H

aw

Edition

io
n
at

ke

rB

ro
w
nl
ow

Ed
uc

Teaching
High School
Science
Through
Inquiry and
Argumentation

Douglas
Llewellyn

at

io
n

Contents

Ed
uc

Preface
About the Author

rB

ro
w
nl
ow

1. Constructing an Understanding of Inquiry

Three Designations of Inquiry
What the National Science Education Standards Say About Inquiry
What A Framework for K12 Science Education and the Next
Generation Science Standards Say About Inquiry
Inquiry as a Three-Legged Stool
Seven Segments of Scientific Inquiry
The Pretzel Theory of Science Inquiry
Inquiry as a Human Endeavor
Ten Beliefs (and Rebuttals) About Inquiry-Based Learning
What Science Inquiry IsWhat Science Inquiry Isnt
A Definition of Scientific Inquiry
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

vii

xvi
1
1
3
4
5
6
9
9
10
14
15
16
18
18
19
20
21
22
23

3. Learning About Inquiry and Argumentation Through Case Studies

A Case Study Approach
A Case Study: Inquiring About Isopods
The Inquiry Cycle

41
41
42
48

aw

ke

2. Constructing an Understanding of Scientific Argumentation

The Influence of Media
What Is a Scientific Argument?
Parts of an Argument
Making a Case for Argumentation
What the National Science Education Standards Say About Argumentation
What the Common Core State Standards Say About Argumentation
What A Framework for K12 Science Education and the
Next Generation Science Standards Say About Argumentation
Different Types of Reasoning
Flaws in Scientific Reasoning
Scaffolding Argumentation in the Classroom
The Classroom as a Courtroom
Painting a Picture of What Real Scientists Do
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

2014 Hawker Brownlow Education 9781743307533 CO7533

26
28
28
29
37
37
39

Brainstorming
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

50
51

io
n

53
53
55

rB

ro
w
nl
ow

5. Developing a Philosophy for Inquiry

What Is Constructivism?
Traditional Versus Constructivist Classrooms
Historical Perspectives of Constructivism
Constructivism Today
Metacognition
How Adolescents Learn
Misconceptions
Conceptual Change Theory
Making Sense of Language
The 5E Learning Cycle
Challenges to Creating a Constructivist Classroom
All Things Are Possible
Case Study: Investigating Yeast
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

ke

56
57
57
60
61
62
64

at

Ed
uc

4. Choosing to Become an Inquiry-Based Teacher

A Choice in Teaching
Self-Directed Learning
The Top 10 Reasons Why Teachers Say They Cant
Teach Through Inquiry
Myths and Misconceptions About Inquiry-Based Teaching
Whats Your Instructional Pie?
Steps in Becoming an Inquiry-Based Teacher
Monitoring Your Progress
The Case of Angela Bicknell
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

65
66
66
70
75
76
77
78
81
83
83
88
90
91
99
100
100
101
102
103
105
106
107
112
114
119
123

7. Modifying a Lab Activity Into an Inquiry- and

Argument-Based Investigation
The Role of the Laboratory in Science
New Approaches to Traditional Labs

124
124
126

aw

6. Four Levels of Science Inquiry

Promoting Student Inquiries
Invitation to Inquiry
Demonstrated Inquiries
Structured Inquiries
Guided or Teacher-Initiated Inquiries
Self-Directed or Student-Initiated Inquiries
Guiding Students Into Inquiry
Differentiated Science Inquiry
Case Study 1: Bottle Ecosystems
Case Study 2: The Finger Lakes Regional Stream Monitoring Network
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

