The nature and purpose of inquiry teaching in the Society and Environment curriculum area

By

Peter Tylee BA (Deakin), MS(Psych) PhD (California Coast), GradDipInfoTech(InfoSys)Distinction (Charles Sturt)

Introduction

This brief paper addresses the inquiry-based approach to teaching in the Human Society and its Environment curriculum area. Rather than define terms in this introduction, since their understanding is essentially what this paper is about, they will be addressed within the appropriate sections below. Discussion will first explain what inquiry is, including the process and explore inquiry teaching and what it can involve (its nature). Discussion will follow on why the approach is advocated and what it seeks to achieve (its purpose). It is acknowledged that while these are logically and epistemologically distinct, at the curriculum implementation chalk face, as it were, teachers need not be too concerned about this. Indeed, Allan, Hill, Hepworth and Wallace (2002) appear to blur any distinction between the method and the message, as though the inquiry process may be considered synonymous with the curriculum area and its teaching. Articulating their separateness in theory and fact may therefore be fruitless and hence a pragmatic rather than purely conceptually distinct approach will be taken. The paper will conclude with a derived summary of the essential criteria for inquiry teaching.

The Nature of Inquiry Teaching

What is inquiry?

Inquiry here may be taken to refer to the process of finding out, of discovery or learning by active exploration or engagement with other humans, their artefacts and the natural environment (Tylee, 1986). Fundamentally, inquiry is not static, nor is it an event, it involves a process.

What does this process involve?

The inquiry process has been formulated in various ways in both similar and different contexts. Oliner’s (1976, 36) dated assertion that “there is no real consensus regarding the meaning of the term” is today an overstatement. While clearly expressed consensus may never exist, it is a widely understood term. One essential feature is that the inquiry process is purposeful. Other common features include progress through a number of steps, stages or phases. The progress may be circular or iterative and while frequently actually a combination of these (back and forth repetitions within an overall cycle), it remains systematic. Marsh (1994) cites steps such as becoming aware, identifying issues, searching for information, testing hypotheses and reaching conclusions. Murdoch and Hamston (1999) cover similar steps with different expression (the six ‘e’s), their most significant extension being enabling, thereby emphasising resulting action. The Victorian Ministry of Education (1987, 10, in Marsh, 1994, 140) enumerated eight steps which are again, broadly similar in intent, if differing somewhat in expression.

In essence, the inquiry process as employed in the present context is another variant of the rationalist problem solving process. This process involves problem identification and definition, exploration of diverse possible solutions (involving creative, lateral or divergent thinking), selection of the best solution given the context (involving convergent thinking), implementation of the chosen solution and evaluation of both the result and the process. This method is seen, for example, in the professional nursing process (assessment, diagnosis, planning, implementation and evaluation) and the teaching process (establish entry behaviour, determine learning needs, plan teaching activities and learning experiences, implement teaching, evaluate outcome).

So, is that inquiry teaching?

No, inquiry teaching is something more than this. The traditional expression of the teaching process, as stated above, remains largely teacher focussed. Central to inquiry teaching is a focus on the learner. In this important respect, the SPACE model (Holliday, 1997; Harrison, 1998), which provides conceptual coherence to the present course, with its emphasis on the teacher’s role being facilitator of learning, is quite appropriate here. An approach that seeks to develop in learners: Self-belief, Personal meaning, Action, Collaboration, and Empowerment, is very supportive of inquiry teaching, which is actually about facilitating learning through the student-centred inquiry process.

Inquiry teaching seeks to facilitate conditions whereby learners will actively construct their understanding and will think about aspects of the knowledge they are building (Oliner, 1976). The purposeful nature of the inquiry process becomes evident in two respects. Firstly, as Banks and Clegg (1990) indicate, inquiry teaching aims for the learners to derive knowledge in the form of facts, concepts, generalisations and theories and then use this knowledge to solve problems, make decisions and take social action. Secondly, since the products of social inquiry “are subject to constant reconstruction or revision” (Banks & Clegg, 1990, 81), another purpose of inquiry teaching is learner acquisition of the inquiry skills themselves. As the Board of Studies (1998a, 4) states, learners “will develop skills that enable them to acquire information, [and] use an inquiry process”.

