critical thinking inquiry based learning

• Our Mission

Creating Challenging Learning Experiences

When teachers leverage inquiry, students use critical thinking skills to examine multiple perspectives and find ways to improve our world.

As I write this article, my daughter is writing about the Berlin Conference and the Scramble for Africa. She is evaluating the impact of imperialism on the people of Africa in the 1800s and the rationale of European nations to colonize an entire continent of people. Through this unit, she analyzed Kipling’s White Man’s Burden and evaluated the influence of its message on world leaders. In addition, she was assigned excerpts from Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness to represent the thinking of the anticolonialism messages of the time.

I examined these tasks, and I found that she was engaged in critical thinking. She was asked to analyze policies and the author’s purpose in complex pieces of writing. Further, she was tasked with weighing the decisions of European countries to conquer the people of Africa. In addition, she evaluated different perspectives on these decisions.

However, she lacked the opportunity to tie that powerful work to different perspectives from largely underrepresented groups during that period and today. She read about the experiences and analysis of White men. I don’t recall any analysis of the people of Congo, the Philippines, or India.

Rigor Light

She was engaging in critical thinking but lacked the opportunity to engage in criticality, or the idea that we must connect critical thinking with varying contexts (past, present, and future situations) and perspectives to the human condition. As a result, she participated in a mirage of rigor. Rigor without criticality and contribution is rigor light.

Professor and author Gholdy Muhammad, who holds a PhD in literacy, language, and culture, explains the difference between critical thinking and criticality in this way: “I discuss the difference between lowercase- c critical , which is just deep and analytical thinking. But Critical with a capital c is related to power, equity, and anti-oppression.” The argument here is that both criticality and critical thinking are deeply intertwined and necessary in our work with students.

A good way to remain focused on criticality is through the lens of equity. Equity as a practice and mission and the development of thinking deeply are interwoven. So how do we ensure that we are tending to the demands of the interrelationship between the advancement of equity and cognition? And how do we use this learning for meaningful contribution?

The recommendation here is to engage students with a set of questions that move critical thinking to exploring perspectives, evaluating contexts, and determining potential actions that students can take to solve problems and improve or enhance the world. One way to do this is to use questions that move across levels of thinking from critical analysis, to criticality analysis, to a call to action.

Critical Thinking Questions

The “what” questions guide students to engage in critical thinking by analyzing, synthesizing, evaluating, and reflecting on their curriculum, texts, and current events. Using inductive and deductive reasoning is essential for students to develop the skills necessary to understand the core principles of a subject. Here are a few questions to prime critical thinking skills:

• What is your overall summary or conclusion from this text, theme, idea?
• What are repeating themes, patterns that occur in this unit of study?  
• What are your key takeaways? 
• What is the main idea of the story/article?
• What information supports your explanation? To what extent is that information valid and accurate?
• What themes emerge between the two texts we are reading?  
• What is the author trying to prove? How do you back up your assertion?
• How does _____ contrast with _____?
• What is the point or big idea of _____?

Criticality Thinking Questions

The “so what” questions prepare students to challenge assumptions and intent, analyze multiple perspectives, and discuss the effects of both past and present decisions on multiple communities, particularly those whose voices have been underrepresented and marginalized. Here we use the powerful tools of critical thinking to challenge and better understand the nature of how we have been presented, persuaded, and pushed to learn content in particular ways. Here are a few questions to prime criticality skills:

• How does this relate to other contexts we have studied so far in both time and space? How does this relate to today?  
• Given the perspectives we are seeing in this text, what voices are missing? 
• What perspectives would help us better understand the situation at hand from other people, communities, and cultures?  
• What assumptions are we carrying in this discussion? What are the implications of exploring and testing assumptions?  
• Where have we seen similar stories/patterns/themes in other texts or in the real world? 

Call-to-Action Questions

The “now what” questions help students look for ways to contribute. Critical and criticality thinking skills are designed for students to take action. Here students should think and act on their learning to make the world a better place through better ways to frame content, to generate problems they want to solve, and to contribute to solving problems locally and globally. The  following questions serve as a primer for students to use their voice for contributing to a better understanding and a better future. 

• To what extent can and should we take action in a way that promotes social change? 
• Where have we seen successes in taking action in the past? How can we leverage these successes in this context?
• When is the opportune time to take action that creates a sustainable change?
• Where do we see alignment with our next steps?
• To what extent have others solved this problem?
• Where have we taken into account assumptions about the problem and our solution?

The following organizations offer a number of protocols that can assist in structuring these questions and conversations: Facing History , National School Reform Faculty , and School Reform Initiative . Additionally, strategies such as comparing contexts or using rigorous PBL as a methodology enable this work to flourish.

Inquiry-Based Learning: A Comprehensive Guide for Teachers

Welcome to the world of inquiry-based learning!

If you’re reading this, chances are you’re already familiar with traditional forms of education, where the teacher is the primary source of knowledge. Students are expected to absorb information passively. However, inquiry-based learning flips this model on its head, putting students at the center of their learning journey and empowering them to ask questions, seek answers, and actively engage with the material.

But why should you consider incorporating inquiry-based learning into your classroom? Here are just a few of the many benefits:

Engagement in the Learning Process

One of the key benefits of inquiry-based learning is the ability to engage students in the learning process. When students are given the opportunity to explore a topic that interests them and are encouraged to ask questions and seek answers, they become more invested in the material. This can lead to increased motivation, attention, and retention of information.

Inquiry-based learning also provides an excellent opportunity for students to develop their critical thinking and problem-solving skills. By posing questions and seeking answers, students are encouraged to think critically about the topic and evaluate and analyze information. This helps them to develop the skills they need to solve complex problems and make informed decisions.

Working Together and Getting Creative

Foster Creativity and Innovation

Inquiry-based learning can also foster creativity and innovation in students. When students are free to explore a topic and come up with their own ideas and solutions, they are more likely to think outside the box and come up with creative and innovative approaches. This can be especially beneficial in subjects like science and technology, where students are encouraged to think creatively to solve real-world problems.

Encourage Collaboration and Teamwork

Inquiry-based learning can also be an excellent way to encourage collaboration and teamwork among students. When students work together to explore a topic and seek answers, they have the opportunity to share their ideas and perspectives and to learn from one another. This can help to build strong working relationships and foster a sense of community within the classroom.