CO7533 9781743307533 2014 Hawker Brownlow Education

132
134
134
140
141
142
144

146
146
147
148
154
155
157
158
162

Ed
uc

at

8. Managing the Inquiry-Based Classroom

The Implementation Curve
Challenges to Inquiry-Based Teaching
Making Time for Inquiry and Argumentation
Avoiding a Lockstep Approach
Establishing the Right Atmosphere
Assessing and Monitoring Your Classroom Management Strategies
Case Study: Investigating Contour Lines
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

io
n

Modifying a Traditional Lab Into an Inquiry-Based Lab

Addressing Misconceptions About Density
Scaffolding Toward Inquiry
Writing an Inquiry/Argument-Based Lab Report
The Current Debate About High School Science Labs
Case Study: The Hydrate Lab
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

164
165
166
169
169
170
175
176
176
178
179
184
187

10. Assessing Scientific Inquiry

The Anxiety Over Assessment
Curriculum Alignment
Formative and Summative Assessment Tools
Designing Assessments
Choosing the Right Test Item
Using Multiple Assessments
Authentic Assessments
Transitioning to New Assessments
Case Study: Measuring and Assessing Centripetal Force
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

190
190
191
192
193
194
195
195
205
206
212

11. Creating a Classroom Culture of Inquiry and Argumentation

The Environment of a Traditional Classroom
The Environment of an Inquiry-Based Classroom
Students in an Inquiry-Based Classroom

213
215
216
216

aw

ke

rB

ro
w
nl
ow

9. Developing Effective Questioning Skills

The Purpose of Questions
Blooms Taxonomy
Expository Questions
Quality Questions Model Quality Thinking
Questioning Techniques
Just Tell Me the Answer
The Power of Praise and Positive Reinforcement
A Three-Step Approach to Better Questioning
Recalibrate Your Questioning Skills
Exploratory Questions
Case Study: Designing a Professional Development Plan
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

2014 Hawker Brownlow Education 9781743307533 CO7533

219
222
228
231
232
234
234
236
238
239
240
241
241
241
243

Ed
uc

at

Resource A: Resources for High School Science Teachers

Print Resources on Scientific Inquiry and Argumentation
Print Resources on Inquiry- and Argument-Based Investigations
Print Resources on Constructivism
Print Resources on Science Standards and Science Literacy
Print Resources on Assessment
Print Resources on General Science Areas
Multimedia Resources on Scientific Inquiry and Argumentation
Online Resources on Scientific Inquiry and Argumentation
Professional Organizations

io
n

Teachers in an Inquiry-Based Classroom

A Classroom Culture That Fosters Inquiry and Argumentation
Reflecting on a Teaching Career
Final Thoughts: Your Legacy
Questions for Reflection and Discussion

246

References

247

ro
w
nl
ow

Resource B: Bottle Handout

252

aw

ke

rB

Index

CO7533 9781743307533 2014 Hawker Brownlow Education

TEACHING HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE THROUGH INQUIRY AND ARGUMENTATION

specific for that grade. These standards help science educators define what students
should know and be able to do. Reading the inquiry standards for grades 912 can help
develop an understanding of the abilities necessary to do scientific inquiry.
At the high school level, according to the NRC (2000a), students should be able to

at

io
n

identify questions and concepts that guide scientific investigations,

design and conduct scientific investigations,
use technology and mathematics to improve investigations and communications,
formulate and revise scientific explanations and models using logic and evidence,
recognize and analyze alternative explanations and models, and
communicate and defend a scientific argument. (p. 19)

Ed
uc

ro
w
nl
ow

Although the National Science Education Standards have been replaced by A Framework
for K12 Science Education (NRC, 2012) and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS;
NRC, 2013), science teachers should still become familiar with the National Science
Education Standards. The Standards can be purchased in softcover, read online, or downloaded as a free PDF version from the National Academy Press (www.nap.edu/
bookstore). Readers may also be interested in an excellent accompanying text, Inquiry and
the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning (NRC, 2000a)
that offers stories of high school teachers engaging students in inquiry (see Resource A,
the Print Resources on Scientific Inquiry and Argumentation section).