Inquiry teaching is not new but it appears to have been given greater emphasis in more recent times. Allan, Hill, Hepworth and Wallace (1998a, 28) state that “since the 1960s … the prevailing philosophy in social studies education … has been inquiry”. Gilbert (2001, 9-12) outlines a course of development in the society and environment curricular area from providing information about the world, to social and political inculcation, the development of disciplined knowledge and problem-solving, personal and social development, effective participation in society, and finally critical social understanding and action. This broadly concurs with Allan, Hill, Hepworth and Wallace (1998a, 28) who claim the “emphasis has moved from content to process, from the acquisition of knowledge to the ability to apply that knowledge”. The real point of inquiry teaching however, is not simply the application of knowledge, such as in social action for example (as important as that may be), but the acquisition of the knowledge-gaining-process skills.

In the context of inquiry teaching Oliner (1976) indicates that learners are to think deeply, actively and strategically. Oliner (1976, 18) offers this optimal inquiry strategy: identify an issue, develop tentative hypotheses, gather and evaluate evidence, test hypotheses, and draw tentative conclusions. This question and answer based approach can be presented in a form modified to permit “students to relate to issues in terms personally relevant for them” (p.26). This is a critically important point, whatever process is followed.

One cannot leave this discussion of inquiry teaching without noting its unavoidably political nature. At base, politics merely addresses the relative power relationships between and among people. It is political then, in the important but limited sense mentioned by Allan, Hill, Hepworth and Wallace (1998a, 23) of having to address content which has been prescribed to meet the requirements of interest groups, like the material documented in the relevant syllabus for New South Wales (Board of Studies, 1998b). It is more pertinent to note that its learner focus notwithstanding, inquiry teaching, like all teaching, “involves interpretations and judgements about what knowledge is important, what students are interested in and capable of, which teaching resources are available and likely to be useful, and a host of other considerations” (Gilbert, 2001, 4) all of which represent political decisions. More importantly still, it is political because more than any other curriculum area, it actually seeks to empower learners to engage in social and political action (such as is shown, for example, in From the Classroon: Majura Primary School, 2000).

Summary of the nature of inquiry teaching

Inquiry teaching may be summarised as an approach by professional teachers which is learner focussed and meets the requirements of the currently prevailing curriculum or syllabus for the particular jurisdiction. (It is therefore unavoidably a political process, the more so since this syllabus area directly addresses highly politicised values education.) It is characterised by the use of a purposeful, systematic, stepwise process of discovery in which learners are actively engaged. Intended outcomes include learner acquisition of knowledge about human society and its environment, together with skills that enable them to use an inquiry process to acquire knowledge and understanding and to participate in social and civic life.

The Purpose of Inquiry Teaching

As already acknowledged, the nature and purpose of inquiry teaching significantly overlap in this discussion. We have already seen much of the purpose of inquiry teaching above. Nevertheless, there is value in taking a different perspective here in addressing purpose. In this sense while nature addressed what and why, purpose more fully explores why, which has motivational importance.

The need as a call to action

The importance of meeting the syllabus objectives in this area of study cannot be overstated. Inquiry teaching in this area contributes significantly to laying a foundation for the future of one’s local and the global society. Referring to one syllabus (Board of Studies, 1998b) as an example, we find the content organised around four strands: change and continuity, cultures, environments and social systems and structures. It indicates concern with students developing skills to participate in social and civic life; developing values and attitudes related to social justice, intercultural understanding, ecological sustainability, democratic processes, beliefs and moral codes and lifelong learning. It also introduces religious education and spirituality. All of this with multidisciplinary insights into present, historical and future issues facing people locally, nationally and internationally. The breadth is vast and the significance immense, particularly considering the pluralist and multicultural nature of Australia.

The purpose then is to meet this need. Gilbert (2001) presents approaches to civics education, Fien and Williamson-Fien (2001) suggest ways of incorporating a global perspective in inquiry teaching and Hutchinson (1996) explored in some depth ways of educating for sustainable futures and cultures of peace. These all contain practical suggestions of ways to implement inquiry teaching in this learning area. Belamy’s (1999) discussion on the varied prospects of life that children are born to and the stock taking of world ecosystems undertaken at the turn of this century (UNDP, UNEP, WB, WRI, 2000) lend a sense of urgency. Fortunately Murdoch and Hamston (1997) demonstrate that this immense responsibility can be integrated with other key learning areas.

