Search results

This chapter highlights inquiry-based learning in action in a first-year Social Sciences inquiry course. Focusing on the continued development of this course over eight years, we present a practical example of fostering an inquiry-based teaching and learning environment grounded in metacognitive practice. Woven throughout the course is a thoughtful and deliberate incorporation of skill-building based on two types of metacognitive expertise; self-understanding and self-regulation with a goal to encourage and support students in developing effective learning strategies necessary for university study. We have found that scaffolding the inquiry learning process with metacognition further enhances the first-year learning experience and promotes a deeper level of learning, where students become aware of their own thinking practice and process. These skills include critical thinking, self-directed learning, clear communication and openness to learning. The chapter presents a series of strategies for introducing and linking metacognitive practice and the inquiry-based approach to learning. Presenting the five stages of inquiry learning: exploration, question and problem identification, methods of investigation, collection and analysis of data, development of conclusions and creative communication of results we describe how we work to develop a more distinct, personalized, engaging and sustainable undergraduate learning experience.

Higher-education institutions have an increasing responsibility to foster “global citizenship,” enabling students to recognize injustice and pursue equity. As a first step to creating a larger “hub” for global justice, McMaster University set out to develop an interdisciplinary course on the topic. With high-level institutional support, a cross-campus, interdisciplinary course design team was formed to further investigate effective pedagogy. Inquiry-based learning (IBL) was considered a foundation for other learning strategies within the course because of its evidenced ability to instigate a process of “learning by doing,” requiring students to both self-direct their education and develop their capacities as independent learners. To provide a further evidence base, a student member of the committee also conducted a pan-Ontario study surveying relevant instructors on successful global justice pedagogies. Collectively, these findings were integrated to inform the development of “Global Justice Inquiry,” which is characterized by its small course size, open-inquiry style, and engagement of alumni, community partners, and faculty from across campus. This chapter details the process followed to develop this course, presenting it as a model that might be helpful to others looking to develop interdisciplinary inquiry offerings.

This chapter explores how four culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse colleagues use self-study methodologies and online journaling to systematically examine inquiry-based teaching and learning in international contexts. Respectively from the USA, Canada, Taiwan, and China, the main research question is, “How can we develop an inquiry stance in our similarly diverse teacher candidates?” For five months, they explore the question with one another in an interactive online journal. The analysis of their written journal reflections result in four main themes: (1) naming and framing inquiry and context, (2) perspectives on translating theory to practice, (3) common practices for developing inquiry stance, and (4) policy work. The chapter concludes with a list of recommendations for fostering inquiry-based teaching and learning with culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse teacher candidates. Self-study research methodologies, Philosophy for Children, and online journaling are also suggested as professional development models for diverse globalized teacher educators.

Dealing with the issue of “Can practical wisdom be taught in business schools?,” in this chapter, I argue for an inquiry-based learning approach as a way of improving today’s management education. Following along these lines, I initially focus on the current criticism of today’s management education in business schools. Then, I provide an introduction into the recent interest in the topic of practical wisdom by management scholars that emerged as part of an effort to overcome these failures of business schools. These attempts, however, remain on a rather vague or theoretical level and are lacking helpful guidance on how universities might implement this concept into their educational offerings. In order to remedy these shortcomings, I introduce a competency-based three-pillar model of practical wisdom and combine it with an inquiry-based learning approach. A comprehensive scheme highlights how the particular competencies of practical wisdom can be fostered over the successive stages of the inquiry process. Most importantly, by describing a MA-thesis program as a successful example of these ideas in application, I provide concrete suggestions of how to facilitate the growth of practically wise competencies by means of an inquiry-based learning approach.

There are many beliefs about how additional languages are learned, several of which have informed some of the most tenacious pedagogical constructs. In this chapter, additional language teachers working with additional language students in high schools are asked to challenge some widely accepted beliefs about language learning and methods of teaching language, and consider a technique that better aligns with constructivist theories of learning and the inquiry-based learning (IBL) approach. This chapter includes a brief discussion on IBL, its constructivist roots, and its many permutations. It also explores some constructivist-based additional language teaching approaches and discusses to what extent they align with IBL. Also provided is a six-step inquiry language-learning process, specifically designed to teach additional languages, with discussion on how each stage builds upon the other, optimizing language learning. In addition, a series of lessons are described which show how the inquiry language-learning process can be employed to teach additional languages to students who are not yet fully proficient in the school’s language of instruction. The chapter concludes with a discussion on some of the challenges of using IBL with additional language students, citing some of the psychological, cultural, and cognitive needs often present in these students. The chapter ends with a call for further research into the use of IBL to teach additional languages.

