back and forth between these two worlds like scientists; and “the phenomena and
experiments serve as a source for validating ideas and theories and as a playground
for generating new ideas and theories in a complex mix of inductive and deductive
mind play” (p.75).
Inquiry as process of generating and validating knowledge fits into a view on
learning as knowledge creation, discussed by Paavola et al. (2004). Inquiry, under
the knowledge-creation perspective, is the process whereby new knowledge and
understandings are (re)constructed. From the knowledge-creation perspective,
knowledge is not always objectively true. Knowledge is not always given by
teachers and scientists or in other knowledge containers (e.g. journal articles,
textbooks). Knowledge and its representations (e.g. ideas, concepts, relationships,
theories and models) can also be created, elaborated and restructured by learners and
researchers. This is in line with Duschl et al. (2007) that the brain is filled with
preconceptions from early life experiences; some of these preconceptions match
with science, others do not. Therefore, much learning involves reconstruction of
prior ideas, which are already in the learner’s brain. In addition to the knowledgecreation model, Paavola et al. (2004) discussed two other metaphors of learning:
acquisition and participation. The knowledge-acquisition metaphor focuses on learning within individuals’ minds, whereas the participation metaphor emphasises learning as a process of participation in various practices and activities. The knowledge
creation perspective encompasses both acquisition and participation.
In the book: “The scientist in the crib”, Gopnik et al. (1999) implied that from
young ages, children can create new knowledge by inquiry, and scientists make the
most of this capacity, which lets “children learn so much so quickly” (p.9). Consequently, we indeed concur with Duschl et al. (2007, p.83) that pupils can “engage in
and profit from instruction that incorporates relatively complex scientific practices
from the very beginning of their schooling”.
The science-education community has suggested making authentic inquiry of
science more accessible to pupils (e.g. Gaskell 1992; Edelson 1998; Braund and
Reiss 2006). Authenticity of inquiry in the school can be interpreted as resemblance
of pupil activities to experimentation/modelling activities of practicing scientists in
constructing new knowledge, considering the three following aspects (Heck 2009):
– A real-life context for learning that provides pupils with opportunities to investigate realistic science problems in history or present-day research and so pupils
will appreciate the relevance of scientific knowledge in everyday life.
– Tools and techniques that enable pupils to carry out experiments/modelling and to
analyse and process high-quality data in much the same way scientists do.
– Scientific attitudes of learning that stimulate pupils’ pursuit of unanswered
questions, commitment to challenging tasks, and social interactions
(e.g. cooperation, argumentation).
Authentic inquiry is close to real science, so makes school science more attractive
and relevant. Moreover, considering the “learning as participation” metaphor
(Paavola et al. 2004), pupils can appreciate inquiry as a scientific method of
130
T. Ellermeijer and T.-B. Tran
experiments serve as a source for validating ideas and theories and as a playground
for generating new ideas and theories in a complex mix of inductive and deductive
mind play” (p.75).
Inquiry as process of generating and validating knowledge fits into a view on
learning as knowledge creation, discussed by Paavola et al. (2004). Inquiry, under
the knowledge-creation perspective, is the process whereby new knowledge and
understandings are (re)constructed. From the knowledge-creation perspective,
knowledge is not always objectively true. Knowledge is not always given by
teachers and scientists or in other knowledge containers (e.g. journal articles,
textbooks). Knowledge and its representations (e.g. ideas, concepts, relationships,
theories and models) can also be created, elaborated and restructured by learners and
researchers. This is in line with Duschl et al. (2007) that the brain is filled with
preconceptions from early life experiences; some of these preconceptions match
with science, others do not. Therefore, much learning involves reconstruction of
prior ideas, which are already in the learner’s brain. In addition to the knowledgecreation model, Paavola et al. (2004) discussed two other metaphors of learning:
acquisition and participation. The knowledge-acquisition metaphor focuses on learning within individuals’ minds, whereas the participation metaphor emphasises learning as a process of participation in various practices and activities. The knowledge
creation perspective encompasses both acquisition and participation.
In the book: “The scientist in the crib”, Gopnik et al. (1999) implied that from
young ages, children can create new knowledge by inquiry, and scientists make the
most of this capacity, which lets “children learn so much so quickly” (p.9). Consequently, we indeed concur with Duschl et al. (2007, p.83) that pupils can “engage in
and profit from instruction that incorporates relatively complex scientific practices
from the very beginning of their schooling”.
The science-education community has suggested making authentic inquiry of
science more accessible to pupils (e.g. Gaskell 1992; Edelson 1998; Braund and
Reiss 2006). Authenticity of inquiry in the school can be interpreted as resemblance
of pupil activities to experimentation/modelling activities of practicing scientists in
constructing new knowledge, considering the three following aspects (Heck 2009):
– A real-life context for learning that provides pupils with opportunities to investigate realistic science problems in history or present-day research and so pupils
will appreciate the relevance of scientific knowledge in everyday life.
– Tools and techniques that enable pupils to carry out experiments/modelling and to
analyse and process high-quality data in much the same way scientists do.
– Scientific attitudes of learning that stimulate pupils’ pursuit of unanswered
questions, commitment to challenging tasks, and social interactions
(e.g. cooperation, argumentation).
Authentic inquiry is close to real science, so makes school science more attractive
and relevant. Moreover, considering the “learning as participation” metaphor
(Paavola et al. 2004), pupils can appreciate inquiry as a scientific method of
130
T. Ellermeijer and T.-B. Tran