Develop Communication Skills

Inquiry-based learning can also support the development of communication skills in students. By posing questions and seeking answers, students are encouraged to communicate their ideas and findings to their classmates and teachers. This can help them to develop their oral and written communication skills, as well as their ability to present information effectively.

Think About It

Support the Development of Higher-Order Thinking Skills

Inquiry-based learning can also be an excellent way to support the development of higher-order thinking skills in students. By encouraging students to think critically and to evaluate and analyze information, inquiry-based learning can help students to develop skills like analysis, synthesis, evaluation, and application. These skills are essential for success in higher education and in the workforce.

Support the Development of Self-Regulation and Metacognitive Skills

Inquiry-based learning can also support the development of self-regulation and metacognitive skills in students. By allowing students to take control of their learning and to set their own goals, inquiry-based learning can help students to develop self-regulation skills like time management, organization, and goal-setting. Additionally, by encouraging students to think critically about their learning and to reflect on their progress, inquiry-based learning can help them develop metacognitive skills like self-monitoring, self-assessment, and self-direction.

Inquiry-based learning can also be an excellent way to develop research skills in students. By posing questions and seeking answers, students are encouraged to find and evaluate sources of information and to use this information to support their ideas and conclusions. This can help them to develop the skills they need to conduct research effectively, whether for a school project or in their future careers.

Develop Digital Literacy Skills

In the digital age, it is more important than ever for students to develop digital literacy skills. Inquiry-based learning can be an excellent way to support the development of these skills, as students are often encouraged to use technology and the internet to find and evaluate information. This can help students to develop skills like internet search, online research, and digital citizenship.

In the Real World

Develop Real-World Problem-Solving Skills

Inquiry-based learning can also be an excellent way to develop real-world problem-solving skills in students. By encouraging students to think critically and to explore real-world issues and problems, inquiry-based learning can help students to develop the skills they need to solve complex problems and make informed decisions in their personal and professional lives.

Develop Cultural Competencies

Inquiry-based learning can also support the development of cultural competencies in students. By allowing students to explore different cultures and perspectives, inquiry-based learning can help students to develop an understanding and appreciation of diversity. This can be especially important in today’s globalized world, where cultural competency is essential for success in both education and the workforce.

Develop Global Citizenship Skills

Inquiry-based learning can also be an excellent way to develop global citizenship skills in students. By encouraging students to think critically about global issues and to consider the perspectives of others, inquiry-based learning can help students to develop the skills they need to be responsible and engaged global citizens.

Develop Ethical Reasoning Skills

Inquiry-based learning can also support the development of ethical reasoning skills in students. By encouraging students to think critically about ethical dilemmas and to consider different perspectives, inquiry-based learning can help students to develop the skills they need to make informed and ethical decisions.

Implementing Inquiry-Based Learning in the Classroom

Now that we’ve covered some of the many benefits of inquiry-based learning, you may wonder how to implement it effectively in your classroom. Here are a few best practices and strategies to consider:

Start small: If you’re new to inquiry-based learning, it can be helpful to start small and gradually build up to more complex projects. This can help you to get a feel for the approach and to identify any challenges or obstacles you may encounter.

Set clear goals and objectives: It’s important to have clear goals and objectives for your inquiry-based learning project so that students understand what is expected of them and can stay focused on their learning.

Encourage student choice: Allowing students to choose their own topics or projects can be an excellent way to engage them in the learning process and foster a sense of ownership over their work.

Use a variety of resources: Encourage students to use a variety of resources, including books, articles, websites, and interviews, to gather information and ideas for their projects.

Encourage collaboration: Inquiry-based learning can be an excellent opportunity for students to work together and learn from one another. Encourage students to collaborate and share their ideas and findings with their classmates.

Differentiate instruction: It’s important to remember that all students learn differently, so it’s essential to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of all learners. This may involve providing different resources or activities for students, or offering different levels of support or challenge.

Incorporate technology: Technology can be a powerful tool for inquiry-based learning, as it gives students access to a wealth of information and resources. Consider incorporating technology into your inquiry-based learning projects, whether it be through the use of computers, tablets, or other devices. Just be sure to teach students how to use these tools responsibly and ethically.

Assessing Student Learning and Progress in an Inquiry-Based Learning Environment

Effective assessment is essential for ensuring student learning and progress in any educational setting, and this is no different in an inquiry-based learning environment. Here are a few strategies and methods to consider:

Traditional assessments: While traditional methods of assessment, such as exams and quizzes, can still be useful in an inquiry-based learning environment, it’s important to keep in mind that they may not always be the most effective way to assess student learning.

Alternative assessments: Alternative assessment methods, such as projects, presentations, portfolios, and essays, can be more effective in an inquiry-based learning environment, as they allow students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in a more authentic and meaningful way.

Formative assessments: Formative assessments, designed to provide ongoing feedback to students and teachers, can be beneficial in an inquiry-based learning environment. These assessments can help students to track their progress and to identify areas where they need additional support or challenge.

Summative assessments: Summative assessments, designed to evaluate student learning at the end of a unit or course, can also be useful in an inquiry-based learning environment. These assessments can provide a more comprehensive picture of student learning and can be used to inform instruction and make decisions about student progress.

Gathering and analyzing data: It’s essential to gather and analyze data on student learning and progress in an inquiry-based learning environment. This can be done through various methods, such as student self-assessment, teacher observation, and assessment of student work. By analyzing this data, teachers can identify areas of strength and areas where students may need additional support or challenge.

What is the Difference Between Inquiry-based learning and Project-based Learning?

Inquiry-based learning and project-based learning are similar in that they both involve students in active, hands-on learning experiences. However, there are some key differences between the two approaches.

Inquiry-based learning is an approach to education that focuses on students asking questions, seeking answers, and actively engaging with the material. It encourages students to explore a topic or issue, to think critically and creatively, and to come up with their own ideas and solutions. Inquiry-based learning is often open-ended and allows for student choice and creativity.

Project-based learning, on the other hand, is an approach that involves students in a long-term, in-depth investigation of a real-world problem or challenge. Projects often have a clear outcome or product, such as a presentation, report, or prototype. Project-based learning can be more structured than inquiry-based learning, as it often has specific goals and objectives that students must meet.

