INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 2 Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. Louise Richards Moulding for all of her help and encouragement. I have taken several classes from Dr. Moulding and have learned a great deal in all of them. She has been an example of the type of teacher that I would like to become. I would like to thank Dr. Moulding for sharing resources that would help in my research and for helping me make connection with people that have helped me learn how to incorporate inquiry-based science into my classroom. As I discussed my project ideas with Dr. Moulding, she helped guide me towards doing a self-study project. Participating in a self-study has helped me to reflect upon my teaching and to search out ways that I can improve as a teacher. This is a practice that I plan to continue so that I can continually improve my teaching style. I believe that this will be a valuable learning tool for me as I progress in my career. I look forward to continuing to incorporate inquiry-based teaching methods in my classroom. I would like to thank Ryan Cain for participating on my committee, especially at such a busy time in his life, as he was completing his doctoral dissertation. Ryan Cain has shared ideas that I could use in my classroom that would enhance the experience of incorporation inquiry-based methods in my classroom. He has also been very helpful in guiding me towards resources for the future curriculum guidelines for Science in the State of Utah. I would like to thank Denise Manzione for being a mentor as I started my teaching career. Denise went above and beyond in sharing lesson plans, supplies, and curriculum maps to help my first year of teaching go smoothly. She has been a great guide during PLC’s and has helped me to learn what is important to focus on and what should be laughed about and move on. Denise and Andrea Reynolds had spent a great deal of time setting up science lessons that would follow the Utah Core Standards. They were more than willing to share all of this information as INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 3 well as teach me and help guide me through incorporating inquiry-based science into the classroom. I would like to thank Andrea Reynolds for participating in PLC’s with me. Also, she was willing to use the same lessons in her science curriculum, so that we could discuss what was working well and what changes in direction needed to be made in order for the students to have a positive learning experience in the classroom. Andrea has also been instrumental in helping me all aspects of my teaching. She has always shared ideas, supplies and her expertise to help me improve my teaching skills and methods. Thanks for being my walking/talking partner, this has helped to keep me sane and has been valuable time to discuss school and family issues. Lastly, I would like to thank Kendall and my family for all of their love and support. I could not have made it through this program without them. They have pitched in to help at home and have never complained about the time and energy that this has taken. They have helped me to keep a balance in my life and to focus on what was most important at that moment. They have all been an incredible support as I have had many ups and downs in my personal life while working towards this degree. I cannot thank them enough for all that they have done. Words cannot express how grateful I am for them and how much I love them. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 4 Table of Contents NATURE OF THE PROBLEM...........................................................................................7 Literature Review............................................................................................................9 Inquiry-Based/Phenomena Based Science .................................................................9 Next Generation Science Standards .........................................................................10 Benefits of Inquiry-Based Learning to Students ......................................................12 Role of the Teacher ..................................................................................................13 Impediments to Incorporating Inquiry-Based Learning ..........................................17 Benefits of Professional Development.....................................................................18 Self-Study as Professional Development .................................................................19 Summary .......................................................................................................................21 PURPOSE ..........................................................................................................................23 METHOD ..........................................................................................................................24 Context ..........................................................................................................................25 The Teacher .............................................................................................................25 The PLC Group ........................................................................................................25 The Setting ...............................................................................................................26 The Curriculum ........................................................................................................27 Process ..........................................................................................................................27 OUTCOMES......................................................................................................................29 Phenomena Introduced to Generate Inquiry .................................................................29 Content Knowledge ......................................................................................................31 Course Corrections........................................................................................................32 INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 5 Success .........................................................................................................................35 Students Agency in the Learning Process .....................................................................36 DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................................39 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................42 APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................50 INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 6 Abstract Researchers have suggested that students’ learning should take place through an inquiry process similar to the way scientists work. In April of 2013, The Next Generation Science Standards were released with the goal of creating a more meaningful, authentic science experience. Teaching science as a process of inquiry and explanation helps students think past the subject matter and form a deeper understanding of how science applies broadly to everyday life. Some teachers report that they are not prepared to implement inquiry-based teaching in science, due to several obstacles such as lack of self-efficacy, limited content knowledge’ limited pre-service training, limited professional development and limited understanding of the inquiry process. Research has shown that a distinguishing feature of effective professional development is the teachers’ active involvement in being able to identify their own learning needs and then develop learning experiences that will meet those goals. One way this can be accomplished is through reflection and collaboration with team members. I incorporated inquiry-based teaching methods into my classroom, while teaching a 6-week unit on the water cycle. This self-study reflects on the lessons that were taught, changes that needed to be made to future lessons, what content knowledge I needed to improve on, and I identified steps that could be taken to overcome challenges and weaknesses of implementing the NGSS into my classroom. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 7 NATURE OF THE PROBLEM When teaching science, elementary teachers should move away from seatwork and recitation, and towards having students actively participate in inquiry (White & Fredrickson, 1998; William & Linn, 2002). Researchers have suggested that students’ learning should take place through an inquiry process similar to the way scientists work (Lederman et al., 2014). This will allow students to have a greater depth of knowledge and understanding of science. Research shows that when inquiry method teaching is put into action, students’ interest, engagement and motivation to learn science is enhanced (Engle & Conant, 2002; O’Neill & Polman, 2004). Mistrell and Van Zee (2000) suggest that students learn science better when they are given the opportunity to participate in science inquiry just as a scientist would. The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) were released in April of 2013 with the goal of creating a more meaningful, authentic science experience for students in the United States (NGSS Lead State, 2013). Historically, K-12 instruction has encouraged students to master lots of facts that fall under “science” categories, but research shows that engaging in the practices used by scientists and engineers plays a critical role in comprehension. Teaching science as a process of inquiry and explanation helps students think past the subject matter and form a deeper understanding of how science applies broadly to everyday life (NGSS Lead State, 2013). Some teachers report that they were not prepared to implement inquiry-based teaching in science, due to several obstacles such as lack of self-efficacy, limited content knowledge (Dorph, Tiffany-Morales, & Smith, 2001), limited pre-service training, (Banilower et al., 2013), limited professional development (Fulp, 2002; Weiss, McMahon, & Smith, 2001) and limited understanding of the inquiry process (Yoon et al., 2012). The lack of self-confidence in teaching science could stem back to the training teachers were given in their undergraduate programs INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 8 (Banilower et al., 2013; Olson & Labov, 2009). Teachers also reported their lack of professional development in the science curriculum. In 2011, 85% of elementary teachers reported that they had not participated in professional development concerning science in the previous three years (Dorph et al., 2011). Some teachers do not teach inquiry-based science because of perceived lack of time, teaching materials or other contextual factors (Avery & Meyer, 2012). Inquiry-based teaching can be demanding on teachers and requires that the teacher have a better understanding of the content being taught. Teachers need to be given guidance and practice in learning how to effectively scaffold the lessons and experiments in order to support the student’s ideas and understanding of