What is Inquiry Not? Challenges With True Inquiry Based Learning

Learning Log #1

I first began to learn about the inquiry process a few years ago when plopped into a TL placement for a very prominent figure in Vancouver’s school library community; someone who not only effectively practiced the pedagogy but had influenced her whole school community and quite literally wrote THE book on it (along with you Moira!). Daunting. After a full year there I have to admit I didn’t even get my toes wet in the philosophy, but at least began to have a rather profound shift of thinking about what teaching, collaboration and student learning looked like. It’s only now, several years later, since I’ve had the opportunity to have my own space and a few TL courses under my belt that I’ve had the confidence to venture into inquiry territory with my students and colleagues. Which is why in module 2 when it discusses what inquiry is not, it struck a chord with me. In theory I’m beginning to grasp the concepts but implementation is another story and in my own experience I’ve had several encounters with what it is not thus far. Just as Doctors do, it’s important to rule things out to truly uncover what’s going on!

From what I’ve learned, inquiry is NOT:

- Just A KWL (know/wonder/learned)

In Fontichiaro’s article, “What’s Inquiry? Well I Know It When I See It,” she talks about the importance of student background knowledge being critical for true student centered questioning. Being in a highly ELL school this has been an aspect I’ve somewhat overlooked. Asking a student to question something they know nothing about leads to very shallow, answer-based learning. Colleagues and I have struggled very much with what we perceived to be a lack of wonderment and ability to question in our students, do they have no intrinsic motivation? Have they simply been programmed to listen and learn? Do their home life and cultural beliefs train them to not think critically? While these questions remain unanswered, I like Fontichiaro’s suggestion that children must be “grounded in some overview level of a topic or theme,” or in other words we must immerse them in the content we wish them to explore to fill the gaps they may have in their background knowledge before we can expect true deeper level queries. This is definitely something I can be better at. 

Photo Courtesy http://amorebeautifulquestion.com

- One final destination

This is one I struggle with always. If true inquiry can have open-ended results, how does one ensure curricular goals are being met? Isn’t the destination our curricular goals? Two colleagues and I attempted an inquiry on graphic novels a couple years ago, with big aspirations that students would end up understanding how all the different elements of imagery and text work together to help tell a story differently. We brought in graphic novel author Dan Bar-el, we encouraged discussion with other students and questioning. But when the unit was complete we got together to assess and realized what we had done was not at all inquiry. We had a set idea we wanted them to learn, including key vocabulary and drawing skills, we gave everyone prescribed templates for them to create their own novels, we assessed if they had used their knowledge within their own work. We’ve agreed to rethink doing this unit, and how to make it actual inquiry. I think this will involve broadening the subject to that of imagery and storytelling, as well as truly giving students free reign to discover what this means to them. I guess it’s a work in progress!

Photo courtesy http://www.gig.com/blog/2015/04/08/ask-the-

genie-how-do-i-choose-between-so-many-career-paths/

- Getting From Point A to B With a Free For All In Between

As Coatney suggests in her article, “Essential Questions and Answers for Implementing Inquiry,” a teacher’s role is to create a “third space” where student knowledge and questions meet curriculum. That is, to facilitate a child getting from point A to B, not just let it become a completely child-centered learning experience. Just as many of us teachers struggle with inquiry, so do children. I like when Fontichiaro suggests that “not every research topic bears fruit,” and that it’s our job to ensure an inquiry is student centered but also viable. As well as to guide students to reflect and synthesize along the way, is the information they’re finding useful, credible, where did it come from and what does it really mean? I’ve found many teachers are wary of inquiry because they do not the role they play in it and think it means students get a free for all with what they learn, how they learn and what they construct to demonstrate it. Inquiry does not mean a teacher’s function is diminished, in fact it’s even more important as students of this generation are highly capable of finding answers but seem to need much guidance to think critically and reflectively. The article, "Teaching Inquiry with Primary Sources," has lots of suggestions for when and how teachers will need to facilitate the inquiry process for young students by modeling and scaffolding, I look forward to becoming more familiar with this resource.

Photo courtesy http://practicallystrategic.com

            While the idea of inquiry may still be solidifying in my mind, it does help to identify methods that are clearly not in line with the pedagogy. By slowly eliminating these practices from my teaching methods, hopefully I’ll get closer and closer to true inquiry looks like!

           

Coatney, S. (2015). Essential questions and answers for implementing inquiry. School Library Monthly 31(5): 11-13.

Fontichiaro, K. (2015). Nudging toward inquiry: “What’s inquiry? Well, I’ll know it when I see it.” School Library Monthly 31(4): 49-51.

  

"Teaching Inquiry with Primary Sources." Library of Congress. (http://www.loc.gov/teachers/tps/quarterly/inquiry_learning/article.html).