While both approaches involve active, hands-on learning, the focus of inquiry-based learning is on the process of exploring and discovering, while the focus of project-based learning is on the product or outcome. Both approaches can be effective in engaging students and supporting their learning, and many teachers use elements of both in their classrooms.

Inquiry-based learning is an approach to education that puts students at the center of their own learning journey and empowers them to ask questions, seek answers, and actively engage with the material. With its numerous benefits, including the development of critical thinking and problem-solving skills, the fostering of creativity and innovation, and the encouragement of collaboration and teamwork, it’s no wonder that inquiry-based learning is becoming increasingly popular in classrooms worldwide.

If you’re interested in incorporating inquiry-based learning into your classroom, we encourage you to explore the additional resources and references provided below. With careful planning and creativity, you can create an engaging and meaningful learning experience for your students.

Please comment and share if you found this helpful!

THANK YOU! 😊

Additional Resources and References

• The Inquiry-Based Learning Page ( https://www.inquirybasedlearning.org/ )
• Inquiry-Based Learning: What It Is and Why It’s Important ( https://www.edutopia.org/article/inquiry-based-learning-what-it-why-its-important )
• 10 Tips for Implementing Inquiry-Based Learning ( https://www.edutopia.org/article/10-tips-implementing-inquiry-based-learning )
• Assessing Inquiry-Based Learning ( https://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar12/vol69/num06/Assessing-Inquiry-Based-Learning.aspx )

Read more about Instructional Strategies !

Related Posts:

Comments are closed.

Great for STEM!

Snap Circuit kits are an excellent choice for educators looking to add hands-on, interactive elements to their classrooms. These kits provide students with the opportunity to learn about electricity and circuit design in a fun and engaging way. By building their own circuits and experimenting with different configurations, students can develop a deeper understanding of how electricity works and how it can be harnessed to power a variety of devices. Snap Circuit kits are also an excellent tool for promoting problem-solving and critical thinking skills, as students must analyze and troubleshoot their circuits to get them to function properly. In addition, Snap Circuit kits are durable and long-lasting, making them a wise investment for any classroom. So if you want to add an exciting, educational element to your classroom, consider purchasing a Snap Circuit kit today!

Type in what you are looking for!

Fresh from the classroom.

• What is a Socratic Seminar?
• 7 Strategies for Creating a Positive and Engaging Math Classroom
• The Role of Communication in Creating a Positive School Culture
• The High Cost of Teacher Burnout: How to Support and Retain Educators
• Closing the Gap: Strategies for Addressing Education Disparities Caused by the Pandemic
• Teaching Students to Think Critically and Reason Effectively
• Finding Work-Life Balance as a Teacher
• Creating a Positive Home-School Connection
• Going Beyond Tests: Alternative Methods for Assessing Student Learning
• 6 Ways to Incorporate Hands-On and Experiential Learning in Your Classroom
• Incorporating Social-Emotional Learning into Your Daily Routine
• Helping ELLs Thrive: Strategies for Success in the Classroom
• Helping Students Succeed: Teaching Study Skills and Time Management
• 5 Tips for Creating an Engaging Classroom Environment
• 5 Strategies for Effective Classroom Management and Discipline
• Copyright Notice
• Privacy Policy
• Terms and Conditions

Affiliate Disclosure

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Privacy Overview

Search type

University Wide

Faculty / School Portals

Main navigation 4plus items

• Instructional Strategies

Inquiry-Based Learning

What is inquiry-based learning.

Based on John Dewey’s philosophy that education begins with the curiosity of the learner, inquiry in the classroom places the responsibility for learning on the students and encourages them to arrive at an understanding of concepts by themselves. Lee et al. (2004) defined inquiry-based learning as an "array of classroom practices that promote student learning through guided and, increasingly, independent investigation of complex questions and problems, often for which there is no single answer” (p. 9). Students are supported in developing their abilities to: ask good questions, determine what needs to be learned and what resources are required in order to answer those questions, and share their learning with others.

Ai et al. (2008) highlight the following four elements central to inquiry-based learning:

Inquiry learning is an increasing independent endeavour of growth. Students develop skills around each element of the inquiry process over time. One course may introduce some aspects of the inquiry process with a great degree of guidance and facilitation from instructors. Advanced courses may expand to include all four elements with students largely directing their own learning.

Why Teach Inquiry?

Self-direction is a critical skill for success in both post-secondary education and the workplace. Inquiry-based approaches to learning encourage students to build valuable and transferable skills, including:

• Realistic goal-setting and goal-tracking
• Time- and priority-management
• Information gathering, filtering, and integration
• Critical thinking
• Communication of ideas and learning
• Self-assessment and reflection

Inquiry-Based Teaching Strategies

Consider which essential features best suit your inquiry-focused course. Teaching strategies will vary depending on the degree of learner self-direction and direction provided by you the instructor.

Learner engages in scientifically oriented questions

Variations ranging from introductory to advanced inquiry:

• Learner engages in question provided by the instructor, materials, or other source
• Learner sharpens or clarifies question provided by instructor, materials, or other source
• Learner selects among questions, poses new questions
• Learner poses a question

Learner gives priority to evidence in responding to questions

• Learner is given data and is directed or guided on how to analyze it
• Learner is given data and is asked to analyze it with less guidance from the instructor
• Learner is directed to collect certain data and does so with a varying degree of guidance
• Learner determines what constitutes evidence and collects it mostly in a self-directed manner

Learner formulates explanations from evidence

• Learner is provided with evidence and is guided on how to use the evidence to formulate an explanation
• Learner is given possible ways to use evidence to formulate explanation
• Learner is guided in process of formulating explanations from the evidence
• Learner formulates explanation after summarizing the evidence in a mostly self-directed manner

Learner connects explanations to scientific knowledge

• Instructor demonstrates possible connections between explanations and scientific knowledge
• Learner is guided toward areas and sources of scientific knowledge and draws connections to explanations
• Learner independently examines other resources and forms the links to explanations

Learner communicates and justifies explanations

• Instructor provides learners guidance on given steps and procedures for communication
• Learner is provided broad guidelines to apply in sharpening their communication
• Learner coached in development of communication
• Learner forms reasonable and logical argument to communicate explanations in a mostly self-directed manner