the content being studied. If teachers are not given the support needed through professional development, mentoring, curriculum materials, and supplies to effectively implement inquiry-based science, and increase their self-efficacy in teaching science, teachers are not likely to incorporate inquiry-based teaching into the curriculum. Teachers with more confidence in teaching science use more student-centered approaches instead of relying on text-book centered instruction (de Laat & Watter, 1995). A study with middle school teachers, showed there were positive correlations between gains in teacher’s self-efficacy in teaching science through professional development and implementing inquiry-based instruction (Lakshmanan, Heath, Perlmutter, & Elder, 2011). There was a study done, which included elementary teachers in one large urban school district, in which schools were ranked ‘academic emergency’ schools by the state’s standards, and a smaller adjacent sub-urban district. This study showed that when teachers gained greater confidence, as a result of an intensive large-scale professional development approach combined with continuous coaching and mentoring, they obtained higher achievement in their class (Lumpe, Czerniak, Beltyukova, & Haney, 2012). INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 9 While professional development is needed, research has shown that sustained and extensive opportunities to develop and practice must go beyond the traditional “one shot” workshop approach (Darling-Hammond, Wei, Andree, Richardson, & Orphanos, 2009; DiPaola & Hoy, 2014). A distinguishing feature of effective professional development is the teachers’ active involvement in being able to identify their own learning needs and then develop learning experiences that will meet those needs (Parker, Patton, & Tannehill, 2012). Teacher learning may be most relevant when it is focused on teachers’ real work in schools with young people and addresses the unique characteristics of their school. When teachers are allowed the freedom to set their own goals, determine how they will achieve these goals, and then take the time to reflect and collaborate they are more likely to achieve success. This can be accomplished through many means, one of which is professional learning communities (PLC) (Patton, Parker, & Neutzling, 2012). Literature Review Inquiry-Based/Phenomena Based Science Teachers of science are expected to use inquiry approach in which students are actively involved in scientific investigations that provide them with opportunities to explore possible solutions, explain phenomena, elaborate on potential outcomes, and evaluate findings (Harris & Rooks, 2010). In 2012, The National Research Council made recommendations in science education, which called for a redesign of learning environments and emphasized the need for scientific inquiry in the classroom (National Research Council, 2012). The National Research Council stated, Scientific inquiry refers to the variety of ways in which scientist and students study the natural world by developing questions and proposing explanations based on the evidence INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 10 and data derived from their work. Inquiry helps students develop knowledge and an understanding of scientific concepts and the work of scientists through investigations and the process of science. (National Research Council, 2000, p. 1) The National Research Council also identified five essential features of classroom inquiry: • Learners engage in scientifically oriented questions. • Learners give priority to evidence, which allows them to develop and evaluate explanations that address scientifically oriented questions. • Learners formulate explanations from evidence to address scientifically oriented questions. • Learners evaluate their explanations in light of alternative explanations, particularly those reflecting scientific understanding. • Learners communicate and justify their proposed explanations. (National Research Council, 2000, p. 25) Students should be able to explain phenomena and design solutions to problems. Making sense of phenomena and/or designing solutions to problems drives student learning of science and engineering practices, disciplinary core ideas, and crosscutting concepts so that important science facts are learned in context (NGSS District Implementation Workbook, May 2017). Next Generation Science Standards The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) were released in 2013. These science standards identify scientific and engineering practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas in science that all K-12 students should master in order to prepare for success in college and the 21st century (Next Generation Science Standards [NGSS] Lead States, 2013). The NGSS were created due to the major advances in science and researchers’ understanding of how students INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 11 learn science. High-quality education standards allow educators to teach effectively, moving their practice toward how students learn best – in a hands-on, collaborative, and integrated environment, rooted in inquiry and discovery (NGSS Lead States, 2013). Teaching based on the NGSS calls for more student-centered learning that enables students to think on their own, problem solve, communicate, and collaborate – in addition to learning important scientific concepts (NGSS Lead States, 2013). Every NGSS has three areas working together to create a three-dimensional learning experiences. These include the following: • Crosscutting Concepts are a means of linking the different domains of science identified as Physical Science, Life Science, Earth and Space Science, and Engineering, Technology and Applications of Science. Examples of crosscutting concepts include: patterns, similarity and diversity; cause and effect; scale, proportion and quantity; systems and system models; energy and matter; structure and function; and stability and change. Thoroughly understanding these concepts helps students to interrelate knowledge and develop a scientifically-based view of the world. • Science and Engineering Practice helps students understand what scientists and engineers do to investigate, develop theories, and build models and systems. By defining and engaging in practices, students better understand the relevance of science and its connection to everyday life. • Disciplinary Core Ideas focus science curriculum, instruction and assessments on the most essential aspects of science. Core ideas meet at least two of the following four criteria. o Have broad importance across multiple sciences or engineering disciplines or be a key organizing concept of a single discipline; INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 12 o Provide a key tool for understanding or investigating more complex ideas and solving problems; o Relate to the interests and life experiences of students or be connected to societal or personal concerns that require scientific or technological knowledge; o Be teachable and learnable over multiple grades at increasing levels of depth and sophistication (NGSS Lead State, 2013). These three dimensions have been color coded as follows: science and engineering practices represented by blue, disciplinary core ideas represented by orange and crosscutting concepts represented by green. Benefits of Inquiry-Based Learning to Students It has been shown that interactive science lessons that incorporate cognitively challenging activities increase children’s enthusiasm, engagement with science, and science performance at school (Mant, Wilson, & Coates, 2007). Students who participated in inquiry-based science and were introduced to how the content related to aspects of real life, showed greater motivation to learn and understand science (Bybee & McCrae, 2011). A study in New Zealand found that students who participated in inquiry science achieved an increased interest, better understanding, and were able to transfer knowledge from the teaching context to new situations (Chen & Cowie, 2013). When students have the opportunity to participate in scientific inquiry, they learn to use their own ideas and, in so doing, they deepen their conceptual understanding as well as their content understanding of science (Harris & Rooks, 2010). Higher expectations for students during inquiry supports students in taking some of the responsibility upon themselves to learn and give greater intellectual effort (Blumenfeld, Kempler, & Krajcik, 2006). INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 13 Role of the Teacher In inquiry- and learner-centered settings, teachers (and learners) take on different and diverse roles (Aulls, Kaur, Magon, & Shore, 2015; Walker & Shore, 2015). The teacher’s role changes from the traditional role of information delivery to effectively scaffolding supports for the students to integrate and apply ideas (Harris & Rooks, 2010). The teacher needs to strategically scaffold activities so that students understand how to think as they participate in tasks, as well as being able to acquire the procedural knowledge to be able to complete the tasks; how to cooperate with others; and how to reflect on their learning (Harris & Rooks, 2010; Hmelo-Silver Duncan & Chinn, 2007). Materials for inquiry-based learning are generally not scripted in a way that allow for step-by-step instruction (Davis & Krajcik, 2005). Teachers, therefore, need to make instructional decisions that meet the needs of the students in the classroom and guide discussions with groups of students (Davis & Krajcik, 2005). The teacher needs to know how to establish small cooperative groups so children understand that they are to work together to share ideas, discuss differences, and construct new understanding (Gillies & Boyle, 2010). The teacher’s role is to organize science experiences and knowledge in ways that support all students in making sense of phenomena, consistent with how scientists construct knowledge (Moulding & Bybee, 2017). A structure for phenomenon-based teaching is to combine the Biological Science Curriculum Study (BSCS) 5E instructional model with Gather, Reason, and Communicate (GRC) student performance sequence. The BSCS 5E Instructional Model consists of the following: • Engage: Students Engage with phenomena: In this stage the teacher poses a question or presents phenomena to engage the students. During this phase INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 14 students should be given the opportunity to make connection to their prior knowledge and the teacher needs to assess what the students understand. • Explore: Students Explore phenomena: During this phase students will explore by doing hands on activities. The students will need to investigate the phenomena, formulate explanations, observe patterns, and develop their explanation of the phenomena. The teacher’s role in this state is to initiate the activity, describe background information, provide the needed materials and equipment, and to counter any misconceptions. The teacher acts as a guide as the students acts as scientists and perform