This chapter develops a theoretical model of a collaborative inquiry-based group development process with a grounded theory approach. The purpose of this research study is to examine how educators engage in collaborative inquiry-based group development processes that transform their professional identity and pedagogical practices. Qualitative research data comes from the Livingstone Inquiry Group (LIG) in Vancouver, Canada. It is a longitudinal case study of inquiry-based pedagogies (IBPs) in a community of learners. They started in 2007 with members representing K-12 teachers, resource staff, administrators, higher education, and union organizations. The model outlines generative dynamics between social capital and relational learning which support pedagogical paradigm shifts in the group’s collaboration. Implications of this study provide direction for research regarding inquiry-based learning in higher educational institutions as an important forum for sustainable professional development of teachers as life-long learners.

This chapter addresses a sensitive topic in the field of education: the relationship between and among narrative inquiry, critical analysis, and critical theory. It argues that narrative inquirers are critical – but not in the same way that critical theorists are critical, although they may draw on the same literature and terms. To make our point, we unpack three of our peer-reviewed articles and highlight our theoretical frames and research moves to demonstrate criticality in narrative inquiry. We specifically discuss (1) titles and topics, (2) research frameworks, (3) historical and contemporary data, (4) use of participants' voices (words and feelings), (5) themes, and (6) new knowledge. We mostly argue that narrative inquiry exists because of experience. From experience, everything else unfolds – including criticality – depending on where the researcher in relationship with research participants, takes the inquiry. This chapter explicitly addresses a lived issue known both inside the narrative inquiry community and outside of it.

Society is increasingly confronted with a range of complex social problems that need to be addressed using a research process based on collaboration between stakeholders from both science and society and the integration of knowledge from different disciplines. This type of interdisciplinary research is more complex than mono disciplinary research and requires skills at the cognitive, inter-personal, and intra-personal levels. We present the experiences with an interdisciplinary master’s program. The research question we address is what educational strategy prepares students for interdisciplinary research on complex social problems? Since tasks which are too complex can frustrate students and create resistance, we argue for a gradual approach to inquiry-based learning. We interviewed both students and lecturers, and included curricula evaluations. We found that students can be trained in interdisciplinary research based on a gradual approach to open inquiry and we found a relationship between the complexity of cognitive tasks and the amount of learning in other domains. We argue that when students are challenged at the right level with appropriate guidance, the learning domains will reinforce each other. To keep students optimally challenged, it is crucial that the teachers adjust their role while directing students from structured inquiry towards open inquiry.

Within the developing exploration of the role of the scholar-practitioner, the situation in which scholar-practitioners engage in the scholarship of practice in their own organizational systems has not received much attention. This chapter adopts the position that scholar-practitioners are not merely practitioners who do research but rather that they integrate scholarship in their practice and generate actionable knowledge, that is, knowledge that is robust for scholars and actionable for practitioners. This chapter explores the phenomenon of scholar-practitioners engaging in the scholarship of practice in their own organizational systems as inside change agents. It discusses how scholar-practitioners engage in inquiry-in-action in first-, second-, and third-person modes of inquiry and practice in the present tense and provides a methodology and methods for such engagement that it be rigorous, reflective, and relevant.

This chapter proposes a synergy and integration between OD’s long tradition of “survey guided development” and the rapidly emerging new directions offered by Appreciative Inquiry. Both Appreciative Inquiry and the survey-guided development approaches have a common shared commitment to the Lewinian call to Action Research. The chapter traces the movement from Action Research to “survey guided development,” and then to the emergence of Appreciative inquiry. Several illustrations of Appreciative Inquiry combined with Survey Guided Organization Development are presented for U.S. and international applications. Findings illustrated in the chapter present the possibility of a third new and powerful perspective on the driving forces and dynamics of change. In addition, the international illustrations raise the question of and strengthen the argument for a common universal human experience.