Inquiry is most definitely not a “one size fits all” paradigm. Teachers can and should adjust the level of scaffolding based on the academic abilities and experience of the class. I do this all the time.
Here are four of the many levels of scaffolding that I might use in different situations.
- A class that has never done inquiry-based labs needs heavy scaffolding. I start by telling them the objective of the experiment and giving them a high-level plan. For example, if the lab is a titration using an already-standardized NaOH solution, the plan I give them might be: “Measure a known amount of the unknown acid (it doesn’t matter how much, as long as you’ve measured it accurately) into a beaker. Add a few drops of indicator. Dispense the base from the buret until you just barely get a color change. Repeat this three times, trying to get the slightest color change possible.” As you can see, this is almost, but not quite a full, detailed procedure.
- For a class that has done a couple of inquiry-based experiments, but students are not yet comfortable with the process, I have them practice the specific techniques used in the experiments first. Then I talk through the experiment with them, pointing out how the technique they just practiced is used. Then, I guide them through the process of coming up with an experimental plan through class discussion.
- For a class that is becoming comfortable with inquiry-based experiments, I give them the objective, then have a class discussion in which I ask a line of questioning like this: “Which quantity/quantities do you need in order to meet the objective? Which formulas relate those quantities to quantities you can measure? Therefore, what measurements do you need to take? How are you going to do that in the lab?”
- For a class that is already comfortable with inquiry-based experiments, I give them the objective. I stay out of the way and observe, except to hand them equipment that they ask for because it’s not in their lab stations or to answer questions (or occasionally Socratically help them if they’re stuck and ask for assistance).
A lot of teachers try to start their students somewhere around example #4 above. They decide that inquiry doesn’t work when their students can’t make the necessary intuitive leaps. This is analogous to giving a first grade class a copy of Romeo and Juliet, and then declaring from the disastrous result that teaching kids to read doesn’t work.
I find it useful to remember that the word “teacher” comes from the word “teach”, not the word “expect”…
Originally posted to the ap-chem discussion list.