As a case example, our colleagues at McMaster follow a particular approach to designing and facilitating inquiry-based courses. They suggest that teaching through “inquiry” involves engaging students in the research process with instructors supporting and coaching students at a level appropriate to their starting skills. Students learn discipline-specific content while at the same time engaging and refining their inquiry skills. An inquiry course:

• Is question-driven, rather than topic- or thesis-driven.
• Begins with a general theme to act as a starting point or trigger for learning.
• Emphasizes asking researchable questions on the theme and coaches students in doing this.
• Builds library, interview, and web search skills, along with the critical thinking skills necessary for thoughtful review of the information.
• Coaches students on how to best report their learning in oral or written form.
• Provides some mechanism (interviews, drafts, minutes of group meetings, bench mark activities, etc.) to help students monitor their progress within the course.
• Draws on the expertise and knowledge of the instructor to model effective inquiry and to promote reflection.

Resources for Designing Inquiry-Based Courses:

Instructional Design Models and Theories: Inquiry-based Learning Model Explanation of 5 steps, principles of, and 4 types of inquiry-based learning.

Institute for Inquiry Created in response to widespread interest in inquiry-based science instruction, the Exploratorium Institute for Inquiry provides workshops, programs, on-line support, and an intellectual community of practice which affords science reform educators a deep and rich experience of how inquiry learning looks and feels.

Guide to Curriculum Design: Enquiry-Based Learning Guide produced by the Imaginative Curriculum Network (University of Manchester) to stimulate thinking and promote good practice in curriculum design.

A Questioning Toolkit Different types of questioning tools for students of all ages.

Ai, R., Bhatt, M., Chevrier, S., Ciccarelli, R., Grady, R., Kumari, V., … Wong, H. (2008). Choose your own inquiry. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Lee, V. S., Greene, D. B., Odom, J., Schechter, E., & Slatta, R. W. (2004). What is inquiryguided learning. In V. S. Lee (Ed.), Teaching and learning through inquiry: A guidebook for institutions and instructors (pp. 3-15). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

• Grades 6-12
• School Leaders

Enter Today's Teacher Appreciation Giveaway!

What Is Inquiry-Based Learning? A Guide for Educators

Learn the ins and outs of this emergent student-centered curriculum.

Maybe you’ve heard about inquiry-based learning in your most recent staff meeting or PD day. We know it might sound daunting, but implementing inquiry-based learning can be exciting for both the students and the teacher. Read on for what exactly inquiry-based learning is, how to implement it, and why you use it in your classroom. 

What is inquiry-based learning?

Inquiry-based learning means tailoring your curriculum to what your students are interested in rather than having a set agenda that you can’t veer from—it means letting children’s curiosity take the lead and then guiding that interest to explore, research, and reflect upon their own learning.

Now, we know that many teachers have to follow state-based curricula, but with practice, it is possible to use inquiry-based learning that follows a curriculum map and guidelines that one has to follow.

For example, perhaps out on the playground, students keep discovering bugs hiding under logs. They dig for them, pick them up, make them a home, and engage with them during playtime. With an inquiry-based learning model, the teacher can take this bug interest and use it in teaching by starting with a question or challenge. The kids can do an experiment to see if those same bugs prefer the shade or the sun with a half-covered box outside; the class could learn about the habitat for a bug and what makes the best habitat and why; you could graph how many bugs are under each log; students could gather books about the different insects and then create their own pamphlet of information to share with others. 

At a basic level, a simple interest in the roly-polies that are always hiding under logs has now touched upon science, social studies, math skills, literacy skills, and 21st-century skills of cooperation, collaboration, and critical thinking. (If this all sounds similar to project-based learning , you aren’t wrong! They go hand-in-hand when it comes to teaching and overall engagement, and they fall under the emergent curriculum umbrella.) 

How does inquiry-based learning benefit students? 

It leads to high engagement.

When children are presented with topics they are interested in, the first step of engagement is automatic. From there, students are able to have a hands-on, real-world learning experience about whatever the topic is. Therefore, the teaching and learning is less from books or abstract concepts and is embedded in their everyday experience.

“The Inquiry Process embraces the ways children learn best. It is a tool for you to plan curriculum in response to children’s curiosity and questioning, acknowledging the problems children encounter and identify as they act on their questions and taking seriously the solutions they hypothesize in relation to their experiences.” —The Cycle of Inquiry Process, From Children’s Interests to Children’s Thinking  

It promotes critical thinking

In From Children’s Interests to Children’s Thinking , research showed children learn best through the same processes that scientists use:

• Asking questions and defining problems
• Developing and using models 
• Planning and carrying out investigations 
• Analyzing and interpreting
• Using mathematical and computational thinking
• Engaging in argument from evidence (explaining their findings)

These steps are very similar to the cycle of inquiry that is directly related to inquiry-based learning: engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate. According to the American Association of School Librarians, the 5E Inquiry-Based Instructional Model is based upon cognitive psychology, constructivist theory to learning, and best practices in STEM instruction (Bybee and Landes, 1990). 

Each student can build upon their strengths

With an open-ended path, inquiry-based learning allows students to build upon their strengths, feel engaged, and take ownership of learning. As a teacher, get creative to add to the knowledge and skills they have, while assisting the student to reach their learning goals on a path that they can lead. 

What is the general process of using inquiry-based learning? 

One challenge to inquiry-based learning is knowing when to put aside your own teaching agenda and to allow space for an emergent, inquiry-lead exploration. You might have planned something specific, but during free choice, an entire city is built in the block area. The students work together, they have roles, and they have to figure out how to get each block to balance in the best way to create that bridge from one building to the next. 

As a teacher, how can you take the learning objectives from crafting a storybook and reach those from the block city?

Follow the 5Es of Inquiry: 

• Engage—This engagement is already naturally happening with their block city. 
• Explore—Start with questioning: There’s a new visitor to the city, but they aren’t sure how to get around. What can we do? 
• Explain—Allow for discussion and exploration; provide resources . Offer clipboards and paper for the students to plan. Pull up a map online or Google Earth to zoom in on roads. 
• Elaborate—In small groups, have the students plan and write directions, a map, or road signs for the block city. 
• Evaluate—Have students reflect on why we need labels and signs and how they help others.