experiments. • Explain: Students and teachers Explain phenomena: During this stage the students and teachers discuss what they have learned. The teacher directs the students to important key aspects of the prior stage. Using the students’ explanations and experience, the teacher introduces scientific and technological concepts. During this phase the students and teacher are using disciplinary core ideas including vocabulary, science or engineering practice, and crosscutting concepts. This follows the guidelines in the NGSS. • Elaborate: Students Elaborate scientific and engineering concepts and abilities: During this phase the teacher encourages students to gain more information through written material, databases, simulations, and web-based searches from which they gather, reason and communicate their responses and apply their learning to new situations. • Evaluate: Students and teacher evaluate students’ learning: During this phase the students receive feedback on their performance. The teacher would be INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 15 performing formative assessment throughout every phase of the 5E model, this evaluate phase is when the teacher would perform a summative assessment (Moulding & Bybee, 2017). The website for the NGSS, suggests using the BSCS 5E model when designing lessons and units (NGSS@NTSA, n.d.). The GRC is a performance sequence that has utility for organizing instruction within the 5E model and provides a structure for students to use in making sense of science phenomena. The goal of GRC is for students to use science and engineering practices, core ideas, and crosscutting concepts to reason causes of phenomena (Moulding & Bybee, 2017). The following explains what happens during each stage of the GRC. In this list the practices are color coded to identify linked practices. Red = obtain, evaluate, and communicate information; Blue = construct explanations and developing arguments; Orange = analyze and interpret data, use mathematical/computational thinking; and Aqua = develop and use models. Gather: • Obtain information • Ask questions/define problems • Plan & carry out investigations • Use mathematics/computational thinking • Use models to gather & organize data and/or information Reason: • Evaluate information • Analyze data • Use mathematics/computational thinking INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 16 • Construct explanations/solve problems • Develop arguments for how evidence supports or refutes an explanation • Use models to reason, predict, & develop evidence Communicate Reasoning: • Communicate information • Communicate arguments (written/oral) for how evidence supports or refutes and explanation • Use models to communicate reasoning This model developed by B. Moulding, 2012 (Moulding & Bybee, 2017). When combining the BSCS 5E Instructional Model and GRC, the gather, reason, and communicate reasoning would be used in the Engage, Explore and Elaborate phases of the BSCS 5E Instructional Model, while only the reason and communicate reasoning would be used in the Explain and Evaluate phases of the BSCS 5E Instructional Model. The purpose of the GRC sequence is to focus instruction on experiences that lead to students’ reasoning and then communicating their reasoning. GRC lesson plans are constructed to focus on student-centered science performances. Things that the teacher can do to support the student performance are presented as teaching suggestions. The lessons are also color coded as science and engineering practices being blue, crosscutting concepts are green, and core ideas are red. Each lesson begins with the introduction of the NGGS that will be focused on, a phenomenon that goes along with the standard, followed by the lesson performance expectations, the lesson then follows the BCCS 5E Instructional Model, the lessons end with the students communicating their reasoning (Moulding & Bybee, 2017). INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 17 Some teachers report that they are not prepared to implement inquiry-based teaching in science, due to several obstacles, such as lack of self-efficacy, limited content knowledge, (Dorph, Tiffany-Morales, & Smith, 2001), and limited pre-service training (Banilower et al., 2013). A 2015 survey of educator working conditions found that the biggest stressor for 71 percent of educators surveyed was the “adoption of new initiatives without proper training or professional development (NGSS District Implementation Workbook, 2017). Impediments to Incorporating Inquiry-Based Learning Past research has shown that teachers’ attitudes towards science are predictive of their intention to teach science and of their classroom practices when they teach science (van Aalderen-Smeets & Walma van der Molen, 2013; Haney, Lumpe, Czerniak, & Egan, 2002). Teachers who feel less confident teaching science tend to avoid strategies such as demonstrations and inquiry-based instruction because these strategies may reveal their limited background knowledge in science (Lakshmanan et al., 2011). Teachers’ lack of understanding of the inquiry process is a contributing factor to the teachers’ lack of confidence in teaching inquiry science (Yoon et al., 2012). While science is a component of elementary teacher certification, there is significant variations in the number of science credits that are required between universities (California Council on Science and Technology, 2010). Prospective elementary teachers reported that they avoided the opportunity for pursuing science coursework, except for the required credits. They also reported taking more science classes in high school then they do in college (Banilower et al., 2013). Another contributing factor is that few teacher-educator programs provide the opportunity for preservice teachers to practice and understand argumentation, which impedes the successful INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 18 implementation of argumentation and inquiry-based science into the classroom (McNeill, Gonzalez-Howard, Katsh-Singer, & 2016; Suh & Park, 2017). Teachers may feel dependent on external factors to teach science, such as the availability of teaching-methods or materials, enough time and other resources (van Aalderen-Smeets & Walma van der Molen, 2012). The teacher’s dependency on context factors (i.e. their belief that they can only teach science if their school ensures the availability of the proper materials or sufficient preparation time) is an indispensable component of the primary teachers’ attitude towards science (van Aalderen-Smeets et al., 2012). Elementary teachers identify a substantial need for professional development to build their content knowledge in science: but they also report limited access to professional development (Fulp, 2002; Weiss et al., 2011). Local school districts tend to offer professional development in disciplines being tested annually (e.g., language arts and math); science is the content area in which professional development, for the most part, is left to university settings. This makes it more difficult for teachers to participate in these professional developments (Buczynski & Hansen, 2010). Benefits of Professional Development It has been shown that teachers gain self confidence in teaching science through intensive professional development along with coaching and mentoring, and also obtain higher student achievement in their class (Lumpe et al., 2012). A recent study showed that providing teachers with science kits did not affect student outcomes, while, inquiry-based methods that were emphasized through professional development did show an effect on student outcomes (Slavin, Lake, Hanley, & Thurston, 2014). Professional development helps to improve teachers’ content knowledge and teaching practices in science (Harmon & Smith, 2007). When well-designed and INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 19 implemented, professional development causes a shift in teachers’ perceptions about the balance between the requirements to teach science and their capability to teach science (Desimone, 2009). A positive change in a teachers’ self-efficacy is an important step in influencing the teachers’ instructional practices (Desimone, 2009). Professional development in specific science content not only led to improving teachers’ content knowledge and practices, it also contributed to modest gains in students’ standardized science achievement exams (Buczynski & Hansen, 2010). When elementary teachers were provided with professional learning in inquiry science content and pedagogical practices, it increased their science content knowledge and their implementation of inquiry learning activities in their classroom (Buczynski & Hansen, 2010). Self-Study as Professional Development A distinguishing feature of effective professional development is teachers’ active involvement in identifying their own learning needs and then developing learning experiences that meet those needs (Parker, Patton, & Tannehill, 2012). Self-study by teacher educators appear to be productive both for the teacher educators themselves and for the development of formal knowledge on teacher education (Korthagen & Lunenberg, 2004). Self-study research on the part of the teacher educator can be defined as systematic research and reflection on the teacher educators’ own practice, leading to both an improvement of these practices and a contribution to the general knowledge base of teacher education (Zeichner, 1999). Therefore, teacher learning may be most relevant when it focuses on teachers’ real work in schools with young people and addresses the unique make up of their school (Patton et al., 2012). Self-study in intentional and systematic inquiry into one’s own practice (Dinkelman, 2003). Self-study can empower teachers to better understand their teaching and students’ INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 20 learning, to take charge of their own professional development, and to advance educational reform in a way that is real and will have direct impact in the classroom (Samaras & Freese, 2006). When participating in self-study, LaBoskey (1997) suggested that interaction with oneself is critical. Attention needs to be paid to beliefs, actions, ways of interacting with others, and self-awareness. “Educators need to be thoughtful about their work; they must question assumptions, consider multiple perspectives, avoid judgements, recognize complexity and be primarily concerned about the needs of their students” (LaBoskey, 1997, p. 61). Loughran (2006) argues, “Self-study is a way of purposefully examining the relationship between teaching and learning so that alternative perspectives on the intentions and outcomes might be better realized” (p. 174). The teacher educator may become better informed not only about the nature of learning but also of possibilities for developing appropriate alternatives. Reflection remains an increasingly valued element in teaching and learning across professions such as teacher education, medicine, the law, and social work (Lyons, 2010). Self-study of teacher education practices is not an end in itself but a means to the end of