Content deleted Content added
remove copyright content copied from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9683-6 |
→Open/true inquiry learning: I added a paragraph describing the reported benefits of the different levels of inquiry. This paragraph is an edited version of the paragraph that I wrote a few days ago. I revised it following the comments from Diannaa. |
||
Line 47:
Open learning has been developed by a number of science educators including the American [[John Dewey]] and the German [[Martin Wagenschein]].{{efn| name= MartinWagenschein| Wagenschein characterized his approach as Socratic, genetic, and example-based.<ref>[[:de:Martin Wagenschein]]</ref>{{Circular reference|date=April 2022}}}} Wagenschein's ideas particularly complement both open learning and inquiry-based learning in teaching work. He emphasized that students should not be taught bald facts, but should understand and explain what they are learning. His most famous example of this was when he asked physics students to tell him what the speed of a falling object was. Nearly all students would produce an equation, but no students could explain what this equation meant.{{citation needed|date=October 2012}} Wagenschein used this example to show the importance of understanding over knowledge.<ref>{{cite periodical |url=http://ed.fnal.gov/trc_new/sciencelines_online/fall97/activity_inserts.html |title=The Science Journal: Writing and Inquiry Development |access-date=2017-01-03 |author=Dahl, Susan | author2=Franzen, Pat | url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080908102608/http://ed.fnal.gov/trc_new/sciencelines_online/fall97/activity_inserts.html |magazine=Science Lines: A Newsletter from the Teacher Resource Center at Fermilab |volume=9 |issue=1, Fall 1997 |type=Activity |archive-date=2008-09-08}}</ref>
Although both guided and open/true inquiry were found to promote science literacy and interest, each has its own advantages. While open/true inquiry may contribute to students' initiative, flexibility and adaptability better than guided inquiry in the long run<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Dorfman |first=Bat-Shahar |last2=Issachar |first2=Hagit |last3=Zion |first3=Michal |date=2020-02-01 |title=Yesterday’s Students in Today’s World—Open and Guided Inquiry Through the Eyes of Graduated High School Biology Students |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9683-6 |journal=Research in Science Education |language=en |volume=50 |issue=1 |pages=123–149 |doi=10.1007/s11165-017-9683-6 |issn=1573-1898}}</ref> ,some claim that it may lead to high cognitive load and that guided inquiry is more efficient in terms of time and content learning<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bunterm |first=Tassanee |last2=Lee |first2=Kerry |last3=Ng Lan Kong |first3=Jeremy |last4=Srikoon |first4=Sanit |last5=Vangpoomyai |first5=Penporn |last6=Rattanavongsa |first6=Jareunkwan |last7=Rachahoon |first7=Ganya |date=2014-08-13 |title=Do Different Levels of Inquiry Lead to Different Learning Outcomes? A comparison between guided and structured inquiry |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09500693.2014.886347 |journal=International Journal of Science Education |language=en |volume=36 |issue=12 |pages=1937–1959 |doi=10.1080/09500693.2014.886347 |issn=0950-0693}}</ref>.
=== Inquisitive learning ===
| |||