Have more questions about inquiry-based learning? Come talk it over with other educators in the  We Are Teachers HELPLINE group on Facebook .

Also check out  what is critical thinking and why do we need to teach it , you might also like.

What Is Project-Based Learning and How Can I Use It With My Students?

There's a difference between regular projects and true-project based learning. Continue Reading

Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved. 5335 Gate Parkway, Jacksonville, FL 32256

• Open access
• Published: 11 September 2019

Inquiry and critical thinking skills for the next generation: from artificial intelligence back to human intelligence

• Jonathan Michael Spector   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6270-3073 1 &
• Shanshan Ma 1  

Smart Learning Environments volume  6 , Article number:  8 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

32k Accesses

53 Citations

31 Altmetric

Metrics details

Along with the increasing attention to artificial intelligence (AI), renewed emphasis or reflection on human intelligence (HI) is appearing in many places and at multiple levels. One of the foci is critical thinking. Critical thinking is one of four key 21st century skills – communication, collaboration, critical thinking and creativity. Though most people are aware of the value of critical thinking, it lacks emphasis in curricula. In this paper, we present a comprehensive definition of critical thinking that ranges from observation and inquiry to argumentation and reflection. Given a broad conception of critical thinking, a developmental approach beginning with children is suggested as a way to help develop critical thinking habits of mind. The conclusion of this analysis is that more emphasis should be placed on developing human intelligence, especially in young children and with the support of artificial intelligence. While much funding and support goes to the development of artificial intelligence, this should not happen at the expense of human intelligence. Overall, the purpose of this paper is to argue for more attention to the development of human intelligence with an emphasis on critical thinking.

Introduction

In recent decades, advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI) have developed at an incredible rate. AI has penetrated into people’s daily life on a variety of levels such as smart homes, personalized healthcare, security systems, self-service stores, and online shopping. One notable AI achievement was when AlphaGo, a computer program, defeated the World Go Champion Mr. Lee Sedol in 2016. In the previous year, AlphaGo won in a competition against a professional Go player (Silver et al. 2016 ). As Go is one of the most challenging games, the wins of AI indicated a breakthrough. Public attention has been further drawn to AI since then, and AlphaGo continues to improve. In 2017, a new version of AlphaGo beat Ke Jie, the current world No.1 ranking Go player. Clearly AI can manage high levels of complexity.

Given many changes and multiple lines of development and implement, it is somewhat difficult to define AI to include all of the changes since the 1980s (Luckin et al. 2016 ). Many definitions incorporate two dimensions as a starting point: (a) human-like thinking, and (b) rational action (Russell and Norvig 2009 ). Basically, AI is a term used to label machines (computers) that imitate human cognitive functions such as learning and problem solving, or that manage to deal with complexity as well as human experts.

AlphaGo’s wins against human players were seen as a comparison between artificial and human intelligence. One concern is that AI has already surpassed HI; other concerns are that AI will replace humans in some settings or that AI will become uncontrollable (Epstein 2016 ; Fang et al. 2018 ). Scholars worry that AI technology in the future might trigger the singularity (Good 1966 ), a hypothesized future that the development of technology becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unfathomable changes to human civilization (Vinge 1993 ).

The famous theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking warned that AI might end mankind, yet the technology he used to communicate involved a basic form of AI (Cellan-Jones 2014 ). This example highlights one of the basic dilemmas of AI – namely, what are the overall benefits of AI versus its potential drawbacks, and how to move forward given its rapid development? Obviously, basic or controllable AI technologies are not what people are afraid of. Spector et al. 1993 distinguished strong AI and weak AI. Strong AI involves an application that is intended to replace an activity performed previously by a competent human, while weak AI involves an application that aims to enable a less experienced human to perform at a much higher level. Other researchers categorize AI into three levels: (a) artificial narrow intelligence (Narrow AI), (b) artificial general intelligence (General AI), and (c) artificial super intelligence (Super AI) (Siau and Yang 2017 ; Zhang and Xie 2018 ). Narrow AI, sometimes called weak AI, refers to a computer that focus on a narrow task such as AlphaZero or a self-driving car. General AI, sometimes referred to as strong AI, is the simulation of human-level intelligence, which can perform more cognitive tasks as well as most humans do. Super AI is defined by Bostrom ( 1998 ) as “an intellect that is much smarter than the best human brains in practically every field, including scientific creativity, general wisdom and social skills” (p.1).

Although the consequence of singularity and its potential benefits or harm to the human race have been intensely debated, an undeniable fact is that AI is capable of undertaking recursive self-improvement. With the increasing improvement of this capability, more intelligent generations of AI will appear rapidly. On the other hand, HI has its own limits and its development requires continuous efforts and investment from generation to generation. Education is the main approach humans use to develop and improve HI. Given the extraordinary growth gap between AI and HI, eventually AI can surpass HI. However, that is no reason to neglect the development and improvement of HI. In addition, in contrast to the slow development rate of HI, the growth of funding support to AI has been rapidly increasing according to the following comparison of support for artificial and human intelligence.

The funding support for artificial and human intelligence

There are challenges in comparing artificial and human intelligence by identifying funding for both. Both terms are somewhat vague and can include a variety of aspects. Some analyses will include big data and data analytics within the sphere of artificial intelligence and others will treat them separately. Some will include early childhood developmental research within the sphere of support for HI and others treat them separately. Education is a major way of human beings to develop and improve HI. The investments in education reflect the efforts put on the development of HI, and they pale in comparison with investments in AI.

Sources also vary from governmental funding of research and development to business and industry investments in related research and development. Nonetheless, there are strong indications of increased funding support for AI in North America, Europe and Asia, especially in China. The growth in funding for AI around the world is explosive. According to ZDNet, AI funding more than doubled from 2016 to 2017 and more than tripled from 2016 to 2018. The growth in funding for AI in the last 10 years has been exponential. According to Venture Scanner, there are approximately 2500 companies that have raised $60 billion in funding from 3400 investors in 72 different countries (see https://www.slideshare.net/venturescanner/artificial-intelligence-q1-2019-report-highlights ). Areas included in the Venture Scanner analysis included virtual assistants, recommendation engines, video recognition, context-aware computing, speech recognition, natural language processing, machine learning, and more.