improving our teaching practices. Changing our practices usually involves changing some of our assumptions about how teaching influences, encourages, and supports learning, and self-study of our current practices usually generates self-understanding that makes change easier (Russell & Berry, 2014). Three educators, Lyons, Halton, & Freidus (2013), who engaged in promoting reflective inquiry in the education profession, performed a study in which 40 participants wrote papers about their reflective process. Of the 40, nine were asked to refine their papers and submit for publication. Reflecting on understandings gained, individuals can criticize, restructure, and engage possible further action. Working collaboratively acted as a catalyst to deeper reflective study of oneself (Lyons et al., 2013). Mesirow (1991) contended that the provision of the INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 21 opportunity to engage in reflective writing, together with reflective conversations with peers, mentors and colleagues, provided important scaffolds for the development of reflective abilities, leading to revision and transformation of beliefs, values and ultimately behavior. Teachers working together in PLC can form new visions of learning in the classroom, represented through collaboratively generated knowledge and teaching practices, entering into a common search for meaning in their work practices (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999). A study focused on a group of elementary teachers, that have worked together for nine years. During this time, they have met together once a month as part of their professional development. During this collaboration time they have reflected on their teaching methods in their writing lessons and the students results. Through sharing they discovered that some teachers where using generic language to encourage the development of ideas. Collectively they were able to develop a successful program that would be more specific when teaching writing to their students. They suggest that their success resides in the community nature of their work and the support provided through collaborative engagement (Patton et al., 2012). These social environments are enhanced through collaborative learning and joint practices that encourage interactive feedback and discussion (Patton et al., 2012). Summary Elementary teachers should move away from seat work and recitation, and towards having students actively participate in inquiry. The main focus being on inquiry-based science. The inquiry process will help students have a greater depth of knowledge and understanding of science. Some teachers believe that they are not prepared to teach an inquiry-based method of teaching. There are several things that impede teachers from successfully implementing inquiry-based learning. Some of these include: lack of understanding of the inquiry methods, lack of INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 22 content knowledge, and differing educational beliefs. Through effective professional development, self-study and collaboration, teachers can change beliefs, learn how to incorporate inquiry-based learning and successfully implement these programs into their classrooms. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 23 PURPOSE Research has shown that teachers face several obstacles in implementing inquiry-based science into their classrooms. These obstacles include, but are not limited to, lack of self-efficacy, limited content knowledge, limited pre-service training, limited professional development, perceived lack of time, teaching materials or other contextual factors. Some teachers also lack a complete understanding of inquiry-based learning, this style of learning can conflict with the teacher’s core beliefs related to teaching and learning. Research has shown that professional development, which includes informal learning, the opportunity for personal reflection, and the opportunity to collaborate with colleagues in a supportive professional learning community can help assist in the teacher changing beliefs and implementing change in their practice of teaching. My purpose was to examine and change teaching style and thinking process while I developed lesson plans based on GRC framework and implemented inquiry-based science into a 4th grade classroom. In this self-study I did regular self-reflection, collaborated with other teachers and continued studying ways of implementing inquiry based-science. The areas of focus for the self-study were: • What content knowledge was I lacking? • What course corrections did I make during the unit? • What are the successes I saw in myself and my students? • How did I give students agency in what they were learning? While I have had very little experience with inquiry-based teaching, I agree with research that inquiry-based learning can enhance a student’s learning. Research has shown that inquiry-based learning increases the student’s involvement, their depth of understanding, ability to apply INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 24 learning to prior knowledge, improve problem solving skills, make connections to real world situations, and comprehension. As a teacher, I had very little pre-service science training. I have since attended several professional development classes to study science topics that align with the current Utah 4th Grade Common Core standards. I have read several articles and books about inquiry-based learning. I am excited to continue my journey in implementing inquiry-based science into my classroom, and to have practices that align with NGSS standards. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 25 METHOD The NGSS stated that high quality education standards allow educators to teach effectively, moving their practice toward how students learn best, in a hands-on, collaborative, and integrated environment, rooted in inquiry and discovery (NGSS Lead States, 2013). Teachers sometimes feel ill prepared to teach inquiry-based science, due to many factors, lack of content knowledge, lack of self-efficacy (Dorph et al., 2001), lack of professional development (Fulp, 2002; Weiss et al., 2001) and limited understanding of the inquiry process (Yoon et al., 2012). Through effective professional development, self-study and collaboration, teachers can gain the necessary understanding and self-efficacy to incorporate inquiry-based science into their classroom. I have created and implemented inquiry-based science lessons, for the water cycle, in a fourth-grade classroom. These lessons followed the Gather, Reason, and Communicate Performance Sequence (GRC Sequence). These methods align with the NGSS. These methods allowed me to introduce a phenomenon, incorporate cross-cutting concepts, and model and encourage science and engineering practices. The lessons were developed during Summer 2019, changes were made to these plans as the unit progressed. The lessons were taught in Fall 2019. My goal was to help students study science as a scientist would, allowing them to explore, question, and make connections to real world situations. Some obstacles that did stand in the way of implementing inquiry-based science included, my limited science background, lack of experience with the methods of inquiry-based learning and sometimes my core beliefs of teaching. I worked with my PLC group as I developed and changed the lesson plans. The PLC group worked together to ensure that lessons followed the Utah Common Core Standards for Science, along with the GRC methods of teaching science. I reflected on my teaching beliefs and INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 26 how they needed to change in order to successfully implement inquiry-based science into my classroom. Context The Teacher I am in my fourth year of teaching at Stansbury Park Elementary. I graduated from Utah State University with a B.S. in Marketing. I entered the teaching field on a letter of authorization, while I was working towards receiving a Graduate Certificate in Teaching through Weber State University. I have completed my Graduate Certificate in Teaching and am currently working toward a Master of Education in Curriculum and Instruction. While working on my undergraduate degree, I only enrolled in the required science classes in order to fulfill by general education requirements. Since I began teaching, I have attended several professional developments that correlate with the Utah 4th Grade Common Core Science Standards. I have also been researching the benefits of inquiry-based teaching and how to implement inquiry-based teaching. The PLC Group The PLC group consisted of myself and one other 4th grade teacher at Stansbury Park Elementary School. We met weekly to discuss the implementation of inquiry-based science. Issues that were addressed included classroom practices, ways of improving practices, student responses, strengths and weaknesses of the lessons being taught. We had very open communication with one another, and because of the trust that has been built we were able to share classroom situations and discuss solutions to these hurdles that arose. We were also able to give one another constructive criticism. We share a common goal of improving our teaching INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 27 methods, continuing to participate in professional development, and taking time to reflect in order to benefit the students in our classroom. The other teacher is in her 6th year of teaching at Stansbury Park Elementary. She has a Bachelor Degree in Elementary Education. She is continually searching learning opportunities and participating in professional developments. She was selected as Teacher of the Year for Stansbury Park Elementary for the 2018-2019 school year. She was selected for this because she is continually learning about different teaching methods and incorporating them into her classroom. She agreed to participate in this study and allow the PLC conversion to be noted in the study. The Setting This study took place in a 4th grade classroom at Stansbury Park Elementary School, in Stansbury Park, Utah. The study took place in the fall of the 2019-2020 school year. The class consisted of 27 students, 12 boys and 15 girls. Six of the students have IEP’s and are receiving special education services. Two of the students are English Language Learner’s. Science was taught 4 days a week for 45 minutes to an hour. The Curriculum The curriculum followed the 4th Grade Utah Common Core Standards for Science, Standard 1, Students will understand that water changes state as it moves through the water cycle. Both objective 1 and 2 will be covered in this 4 to 6-week unit on the water cycle. The lessons will follow the 5E and GRC methods of teaching science. Some lessons have been created by myself and the PLC group. One of the lessons was taken from the website, Going 3D with GRC (Going 3D, n.d.). These lessons were developed by teachers during professional INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 28 development in many school districts nationwide in collaboration with Brett D. Moulding, Rodger W. Bybee