Conclusion

In keeping with the inquiry process this paper draws logical and justified conclusions based on the data uncovered and critically considered. They must also be tentative. They suffice for now but will be subject to ongoing revision and development. To facilitate brevity as befits this paper, they are presented as summary statements under selected headings.

Content

The significance, sensitivity and political nature of the Human Society and Its Environment key learning area (KLA) mandates careful adherence to the approved syllabus (by whichever name and in whichever jurisdiction). There is no need to elaborate upon typical inclusions in such documents here as they are well documented in primary sources. However, as teachers must still make choices about what content to cover, inquiry teaching should seek to be topical (for example, what is happening in local affairs or world events) and to maximise personal relevance to students.

Processes

Inquiry teaching is fundamentally process orientated. The process may vary but it will be rationalist, critical, deliberative, purposeful, iterative and circular and will reflect social scientific methods. Like content, it must be learner centred, not teacher centred.

Integration

Another essential feature of inquiry teaching is integration. This occurs in three forms. The first is obvious in the multidisciplinary basis of the KLA, which incorporates history, geography, anthropology, legal studies, economics, sociology and political science (Marsh, 1994). The second form of integration is between content and process. In this KLA they can be literally one and the same (for example, teaching the inquiry process). Their integration through the constant (or at least repetitive) reflection on processes can facilitate depth of learning. Finally, one suspects that to cover the necessary breadth of content, cross KLA integration may also be essential.

Outcomes

A final feature of inquiry teaching is that it results in action. Learners who are properly prepared in terms of relevant and meaningful content, have developed knowledge and understanding with appropriate cognitive processes and depth, have reflected on and adopted suitable values and attitudes should be prepared for and empowered to take responsible social action action.

At this point one can consider essential criteria for inquiry teaching in this learning area to include at least all of the above.


References
 

Allan, R., Hill, B., Hepworth, T. & Wallace, A. (2002a). EMH407 Module 1 Understanding society and environment syllabuses (Revised). Charles Sturt University: Wagga Wagga.

Allan, R., Hill, B., Hepworth, T. & Wallace, A. (2002b). EMH407 Module 2 Teaching society and environment (Revised). Charles Sturt University: Wagga Wagga.

Banks, J. & Clegg, A. (1990). Products of social inquiry: Facts, concepts, generalisations and theories. In Teaching strategies for social studies: Inquiry, valuing and decision making, 4th edn. Addison Wesley: Reading, MA, pp. 81-97.

Bellamy, C. (1999). The roll of the dice. In UNICEF, The progress of nations 1999. UNICEF: New York.

Bloom, B. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longman: New York.

Board of Studies. (1998a). Human society & its environment K-6 principal’s package. Board of Studies: NSW.

Board of Studies. (1998b). Human society & its environment K-6 syllabus. Board of Studies: NSW.

Fien, J. & Williamson-Fien, J. (2001). Global perspectives in studies of society and environment. In Studying society and environment: A guide for teachers, ed. R. Gilbert. 2nd edn. Social Sciences Press: Katoomba, pp. 126-141.

From the Classroom: Majura Primary School. Society and Environment Bulletin, 2, 2000, pp. 12-15.

Gilbert, R. (2001). Studies of society and environment as a field of learning. In R. Gilbert (ed), Studying society and environment: A guide for teachers, 2nd edn. Social Sciences press: Katoomba, pp. 4-22.

Harrison, H. (1998). The S.P.A.C.E. model: Optimal conditions for teaching, learning, and assessment. Paper presented at the Annual International Conference of Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, Auckland, New Zealand.

Holliday, R. (1997). Module 1: Introduction to Teaching, in EPT409 Practice of Teaching (Primary) 1: Learning and Teaching. Charles Sturt University: Bathurst.

Hutchinson, F.P. (1996). Extracts from Educating for sustainable futures and cultures of peace. In Educating beyond violent futures. Routledge: London.

Marsh, C. (1994). Teaching studies of society and environment. Prentice Hall: Sydney.

Oliner, P.M. (1976). Some basic attributes of inquiry. In Teaching elementary social studies: A rational and humanistic approach. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich: New York, pp. 4-23, 26.

Tylee, P. (1986). PBL Support package: Enquiry & processing skills 102. Department of Professional Nursing Studies, Newcastle College of Advanced Education: Newcastle.
 

 Publications | Search | Contact