The above data on AI funding focuses primarily on companies making products. There is no direct counterpart in the area of HI where the emphasis is on learning and education. What can be seen, however, are trends within each area. The above data suggest exponential growth in support for AI. In contrast, according to the Urban Institute, per-student funding in the USA has been relatively flat for nearly two decades, with a few states showing modest increases and others showing none (see http://apps.urban.org/features/education-funding-trends/ ). Funding for education is complicated due to the various sources. In the USA, there are local, state and federal sources to consider. While that mixture of funding sources is complex, it is clear that federal and state spending for education in the USA experienced an increase after World War II. However, since the 1980s, federal spending for education has steadily declined, and state spending on education in most states has declined since 2010 according to a government report (see https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/education_spending ). This decline in funding reflects the decreasing emphasis on the development of HI, which is a dangerous signal.

Decreased support for education funding in the USA is not typical of what is happening in other countries, according to The Hechinger Report (see https://hechingerreport.org/rest-world-invests-education-u-s-spends-less/ ). For example, in the period of 2010 to 2014, American spending on elementary and high school education declined 3%, whereas in the same period, education spending in the 35 countries in the OECD rose by 5% with some countries experiencing very significant increases (e.g., 76% in Turkey).

Such data can be questioned in terms of how effectively funds are being spent or how poorly a country was doing prior to experiencing a significant increase. However, given the performance of American students on the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), the relative lack of funding support in the USA is roughly related with the mediocre performance on PISA tests (see https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2015/index.asp ). Research by Darling-Hammond ( 2014 ) indicated that in order to improve learning and reduce the achievement gap, systematic government investments in high-need schools would be more effective if the focus was on capacity building, improving the knowledge and skills of educators and the quality of curriculum opportunities.

Though HI could not be simply defined by the performance on PISA test, improving HI requires systematic efforts and funding support in high-need areas as well. So, in the following section, we present a reflection on HI.

Reflection on human intelligence

Though there is a variety of definitions of HI, from the perspective of psychology, according to Sternberg ( 1999 ), intelligence is a form of developing expertise, from a novice or less experienced person to an expert or more experienced person, a student must be through multiple learning (implicit and explicit) and thinking (critical and creative) processes. In this paper, we adopted such a view and reflected on HI in the following section by discussing learning and critical thinking.

What is learning?

We begin with Gagné’s ( 1985 ) definition of learning as characterized by stable and persistent changes in what a person knows or can do. How do humans learn? Do you recall how to prove that the square root of 2 is not a rational number, something you might have learned years ago? The method is intriguing and is called an indirect proof or a reduction to absurdity – assume that the square root of 2 is a rational number and then apply truth preserving rules to arrive at a contradiction to show that the square root of 2 cannot be a rational number. We recommend this as an exercise for those readers who have never encountered that method of learning and proof. (see https://artofproblemsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Proof_by_contradiction ). Yet another interesting method of learning is called the process of elimination, sometimes accredited to Arthur Conan Doyle’s ( 1926 ) in The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier – Sherlock Holmes says to Dr. Watson that the process of elimination “starts upon the supposition that when you have eliminated all which is impossible, that whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth ” (see https://www.dfw-sherlock.org/uploads/3/7/3/8/37380505/1926_november_the_adventure_of_the_blanched_soldier.pdf ).

The reason to mention Sherlock Holmes early in this paper is to emphasize the role that observation plays in learning. The character Sherlock Holmes was famous for his observation skills that led to his so-called method of deductive reasoning (a process of elimination), which is what logicians would classify as inductive reasoning as the conclusions of that reasoning process are primarily probabilistic rather than certain, unlike the proof of the irrationality of the square root of 2 mentioned previously.

In dealing with uncertainty, it seems necessary to make observations and gather evidence that can lead one to a likely conclusion. Is that not what reasonable people and accomplished detectives do? It is certainly what card counters do at gambling houses; they observe high and low value cards that have already been played in order to estimate the likelihood of the next card being a high or low value card. Observation is a critical process in dealing with uncertainty.

Moreover, humans typically encounter many uncertain situations in the course of life. Few people encounter situations which require resolution using a mathematical proof such as the one with which this article began. Jonassen ( 2000 , 2011 ) argued that problem solving is one of the most important and frequent activities in which people engage. Moreover, many of the more challenging problems are ill-structured in the sense that (a) there is incomplete information pertaining to the situation, or (b) the ideal resolution of the problem is unknown, or (c) how to transform a problematic situation into an acceptable situation is unclear. In short, people are confronted with uncertainty nearly every day and in many different ways. The so called key 21st century skills of communication, collaboration, critical thinking and creativity (the 4 Cs; see http://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21 ) are important because uncertainty is a natural and inescapable aspect of the human condition. The 4 Cs are interrelated and have been presented by Spector ( 2018 ) as interrelated capabilities involving logic and epistemology in the form of the new 3Rs – namely, re-examining, reasoning, and reflecting. Re-examining is directly linked to observation as a beginning point for inquiry. The method of elimination is one form of reasoning in which a person engages to solve challenging problems. Reflecting on how well one is doing in the life-long enterprise of solving challenging problems is a higher kind of meta-cognitive activity in which accomplished problem-solvers engage (Ericsson et al. 1993 ; Flavell 1979 ).

Based on these initial comments, a comprehensive definition of critical thinking is presented next in the form of a framework.

A framework of critical thinking

Though there is variety of definitions of critical thinking, a concise definition of critical thinking remains elusive. For delivering a direct understanding of critical thinking to readers such as parents and school teachers, in this paper, we present a comprehensive definition of critical thinking through a framework that includes many of the definitions offered by others. Critical thinking, as treated broadly herein, is a multi-dimensioned and multifaceted human capability. Critical thinking has been interpreted from three perspectives: education, psychology, and epistemology, all of which are represented in the framework that follows.

In a developmental approach to critical thinking, Spector ( 2019 ) argues that critical thinking involves a series of cumulative and related abilities, dispositions and other variables (e.g., motivation, criteria, context, knowledge). This approach proceeds from experience (e.g., observing something unusual) and then to various forms of inquiry, investigation, examination of evidence, exploration of alternatives, argumentation, testing conclusions, rethinking assumptions, and reflecting on the entire process.