What A Framework for K12 Science

Education and the Next Generation
Science Standards Say About Inquiry

aw

ke

rB

In 2012, the National Research Council (NRC) published A Framework for K12 Science
Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. According to the NRC (2012), the
Framework identifies a general description of the science content and skill development
that all U.S. students should be familiar with by the end of grade 12. The Framework also
lays the foundation for the development of the Next Generation Science Standards in 2013.
Like the NSES, the Framework identifies and articulates the core ideas in science
around which standards should be developed in life sciences, physical sciences, earth and
space sciences, and engineering and technology. In addition to the core ideas, crosscutting concepts and science practices are identified and sequenced across the K12 level.
Each of these three dimensions of the Framework inaugurates the vision of the scope and
nature of science education as a crucial aspect in fostering scientifically literate citizens
for the 21st century. And as with the NSES, inquiry, once again, plays a significant role in
the advancement of scientific literacy.

Inquiry and Scientific Practices

In the Framework and the Next Generation Science Standards the term practices is used
to represent the term inquiry. However, the practices identified in the Framework still
strongly reflect certain common qualities to problem-solving and inquiry approaches.
According to the NRC (2012), the practices in the Framework document reflect the work
that scientists and engineers actually engage in as part of their work. The eight essential
practices of science include the following:

CO7533 9781743307533 2014 Hawker Brownlow Education

28

TEACHING HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE THROUGH INQUIRY AND ARGUMENTATION

Ed
uc

Different Types of Reasoning

at

io
n

next, download a free copy of the Framework at www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_

id=13165 or view the Next Generation Science Standards at www.nextgenscience.org.
The National Science Teachers Association publishes a summary guide called the
Readers Guide to A Framework for K12 Science Education (Pratt, 2012). That document can
be downloaded free at www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936959
778&lid=ngs.
Together with forming explanation and justifying and defending arguments, all the
practices from the Framework and the NGSS place a strong emphasis on fostering reasoning skills. We will now turn our focus toward how communicating arguments encourages
critical reasoning.

ro
w
nl
ow

There are many categories of reasoning patterns recognized in mathematics and science.
Several of these include Jean Piagets concrete and formal reasoning skills such as conservation reasoning, serration-serial ordering, proportional reasoning, and correlational reasoning. Others contrast inductive and deductive reasoning. Since classroom teachers are not
expected to be experts in identifying reasoning patterns, this chapter does not address those
capacitiesthat discussion is left to those who study specific reasoning concepts. This section, however, addresses reasoning as the link between claims and evidence and encourages scientific reasoning skills as an aspect of science inquiries as shown in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2

Claims

Evidence

Reasoning

ke

rB

Observations

aw

Flaws in Scientific Reasoning

Despite our best efforts in fostering critical-thinking skills, students sometimes exhibit
flaws in their logic, reasoning, and arguments. When an individuals argument is faulty,
usually those flaws can be (a) an indication of inexperience in using reasoning skills,
(b) misconceptions in previously held naive notions about the topic being explored, or
(c) backing a claim with another claim. Since research tells us that each student brings to
school preconceptions and varying degrees of reasoning skills and abilities to justify his or
her theories about how the natural world works, each individual has a unique and distinct
cognitive framework that filters reasoning abilities. For that purpose it become necessary
for teachers to provide sufficient think-time for a student as he or she states an explanation. According to Michaels, Shouse, and Schweingruber (2008),
In order to process, make sense of, and learn from their ideas, observations, and
experiences, students must talk about them. Talk, in general, is an important and
integral part of learning, and students should have regular opportunities to talk
through their ideas, collectively, in all subjects. (p. 88)
CO7533 9781743307533 2014 Hawker Brownlow Education