and Nicole Paulson. Process I chose to use a qualitative, self-study approach as a method of learning a new teaching style through actual classroom practice. Self-study can empower teachers to better understand their teaching and students’ learning, to take charge of their own professional development, and to advance educational reform in a way that is real and will have direct impact in the classroom (Samaras & Freese, 2006). I recorded a self-reflecting journal on a personal password protected laptop. The journal included self-reflections and notes from PLC meetings. Outcomes that were addressed included: • evaluations of lesson plans: What worked well? What needed to be changed? • identified the challenges encountered in lesson development. • described how the challenges were met. • discussing successes for myself and students. • recognized my individual strengthens and weaknesses during development and instruction of lessons. • identified steps that can be taken to overcome challenges and weaknesses of implementing the NGSS into my classroom. Self-study is a way of purposefully examining the relationship between teaching and learning so that alternative perspectives on the intentions and outcomes might be better realized (Loughran, 2006). INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 29 OUTCOMES I completed a 6-week self-study, focused on shifting my teaching to a phenomena/inquiry-based approach in science. The unit taught was the water cycle, with emphasis being placed on the BSCS 5E model and the GRC method. Each lesson began with a phenomenon being introduced, with the students then being given time to gather information, reason and communicate their findings. Because I thought teaching the curriculum using a phenomena/inquiry/based approach would take more time, lessons were written to be cross curricular with social studies, language arts and science. The lessons also included science and engineering practices. I recorded my self-reflections in a journal on a password protected computer. These journal entries focused on the content knowledge that am I lacking, evaluating the lesson plans, what changes I may need to make for future lesson and what worked well. I identified what challenges arose for me during each lesson and how I could meet these challenges. I also focused on the successes I was seeing in myself and my students. And finally, the steps I need to continue to take to overcome challenges and weaknesses I have in implementing phenomena/inquiry-based science into my classroom. I also recorded thoughts and ideas from collaborating with other teachers during PLC about inquiry-based science lessons. I had initially planned on recording in my journal each day after the science lesson. I was successful with this the first week and then I found that I was recording in the journal a couple of times a week. It turned out that I had 15 entries recorded in the journal, for a total of 19 pages. Phenomena Introduced to Generate Inquiry I found that my students were much more engaged and interested when I began science with a phenomenon. I started this unit by telling the students that the Indians would make salt sticks in the ocean to trade with fur traders. I then showed them pictures of posts around the INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 30 Great Salt Lake that have salt crystals formed on them. I then asked the students, “Why do you think the crystals formed and what do you is happening in order for the crystals to form?” I then had supplies available for the students to try to recreate what had happened for the salt crystals to form. The students were excited to see what would happen. Some students wanted definite instruction on how to create the experiment. I tried to guide them by asking questions, they worked in groups and some of the students were willing to take the lead and help students come up with ideas of what they could do. During this time, I observed student’s interaction to help me know how to best set up groups that would work well together as well as being willing to guide some of the lower students. The students seemed excited to try different experiments and most of them liked the idea of having some freedom in how they would do the experiment. This in turn got me excited to see what they would discover and how they would react when they learned something new, and also to see how the students would react if their experiment did not work as they had planned. I also found that if I could help the students make a real-life connection to the phenomena, they were more engaged. Objective 2E, of the 4th grade Common Core, states, “Describe how the water cycle relates to the water supply in your community.” While I was teaching this unit, the Snoqualmie Fire began to burn in the mountains above Layton. At the same time the Green Ravine Fire started to burn in the mountains above Lake Point. My students could see the Green Ravine Fire from our school. While at recess they liked to watch the planes fly over and drop fire retardant on the flames. We had discussions in class about why they would drop the flame retardant. I explained to the students that they were not using flame retardant on the Snoqualmie Fire because it was so close to a water shed. I gave my students the challenge to figure out why they could not drop the flame retardant near a water shed. The INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 31 students worked on this in class, and also many students went home and kept researching and were excited to share with the class what they had learned. Content Knowledge While doing research about using inquiry-based teaching methods, I learned that others had identified obstacles in implementing inquiry-based teaching methods. These obstacles included: lack of self-efficacy, limited content knowledge, limited pre-service training, limited professional development, and perceived lack of time and teaching materials. I found all these struggles came into play for me. I was comfortable with teaching the water cycle, as this was the fourth year that I have taught it. I did find that questions came up that I was not completely sure of the answer, I realized that it was okay to say, “Let’s research that together”. I would let the students hypothesize together and then I would make sure I had an answer the next day or an activity for them to discover the answer. I am still learning that it is okay to leave a question unanswered and to be patient while we discover the answer. I know that as I continue to implement inquiry-based teaching methods into my classroom, I will need to continue to educate myself about the current science topic I am teaching. I am realizing that I need to prepare now for a transition in the Utah Science Education and Engineering (SEEd) Standards requirements for next year. I can see where it will be very important for me to continue to reflect and make notes of what content knowledge I am lacking and need to continue to work on. I have participated in different professional development classes to help with my understanding of science. I will continue to seek out and take the opportunity to participate in these professional developments. I find that they not only increase my content knowledge in science, but they also help to improve my self-efficacy. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 32 I also increased in understanding of inquiry-based teaching methods. In setting up lessons that followed the NGSS and GRC methods, I found ways of introducing the phenomena and to scaffold information for my students. I also found different ways for the students to gather information. Sometimes they used devices to collect the information. This was sometimes difficult because I only have 15 devices in my classroom and I have 27 students. Some of the students had to share devices and they did not always appreciate this. In the future I would like to acquire additional devices so that each student could work individually on a device. I also learned that I could incorporate science articles into my small group reading instruction. I could use these to help the students learn how to find evidence, this allowed more time for science instruction while meeting some of the Language Arts Core Requirements. I was also able to tie concepts being taught to Language Arts and to Science. For instance, in our reading program we were studying cause and effect. I was able to carry this over into our science discussion to help the students understand that our science experiments all had a cause and then an affect from that cause. I found that it was important to have cross-curricular objectives in my lessons in order to have time to meet all of the core requirements. Course Corrections I found that using inquire-based teaching methods did take more time then direct instruction methods. I tried to plan accordingly by incorporating some history and language arts into the lessons so that we could take longer on science. Even with writing in cross curricular activities into the plans so that I could spend extra time on science, the science lessons took longer than I thought they would. I wanted the lessons to be fluid and for the students to take time for discovery. I found that it was important for me to guide the students with questions that I would ask to keep them on track. I worked towards creating a balance with how much time I INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 33 could spend on science and still be able to cover the other curriculum that needed to be covered that day. At one point I wrote in my journal, “I am getting behind on my schedule for this unit. I looked back at my plan book from last year and I had already completed the water cycle unit at this time last year. I believe it will take us another week and a half to complete this unit. I may have to speed up the other units in order to cover all of the material before end of year testing.” I allowed extra time for discussion which added time to the unit and I allowed for 15 minutes extra on the days that we did experiments. The students liked it when we had extra science time but it did concern me that I was taking time away from other subjects. I am still working on finding the best balance for time spent on each subject. Classroom management was more difficult while the students were working on experiments. I divided my students into 4 groups to work on experiments. I had a mix of high, medium and low students in each group. I also took into consideration different personalities of students and students that I thought would work well together. I learned that we needed to review the lab rules before we began each lab day. It was imperative that I was circulating between groups to ensure that students were staying on task and that all students were participating. I found that some students would take over the project while some others were content to sit back and not really participate, while others would like to participate but were timid to share their thoughts. I began giving each group a piece of butcher paper and each student in the group was given a different color of pen. The students needed to record their thoughts and findings on the butcher paper and then they signed the paper in their color of pen. This way I would know what each student had contributed. This helped to encourage all the students to participate. I then assigned a different person to be the leader of the group each time we did an experiment. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 34 I have a few students, with varying disabilities, that found it difficult to participate in the group activities and discussions. They also seemed overwhelmed with trying to gather too much information. I found it helpful to give these students a specific assignment on what information they should gather. I also made sure that they had a device to use themselves, instead of sharing with another student. It was also helpful for them to use headphones so that there were less distractions for them. It was helpful for them to have specific instructions and feel that they had a valued piece of information to share in discussions. Lack of supplies was a concern. The supplies for some experiments became expensive. I had introduced the students to the book, “The Water Princess”, and then challenged them to come up with a way that they could purify pond water. I had divided the students into 4 groups to work on this project. I gave them time to research and come up with a plan. I then allowed the students to create a list of supplies that they would need in order to complete their experiment. I liked that the students did research and came up with some good hypotheses of what would work, but this did become expensive to get the supplies from the list that they created. I decided to continue to let them make lists for supplies for this project, but another time I will have supplies on hand that they can choose from to create their experiment. Each group was using the GRC method while performing these experiments. Some groups were doing well with this, while others were struggling. I started to have a class discussion after the groups had met together. We would then do the GRC method all together. The students would share the information they had gathered and share their reasoning. This helped each group to have a better understanding of what we were studying. I would then have individuals write in their journal to communicate what they had learned. I found that the groups could help each other fill in gaps of information that they were missing. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 35 Successes I learned that I was able to incorporate inquiry-based teaching methods into my curriculum and classroom. While there is still room for improvement, I feel that I am much better prepared to follow the NGSS and will be able to more easily transition to the new SEED standards that Utah is adopting in the 2020-2021 school year. My personality is such that I like to know what to expect. In previous years I have given step by step instructions for experiments to ensure that they would work out and that the students would learn the concept that was being taught by the experiment. I have learned that it was okay if an experiment fails and I realized that the students were learning more when they had to continue to research to figure out how to make the experiment work in the way they would like it to. I have become more comfortable with letting the students guide the experiment, even when I know that they will not get their desired result. I am getting better at knowing when to guide and when to let the students take the lead. I enjoyed using the inquiry-based teaching methods. I saw science become more interesting to my students. I had the students fill out forms prior to parent teacher conferences and 82% of my students said that science was their favorite subject. I believe this is in part due to the new teaching methods being used in teaching science. The students were going home and continuing to gather information to share with the class. They were able to make real life connections and this seemed to excite the students and pique their curiosity in the lessons we were studying. At the end of the water cycle unit, I gave the students the same formative assessment that I have in previous years. Overall, the students performed better on the assessment this year then my previous classes have. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 36 I appreciate and value PLC time much more than I did prior to doing this self-study. It is helpful to share ideas, weaknesses and strengths. I found that in admitting my weaknesses, others could share their knowledge and ideas and help me to improve in these areas. When my students first started to purify the pond water, some of the students thought that they needed to add salt for the water to evaporate and become clean. I had not realized that they had made this misconception. I shared my frustration when we met for PLC’s. After the PLC I recorded in my journal, “Andrea reminded me today that we knew that the students would be experimenting during this process and that part of our job was to direct them and help to make correction when they had misunderstandings. She also reminded me that there was a learning curve for me in this process and that I needed to keep trying and learning the process myself. Don’t beat yourself up we can learn from our failures too!” This helped me to refocus and to see my strengths and focus on what I was doing well. The PLC discussions helped in planning lessons and also in changing direction on lessons when needed. I feel that I am more prepared to create and teach lesson in the new Utah Seed requirements that will roll out next year. I know that I will need to learn new content for the new curriculum, but I feel that I have gotten over a huge hurdle in learning to use the inquiry-based teaching methods. Student Agency in the Learning Process Students were given time to gather information in small groups. They also were given the opportunity to design and execute experiments in the way that they thought they would work. They then would evaluate what worked and what may need to be changed to get their desired results. I found that it helped to have a whole class discussion before trying to alter their experiments. Each group had come up with different ideas and communicating this information INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 37 helped all of the groups. I had divided the class into 4 groups. Three of the groups worked well together and the 1 group struggled through this process. I found that I needed to guide this group more than the others. The students seemed to like to working on their experiments and were willing to take the time to gather more information in order to have their experiment work in the fashion that they would like. I allowed the students to help guide the class discussions and we continued to share ideas as long as the students were being productive. This did add to the time we spent on science, but I found this to be valuable time for the students. This also allowed me to do summative assessments during this time. In previous years I would give detailed directions when we were doing an experiment. I struggled some with the idea of giving the students freedom to set up their experiment in the way they chose. In the past when I had the students do the Salt Stick Experiment, I would tell them how large of pieces of clay to use to place in the bottom of the bowl. I would then tell them to stand their toothpicks and straightened paperclips straight up in the clay. I would then tell them to take turns stirring salt into the water. I would make sure that they stirred until the salt was dissolved and then they would pour the water over the toothpicks and paperclips. This year I gave the students the choice of what supplies they would like to do and told them their challenge was to try to replicate what was happening to the post at The Great Salt Lake. The students tried many different things to set up their experiments. It was difficult for me to hold back and not tell the students how to set up the experiment. Some students hooked straws and toothpicks together with the clay and hung them over their salt water. Some of these broke and fell into the salt water and then the crystals started to form. Some had salt crystals form up the sides of the bowl. Some stood the toothpicks and paper clips up in the clay. This turned out to be a more interesting experiment and we were able to discuss why some experiments formed salt crystals up the sticks INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 38 while others did not. This was a good start for me in using the inquiry-based teaching methods, because I realized that we could learn different things from each experiment and it was okay if it didn’t work out the way that I thought it should. I also found that the students took ownership in their projects and research. Students would go home and continue to gather information that would be helpful in our science discussions and in the experiments. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 39 DISCUSSION Some teachers report that they were not prepared to implement inquiry-based teaching in science, due to several obstacles such as lack of self-efficacy, limited content knowledge (Dorph, Tiffany-Morales, & Smith, 2001), limited pre-service training, (Banilower et al., 2013), limited professional development (Fulp, 2002; Weiss, McMahon, & Smith, 2001) and limited understanding of the inquiry process (Yoon et al., 2012). I felt that each of these factors were true for myself. I have tried to truly reflect on how I could best incorporate inquiry-based teaching methods into my classroom. Through teaching this 6-week unit on the water cycle, I feel that I have improved in my self-efficacy and my understanding of the inquiry process has increased greatly. I know that I still have much to learn, but I feel that I have the ability to continue to improve in the inquiry teaching methods. I have and will continue to participate in professional development opportunities to help improve my understanding of the inquiry process and also to increase my content knowledge in the science areas that I am teaching. I feel that I am more prepared to transition to the SEEd standards that Utah schools will be using in the upcoming years. One of the area’s that is still difficult for me is time management. I found that inquiry-based teaching takes more time and I need to learn how to use inquiry-based methods in the allotted time so that I can cover all of the curriculum requirements. While using inquiry-based teaching methods the teachers’ role changes from the traditional role of information delivery to effectively scaffolding supports for the students to integrate and apply ideas (Harris & Rooks, 2010). Prior to incorporating inquiry-based methods I would have step by step instructions for the students to follow. I liked knowing what the outcome of experiments and lessons would be. I have had to change my thinking and realize that INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 40 the students can learn a great deal through inquiry, especially