Experience and engagement are ongoing throughout the process which proceeds from relatively simple experiences (e.g., direct and immediate observation) to more complex interactions (e.g., manipulation of an actual or virtual artifact and observing effects).

The developmental approach involves a variety of mental processes and non-cognitive states, which help a person’s decision making to become purposeful and goal directed. The associated critical thinking skills enable individuals to be likely to achieve a desired outcome in a challenging situation.

In the process of critical thinking, apart from experience, there are two additional cognitive capabilities essential to critical thinking – namely, metacognition and self-regulation . Many researchers (e.g., Schraw et al. 2006 ) believe that metacognition has two components: (a) awareness and understanding of one’s own thoughts, and (b) the ability to regulate one’s own cognitive processes. Some other researchers put more emphasis on the latter component. For example, Davies ( 2015 ) described metacognition as the capacity to monitor the quality of one’s thinking process, and then to make appropriate changes. However, the American Psychology Association (APA) defines metacognition as an awareness and understanding of one’s own thought with the ability to control related cognitive processes (see https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2008-15725-005 ).

Although the definition and elaboration of these two concepts deserve further exploration, they are often used interchangeably (Hofer and Sinatra 2010 ; Schunk 2008 ). Many psychologists see the two related capabilities of metacognition and self-regulation as being closely related - two sides on one coin, so to speak. Metacognition involves or emphasizes awareness, whereas self-regulation involves and emphasizes appropriate control. These two concepts taken together enable a person to create a self-regulatory mechanism, which monitors and regulates the corresponding skills (e.g., observation, inquiry, interpretation, explanation, reasoning, analysis, evaluation, synthesis, reflection, and judgement).

As to the critical thinking skills, it should be noted that there is much discussion about the generalizability and domain specificity of them, just as there is about problem-solving skills in general (Chi et al. 1982 ; Chiesi et al. 1979 ; Ennis 1989 ; Fischer 1980 ). The research supports the notion that to achieve high levels of expertise and performance, one must develop high levels of domain knowledge. As a consequence, becoming a highly effective critical thinker in a particular domain of inquiry requires significant domain knowledge. One may achieve such levels in a domain in which one has significant domain knowledge and experience but not in a different domain in which one has little domain knowledge and experience. The processes involved in developing high levels of critical thinking are somewhat generic. Therefore, it is possible to develop critical thinking in nearly any domain when the two additional capabilities of metacognition and self-regulation are coupled with motivation and engagement and supportive emotional states (Ericsson et al. 1993 ).

Consequently, the framework presented here (see Fig. 1 ) is built around three main perspectives about critical thinking (i.e., educational, psychological and epistemological) and relevant learning theories. This framework provides a visual presentation of critical thinking with four dimensions: abilities (educational perspective), dispositions (psychological perspective), levels (epistemological perspective) and time. Time is added to emphasize the dynamic nature of critical thinking in terms of a specific context and a developmental approach.

Critical thinking often begins with simple experiences such as observing a difference, encountering a puzzling question or problem, questioning someone’s statement, and then leads, in some instances to an inquiry, and then to more complex experiences such as interactions and application of higher order thinking skills (e.g., logical reasoning, questioning assumptions, considering and evaluating alternative explanations).

If the individual is not interested in what was observed, an inquiry typically does not begin. Inquiry and critical thinking require motivation along with an inquisitive disposition. The process of critical thinking requires the support of corresponding internal indispositions such as open-mindedness and truth-seeking. Consequently, a disposition to initiate an inquiry (e.g., curiosity) along with an internal inquisitive disposition (e.g., that links a mental habit to something motivating to the individual) are both required (Hitchcock 2018 ). Initiating dispositions are those that contribute to the start of inquiry and critical thinking. Internal dispositions are those that initiate and support corresponding critical thinking skills during the process. Therefore, critical thinking dispositions consist of initiating dispositions and internal dispositions. Besides these factors, critical thinking also involves motivation. Motivation and dispositions are not mutually exclusive, for example, curiosity is a disposition and also a motivation.

Critical thinking abilities and dispositions are two main components of critical thinking, which involve such interrelated cognitive constructs as interpretation, explanation, reasoning, evaluation, synthesis, reflection, judgement, metacognition and self-regulation (Dwyer et al. 2014 ; Davies 2015 ; Ennis 2018 ; Facione 1990 ; Hitchcock 2018 ; Paul and Elder 2006 ). There are also some other abilities such as communication, collaboration and creativity, which are now essential in current society (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_century_skills ). Those abilities along with critical thinking are called the 4Cs; they are individually monitored and regulated through metacognitive and self-regulation processes.

The abilities involved in critical thinking are categorized in Bloom’s taxonomy into higher order skills (e.g., analyzing and synthesizing) and lower level skills (e.g., remembering and applying) (Anderson and Krathwohl 2001 ; Bloom et al. 1956 ).

The thinking process can be depicted as a spiral through both lower and higher order thinking skills. It encompasses several reasoning loops. Some of them might be iterative until a desired outcome is achieved. Each loop might be a mix of higher order thinking skills and lower level thinking skills. Each loop is subject to the self-regulatory mechanism of metacognition and self-regulation.

But, due to the complexity of human thinking, a specific spiral with reasoning loops is difficult to represent. Therefore, instead of a visualized spiral with an indefinite number of reasoning loops, the developmental stages of critical thinking are presented in the diagram (Fig. 1 ).

Besides, most of the definitions of critical thinking are based on the imagination about ideal critical thinkers such as the consensus generated from the Delphi report (Facione 1990 ). However, according to Dreyfus and Dreyfus ( 1980 ), in the course of developing an expertise, students would pass through five stages. Those five stages are “absolute beginner”, “advanced beginner”, “competent performer”, “proficient performer,” and “intuitive expert performer”. Dreyfus and Dreyfus ( 1980 ) described the five stages the result of the successive transformations of four mental functions: recollection, recognition, decision making, and awareness.

