Abstract
Recent international comparison studies such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) repeatedly argued that inquiry-based learning (IBL) indicated a negative effect on science literacy (SL). However, those studies included two limitations in revealing the relationship between IBL and SL as they did not consider (1) instructional quality and (2) different types of IBL. Accordingly, this study aimed to explore relationships between two types of IBL (open and guided) and SL, and how four types of instructional quality (classroom management, adaptative teaching, teacher–student relationship, and teacher support) moderated the relationships between IBL and SL. For this purpose, a PISA 2015 Finnish sample was used and analyzed by latent moderated structural equation modeling in order to explore the latent interaction between IBL and the quality of instruction. The results of this study presented that the teacher–student relationship was the most potent predictor of SL and moderated the effects of guided and open inquiry on SL. Classroom management also indicated moderation effects for both guided and open inquiry. Also, this study showed the overruling effect of open inquiry on guided inquiry in predicting SL.
Highlights
Inquiry-based learning (IBL), which stimulates and reflects scientists’ authentic work among students, becomes the keystone of science education for the last decades
The Finnish sample was chosen because previous studies continuously have revealed that the Finnish Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) sample indicated two types of IBL as guided inquiry, which is predominant in the curriculum and widely implemented by Finnish teachers, and open inquiry, which had been rarely used, but emphasized in the new 2016 national core curriculum (Lavonen and Laaksonen 2009; Kang and Keinonen 2017, 2018)
IBL has played a pivotal role in science education for last decades as one of the effective teaching approaches enhancing students’ science literacy and interest
Summary
Inquiry-based learning (IBL), which stimulates and reflects scientists’ authentic work among students, becomes the keystone of science education for the last decades. A recent international comparison study, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2015, reported that students’ experiences related to the inquiry cycle had been negatively correlated with students’ science achievement in most of the participating countries (The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2016a). 833), while open inquiry helps students increase procedural and epistemological scientific understanding and engage in higher-order thinking (Madhuri et al 2012; Zion et al 2013) Both approaches may enhance students’ nature of science (NOS) views. Kang and Keinonen (2018) using the PISA 2006 Finnish data found two factors—guided and open inquiry Their findings suggested that guided inquiry indicated positive relationships, whereas open inquiry was negatively related to science literacy. It is recommended to differentiate and measure the effects of different types of IBL on achievement separately when using the PISA datasets
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