thru experiments that fail and need to be reevaluated. It was imperative that I was circulating around the room during group discussions. I did spend more time with one group who were easily distracted. I started to incorporate science readings into my small group instruction for reading. This allowed me to give more guidance to the students that were struggling with the inquiry methods. Historically, K-12 instruction has encouraged students to master lots of facts that fall under “science” categories, but research shows that engaging in the practices used by scientists and engineers plays a critical role in comprehension. Teaching science as a process of inquiry and explanation helps students think past the subject matter and form a deeper understanding of how science applies broadly to everyday life (NGSS Lead State, 2013). I found that the students were more engaged when I used inquiry-based teaching methods. They made real life connections that in turn sparked their interest in learning more. I also believe that this helped the students to remember the concepts for a longer period of time. Some students would gather information outside of class and be anxious to share this information the next day. This creates a base for life-long learners. I have enjoyed the professional development that I have attended and will continue to participate to increase my content knowledge in science. Teachers working together in PLC can form new visions of learning in the classroom, represented through collaboratively generated knowledge and teaching practices, entering into a common search for meaning in their work practices (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999). I also will continue to participate in PLC as I have found these to be invaluable to improving as a teacher. During collaboration time I was able to share ideas, share my successes and discuss my weaknesses. The other teachers were able to do INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 41 this as well and we were able to strengthen our team and our teaching practices. This was a benefit to myself and my students. Self-study by teacher educators appear to be productive both for the educators themselves and for the development of formal knowledge on teacher education (Korthagen & Lunenberg, 2004). I found that I enjoyed writing my journal entries and taking the time to reflect on how the lessons had progressed and how my teaching methods were or were not working. This also assisted me in course correction that needed to be done. I was also able to look back at previous years lessons and incorporate items that I thought had worked well, while still focusing on the inquiry process. I was able to reflect on how my attitude towards science influenced the student’s attitudes. When I presented the lesson with excitement that we were going to discover how a phenomenon worked, the students were excited and much more involved. On one particular day the math lesson just prior to science had not gone well, I was frustrated and trying not to show that to the students. I was not as enthused about the science lesson and the students could definitely sense that. The groups did not work as well during science that day. During my reflection time I realized that my attitude was in large part to blame for the direction science went that day. I found self-study to be a valuable part of my day and my teaching. I found that I started to evaluate how I was teaching other subjects and what ways I could improve other teaching methods. I will continue to reflect on my lessons and my teaching in order to continue to improve in the teaching profession. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 42 REFERENCES Allus, M. W., Kaur Magon, J., & Shore, B. M. (2015). The distinction between inquiry-based instruction and non-inquiry-based instruction in higher education: A case study of what happens as inquiry in 16 education courses in three universities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 147-161. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.011. Appleton, K., & Kindt, I. (2002). Beginning elementary teachers’ development as teachers of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 43-61. Avery, L. M., & Meyer, D. Z. (2012). Teaching science as science is practiced: Opportunities and limits for enhancing preservice elementary teachers’ self-efficacy for science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 112, 395-409. doi:10.1111/j.19498594.2012.00159.x. Banilower, E. R., Smith, P. S., Weiss, I. R., Malzahn, K. A., Campbell, K. M., & Weiss, A. M. (2013). Report of the 2012 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research. Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475-488). New York: Cambridge University Press. Buczynsi, S., & Hansen, C. B. (2010). Impact on professional development on teacher practice: Uncovering connections. Teacher and Teacher Education, 26, 599-607. doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.09.006. Bybee, R., & McCrae, B. (2011). Scientific literacy and student’s attitudes: Perspectives from PISA 2006 science. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 7-26. doi:10.1080/09500693.2010.518644. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 43 California Council on Science and Technology. (2010). The preparation of elementary teachers to teach science in California. Sacramento, CA: California Council on Science and Technology. Chen, J., & Cowie, B. (2013). Engaging primary students in learning about New Zealand birds: A socially relevant context. International Journal of Science Education, 35(8), 1344- 1366. doi:10.1080/09500693.2012.763194. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationship to knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249-306. Davis, E. & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3-14. Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. (2011). Policies that support professional development in the era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 81-92. de Laat, J., & Watter, J. J. (1995). Science teaching self-efficacy in primary school: A case study. Research in Science Education, 25, 453-464. Deglau, D., & O’Sullivan, M. (2006). The effects of long-term professional development program on the beliefs and practices of experienced teachers. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 25, 379-396. Desimone, L. M., (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38, 181-199. doi: 10.3102/0013189x08331140. Dinkleman, T. (2003). Self-study in teacher education: A means and ends tool for promoting reflective teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 6-18. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 44 DiPaola, M., & Hoy, W. K. (2014). Improving instruction through supervision, evaluation, and professional development. Charlotte, NC: Information Age. Dorph, R., Shields, P., Tiffany-Morales, J., Hartry, A., & McCaffrey, T. (2011). High hopes--few opportunities: The status of elementary science education in California. Sacramento, CA: The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning at WestEd. Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399-483. Fulp, S. L., (2002). Status of elementary school science teaching. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research. Gillies, R. & Boyle, M. (2010). Teachers’ reflection on cooperative learning: Issues of implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 933-940. Gillies, R. M. & Nichols, K. (2015). How to support primary teachers' implementation of inquiry teachers' reflections on teaching cooperative inquiry-based science. Research in Science Education, 45, 171. doi:10.1007/s11165-014-9418-x Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E. & Clay- Chambers, J. (2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 922-939. Going 3D. (n.d.). Going 3D with GRC. Available at https://sites.google.com/3d-grcscience. org/going3d INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 45 Haney, J. J., Lumpe, A. T., Czerniak, C. M., & Egan, V. (2002). From beliefs to actions: The beliefs and actions of teachers implementing change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 171-187. doi: 10.1023/A:1016565016116. Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R., & Chinn, C. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42, 99-107. Hackling, M. (2008). An overview of primary connections: Stage 3 research outcomes 2006- 2008. Canberra: Australian Academy of Sciences. Harmon, H., & Smith, K., (2007). A legacy of leadership and lessons learned: Results from the rural systematic initiatives for improving mathematics and science education. Charleston, WV: Edvantia. Harris, C., & Rooks, D. (2010). Managing inquiry-based science: challenges in enacting complex science instruction in elementary and middle school classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 227-240. Korthagen, F., & Lunenberg, M. L. (2004). Links between self-study and teacher education reform. In J. Loughran, M.L., Hamilton, V., LaBoskey & T. Russell (Eds). International Handbook of Self-Study of Teaching and Teacher Education Practices, pp. 421-449. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. LaBoskey, V. K. (1997). Teaching to teach with purpose and passion: Pedagogy for reflective practice. In J. Loughran & T. Russell (Eds.), Teaching about teaching: Purpose, passion, and pedagogy in teacher education (pp. 150-163). London: Falmer Press. Labov, J., & Olson, S. (2009). Nurturing and sustaining effective programs in science education for grade K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academic Press. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 46 Lakshmanan, A., Heath, B. P., Perlmutter, A., & Elder, M. (2011). The impact of science content and professional learning communities on science teaching efficacy and standards-based instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 534-551. Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners’ understanding about scientific inquiry—the views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65–83. Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education. London: Routledge. Lumpe, A. T., Czerniak, C. M., Haney, J. J., & Beltyukova, S. (2012). Beliefs about teaching science: The relationship between elementary teachers' participation in professional development and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 153–166. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2010.551222. Lyons, N. (Ed.). (2010). Handbook of reflection and reflective inquiry: Mapping a way of knowing for professional reflective inquiry. New York, NY: Springer. Lyons, N., Halton, C., & Freidus, H. (2013). Reflective inquiry as Transformative Self-study for Professional Education and Learning, Studying Teacher Education, 9(2), 163-174. doi:10.1080/17425964.2013.808057 Mant, J., Wilson, H., & Coates, D. (2007). The effect of increasing conceptual challenge in primary lessons on pupils’ achievement and engagement. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1707-1719. doi:10.1080/09500690701537973. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 47 McNeill, K. L. Gonzalez-Howard, M., Katsh-Singer, R., & Loper, S. (2016). Pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation: Using classroom contexts to assess high-quality PCK rather than pseudoargumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 261-290. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Minstrell, J., & Van Zee, E. H. (Eds.) (2000). Inquiry into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. Moulding, B. D., & Bybee, R. (2017). Teaching Science is Phenomenal. ELM Tree Publishing: Washington, UT. ISBN:978-0-9990674-0-6 National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science educations standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. NGSS@NTSA (n.d.) https://ngss.nsta.org/designing-units-and-lessons.aspx NGSS District Implementation Workbook. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.nextgenscience.org/news/ngss-district-implementation-workbook NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academics Press O’Neill, K., & Polman, J. L. (2004). Why educate little scientists? Examining the potential of practice-based scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(3), 234- 266. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 48 Parker, M., Patton, K., Madden, M., & Sinclair, C. (2010). From committee to community: The development and maintenance of a community practice. Journal of Teaching in Physical Edcuation, 29, 337-357. Parker, M., Patton, K., & Tannehill, D. (2012). Mapping the landscape of Irish physical education professional development. Irish Educational Studies, 31, 311-327. Patton, K., Parker, M., & Neutzling, M. (2012). Tennis shoes required: The role of the facilitator in professional development. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 83, 522-532. Patton, K., Parker, M., & Pratt, E. (2013). Meaningful learning in professional development: Teaching without telling. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 32, 441-459. Samaras, A. P., & Freese, A. R. (2006). Self-study of teaching practices primer (Vol. 12). Peter Lang. Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Hanley, P., & Thurston, A. (2014). Experimental evaluations of elementary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 870-901. doi: 10.1002/tea.21139. Suh, J. K. & Park, S. (2017). Exploring the relationship between pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and sustainability of an innovative science teaching approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 64, 246-259. van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., Walma van der Molen, J. H. (2013). Measuring primary teachers’ attitudes toward teaching science: Development of the dimensions of attitude towards science (DAS) instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 35, 577-600. doi: 10.1080/095006933.2012.755576. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE 49 Walker, C. L., & Shore, B. M. (2015). Understanding classroom roles in inquiry education: Linking role theory and social constructivism to the concept of role diversification. SAGE Open, 5, 1-13. doi:10.1177/2158244015307584. Wei, R., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council. Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E. R., McMahon, K. C., & Smith, P. S. (2001). Report of the 2000 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research. White, B. Y., & Fredricksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3-118. Williams, M., & Linn, M. C. (2002). WISE inquiry in fifth grade biology. Research in Science Education, 32, 415-436. Yoon, H., Joung, Y., & Kim, M. (2012). The challenges of science inquiry teaching for pre-service teachers in elementary classrooms: Difficulties on and under the scene. Research in Science Education, 42, 589-608. Zeichner, K. (1999). The new scholarship in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28(9), 4-15. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 50 APPENDIX Content Core Standards Science 4.1.2 Standard 1 Students will understand that water changes state as it moves through the water cycle. Objective 2 Describe the water cycle. a. Locate examples of evaporation and condensation in the water cycle (e.g., water evaporates when heated and clouds or dew forms when vapor is cooled.) b. Describe the processes of evaporation, condensation, and precipitation as they relate to the water cycle. Social Study Standards Social Studies 4.2.2 Standard 2 Students will understand how Utah's history has been shaped by many diverse people, events, and ideas. Objective 2 Describe ways that Utah has changed over time. a. Identify key events and trends in Utah history and their significance (e.g. American Indian settlement, European exploration, Mormon settlement, westward expansion, American Indian relocation, statehood, development of industry, World War I and II). Lesson Objective(s): Construct on explanation of how water evaporates and why particles are left behind. Students will understand that there needs to be a heat source in order for water to evaporate (The Sun), students will understand that water changes from a liquid to a gas when it evaporates. Assessment(s): Summative: Students will be able to explain the evaporation process. The explanation should include that water changes from a liquid to a gas. Materials Bowls, salt, clay, toothpicks, paperclips, nails and water. 5E Learning Activities/GRC Engage Phenomenon: Salt water can create salt crystals. -Teach students about the American Indians and their practice of trading salt sticks for supplies. -Show students pictures of posts along The Great Salt Lake that have salt crystals forming on them. Gather 1. Students will hypothesize why the phenomena occurs. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 51 Explore 2. Students will obtain information to support their hypothesis. (Students will work in groups to create an experiment that will duplicate the process of evaporation and creating salt sticks.) 3. Students will explore ways to duplicate this process. 4. Students will observe and record the changes of their experiment over several days. Reason: 5. Students will construct an explanation of the changes that have occurred. Class Discussion: Why do the salt crystals form on the posts? What would affect how quickly the salt crystals would form? Where else does this process take place? What happens to the water? What energy source effects this process? Communicate Reasoning 6. Students will share, with the class, their explanation of the evaporation process. Explain Science Practices: Asking questions Planning and Carrying Out Investigations Obtaining, Evaluating, and Communicating Information Create an experiment that duplicates the creation of salt crystals on posts around The Great Salt Lake. Crosscutting Concepts: Cause and Effect Explain that things need to occur in a specific order for the phenomena to occur Disciplinary Core Ideas: Water evaporates when heated., water changes from a liquid state to a gas during evaporation. When water evaporates it leaves other particles behind. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 52 Pictures used in lesson: INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 53 INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 54 INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 55 Content Core Standards Science 4.2.2 Standard 1 Students will understand that water changes state as it moves through the water cycle. Objective 2 Describe the water cycle. d. Construct a model or diagram to show how water continuously moves through the water cycle over time. e. Describe how the water cycle relates to the water supply in your community. Writing Standards W.4.2 Objective 2 Write informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas and information clearly b. Develop the topic with facts, definitions, concrete details, quotations, or other information and examples related to the topic Lesson Objective(s): Students will understand the water cycle is an ongoing process. Students will design and build a system to purify pond water. Students will construct an explanation for the role of the sun in changing pond water to fresh water. Assessment(s): Students will construct a system to purify water. They will keep a detailed journal of their drawings and findings and reasoning while constructing this system. Students will explain their system to the class. Students will need to include the systematic order in which the water cycle moves. Materials The Water Princess, by Susan Verde Students will determine supplies needed 5E Learning Activities/GRC Engage Phenomenon: Pond water can be changed to fresh water. Engineering Challenge: Design and build a system to purify water Read: The Water Princess to the class. Compare the water she is collecting to the water in the ponds on the golf course. Have a bottle of pond water and ask the students if they would be willing to drink the water? (It is dirty, slimy water) Ask the students if they think they could come up with a way to make the water drinkable? Gather 1. Students will obtain information on how to design and build a system to purify water. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 56 Explore 2. Students will develop a model of the system they will build. Drawings will be done in their science notebooks. 3. Students will be divided into small groups each group will construct a list of supplies needed to build their system. Questions: Why would we need to purify water? How does the water cycle relate to purifying water? In what ways do we use water every day? Is there a limited amount of water? What water sources do we have available to us? Why can’t we drink water from the golf course ponds or The Great Salt Lake? Reason 4. Students will construct their model and then test their model. Students will make note of what changes occur to the water. Students will also make notes of what seemed to work well and will obtain more information to determine what changes need to be made to their system. Students will continue to make changes to their system as needed. 5. Students will construct an explanation as to why their system will purify water, they will explain the changes that occur in this system. Communicate Reasoning 6. Students will communicate to the class how they set up their design and what changes occurred during this process. They will share what changes they needed to make to their system in order to have it function properly. Explain & Elaborate Evaluate Science Practices: Asking Questions and Defining Problems. Developing and Using Models. INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 57 Constructing Explanations and Designing Solutions Obtaining, Evaluating, and Communicating Information Crosscutting Concepts: Cause and Effect Explain that things need to occur in a specific order for the phenomena to occur. Disciplinary Core Ideas: 2 Describe the water cycle. d. Construct a model or diagram to show how water continuously moves through the water cycle over time. e. Describe how the water cycle relates to the water supply in your community.