LEARNING ABOUT INQUIRY AND ARGUMENTATION THROUGH CASE STUDIES

Inquisition:
Stating a question
to be investigated

Exhibition:
Sharing and
communicating
results

Summation:
Collecting
evidence and
drawing
conclusions

ro
w
nl
ow

Inquiry
Cycle

Supposition:
Selecting a
statement to test

Implementation:
Designing and
carrying out a plan

rB

Acquisition:
Brainstorming
possible solutions

at

io
n

The Inquiry Cycle

Ed
uc

Figure 3.4

49

aw

ke

During the supposition phase, students consolidate the information under study to
propose a testable statement or an I think statement. This phase may include stating
one or more hypotheses to test the question being investigated.
During the implementation phase, students design a plan to test their proposed
statement(s) and carry out appropriate procedures.
During the summation phase, students record and analyze their observations and
data to answer to the original What if statement. They also look for patterns and relationships among the variables and extract evidence from the data to make appropriate
claims.
Finally, during the exhibition phase, students communicate and justify their question,
claim, and evidence to the class. New information and explanations are presented in the
form of argument-based written reports, poster displays, argument-based oral presentations, and PowerPoint presentations.
The inquiry cycle can serve as a general format for teachers planning inquiry and
argument-based investigations for their students. We should be reminded that the model
serves as a general approach to raising and answering questions. Following the inquiry
cycle, students often enter and reenter the phases at different aspects of their inquiry process. Thus the cycle serves as a model to guide students through their science inquiries
and investigations.

2014 Hawker Brownlow Education 9781743307533 CO7533

70

TEACHING HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE THROUGH INQUIRY AND ARGUMENTATION

9. Posing What if . . . and I wonder . . . questions facilitates assimilation and

accommodation.

io
n

10. Allowing students to work in groups to share and communicate knowledge

through argumentation, and to test ideas and theories against one another, makes
learning a personal and social experience.

at

Historical Perspectives of
Constructivism

aw

ke

rB

ro
w
nl
ow

Ed
uc

At many science education conferences, workshops, and seminars on learning theory, one
of the most talked about topics among science educators today is constructivism.
Although the theory is not new, recent developments about how the brain works have
strengthened the constructivist model. Aspects of constructivist principles date back to
the works of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Perhaps the first recorded constructivist was
the Neapolitan philosopher Giambatista Vico, who worked in the field as early as 1710.
Have you ever posed a question to a student and heard the response, I know it, but I just
cant explain it? According to most constructivists, we know something only when we
can explain it.
We begin our look at the process of learning by turning our attention to epistemology
the structure and origin of knowledge. We must first understand how knowledge is
engendered to appreciate the potential of inquiry and argumentation as a means of attaining and negotiating conceptual meaning through scientific investigations. By first developing a sound understanding about how high school students learn science, we take a
quantum leap into the practice and implementation of inquiry as a constructivist-based
teaching strategy.
The latter half of the 20th century produced an interest in understanding cognitive
psychology and metacognition. During this century, recent advances in medicine and
research have opened the door to understanding how the brain works in attaining new
knowledge. The latest generation of theorists argues that learning develops within multiple structures of the brain. This new era has affixed merit to the theory of constructivism. Next, we will examine the research and philosophy of several cognitive scientists.

John Dewey

John Dewey (18591952) is considered one of the twentieth centurys most influential
educational reformers and was one of the first modern American constructivists. From his
research at the University of Chicago, Dewey (1900, 1902, 1916) believed that learning and
experience go hand in hand and that knowledge emerges from a personal interaction
between the learner and the external environment. He felt that posing problems of significant interest that draw upon the students prior knowledge activates the learning
process. Dewey felt that teaching should be an active process, including solving problems
that interest students. He believed that problems posed to pupils too often involved the
interests of the teacher rather than the interests of the students. Deweys model for learning also incorporates the students prior knowledge. He insisted that subject matter
requires relevance to the learner. His teachings have also had a profound influence on
environmental and outdoor education. Therefore, many inquiry science teachers align
themselves to Deweyian philosophy.

CO7533 9781743307533 2014 Hawker Brownlow Education