Americans traditionally see themselves as part of nature and focus on ecological relationships, while European Americans perceive themselves as outside of nature and think in terms of taxonomic relationships.