In the course of developing critical thinking and expertise, individuals will pass through similar stages which are accompanied with the increasing practices and accumulation of experience. Through the intervention and experience of developing critical thinking, as a novice, tasks are decomposed into context-free features which could be recognized by students without the experience of particular situations. For further improving, students need to be able to monitor their awareness, and with a considerable experience. They can note recurrent meaningful component patterns in some contexts. Gradually, increased practices expose students to a variety of whole situations which enable the students to recognize tasks in a more holistic manner as a professional. On the other hand, with the increasing accumulation of experience, individuals are less likely to depend simply on abstract principles. The decision will turn to something intuitive and highly situational as well as analytical. Students might unconsciously apply rules, principles or abilities. A high level of awareness is absorbed. At this stage, critical thinking is turned into habits of mind and in some cases expertise. The description above presents a process of critical thinking development evolving from a novice to an expert, eventually developing critical thinking into habits of mind.

We mention the five-stage model proposed by Dreyfus and Dreyfus ( 1980 ) to categorize levels of critical thinking and emphasize the developmental nature involved in becoming a critical thinker. Correspondingly, critical thinking is categorized into 5 levels: absolute beginner (novice), advanced beginner (beginner), competent performer (competent), proficient performer (proficient), and intuitive expert (expert).

Ability level and critical thinker (critical thinking) level together represent one of the four dimensions represented in Fig. 1 .

In addition, it is noteworthy that the other two elements of critical thinking are the context and knowledge in which the inquiry is based. Contextual and domain knowledge must be taken into account with regard to critical thinking, as previously argued. Besides, as Hitchcock ( 2018 ) argued, effective critical thinking requires knowledge about and experience applying critical thinking concepts and principles as well.

Critical thinking is considered valuable across disciplines. But except few courses such as philosophy, critical thinking is reported lacking in most school education. Most of researchers and educators thus proclaim that integrating critical thinking across the curriculum (Hatcher 2013 ). For example, Ennis ( 2018 ) provided a vision about incorporating critical thinking across the curriculum in higher education. Though people are aware of the value of critical thinking, few of them practice it. Between 2012 and 2015, in Australia, the demand of critical thinking as one of the enterprise skills for early-career job increased 125% (Statista Research Department, 2016). According to a survey across 1000 adults by The Reboot Foundation 2018 , more than 80% of respondents believed that critical thinking skills are lacking in today’s youth. Respondents were deeply concerned that schools do not teach critical thinking. Besides, the investigation also found that respondents were split over when and how to teach critical thinking, clearly.

In the previous analysis of critical thinking, we presented the mechanism of critical thinking instead of a concise definition. This is because, given the various perspectives of interpreting critical thinking, it is not easy to come out with an unitary definition, but it is essential for the public to understand how critical thinking works, the elements it involves and the relationships between them, so they can achieve an explicit understanding.

In the framework, critical thinking starts from simple experience such as observing a difference, then entering the stage of inquiry, inquiry does not necessarily turn the thinking process into critical thinking unless the student enters a higher level of thinking process or reasoning loops such as re-examining, reasoning, reflection (3Rs). Being an ideal critical thinker (or an expert) requires efforts and time.

According to the framework, simple abilities such as observational skills and inquiry are indispensable to lead to critical thinking, which suggests that paying attention to those simple skills at an early stage of children can be an entry point to critical thinking. Considering the child development theory by Piaget ( 1964 ), a developmental approach spanning multiple years can be employed to help children develop critical thinking at each corresponding development stage until critical thinking becomes habits of mind.

Although we emphasized critical thinking in this paper, for the improvement of intelligence, creative thinking and critical thinking are separable, they are both essential abilities that develop expertise, eventually drive the improvement of HI at human race level.

As previously argued, there is a similar pattern among students who think critically in different domains, but students from different domains might perform differently in creativity because of different thinking styles (Haller and Courvoisier 2010 ). Plus, students have different learning styles and preferences. Personalized learning has been the most appropriate approach to address those differences. Though the way of realizing personalized learning varies along with the development of technologies. Generally, personalized learning aims at customizing learning to accommodate diverse students based on their strengths, needs, interests, preferences, and abilities.

Meanwhile, the advancement of technology including AI is revolutionizing education; students’ learning environments are shifting from technology-enhanced learning environments to smart learning environments. Although lots of potentials are unrealized yet (Spector 2016 ), the so-called smart learning environments rely more on the support of AI technology such as neural networks, learning analytics and natural language processing. Personalized learning is better supported and realized in a smart learning environment. In short, in the current era, personalized learning is to use AI to help learners perform at a higher level making adjustments based on differences of learners. This is the notion with which we conclude – the future lies in using AI to improve HI and accommodating individual differences.

The application of AI in education has been a subject for decades. There are efforts heading to such a direction though personalized learning is not technically involved in them. For example, using AI technology to stimulate critical thinking (Zhu 2015 ), applying a virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills (Ketelhut et al. 2010 ). Developing computational thinking through robotics (Angeli and Valanides 2019 ) is another such promising application of AI to support the development of HI.

However, almost all of those efforts are limited to laboratory experiments. For accelerating the development rate of HI, we argue that more emphasis should be given to the development of HI at scale with the support of AI, especially in young children focusing on critical and creative thinking.

In this paper, we argue that more emphasis should be given to HI development. Rather than decreasing the funding of AI, the analysis of progress in artificial and human intelligence indicates that it would be reasonable to see increased emphasis placed on using various AI techniques and technologies to improve HI on a large and sustainable scale. Well, most researchers might agree that AI techniques or the situation might be not mature enough to support such a large-scale development. But it would be dangerous if HI development is overlooked. Based on research and theory drawn from psychology as well as from epistemology, the framework is intended to provide a practical guide to the progressive development of inquiry and critical thinking skills in young children as children represent the future of our fragile planet. And we suggested a sustainable development approach for developing inquiry and critical thinking (See, Spector 2019 ). Such an approach could be realized through AI and infused into HI development. Besides, a project is underway in collaboration with NetDragon to develop gamified applications to develop the relevant skills and habits of mind. A game-based assessment methodology is being developed and tested at East China Normal University that is appropriate for middle school children. The intention of the effort is to refocus some of the attention on the development of HI in young children.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

Artificial Intelligence

Human Intelligence

L.W. Anderson, D.R. Krathwohl, A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Allyn & Bacon, Boston, 2001)

Google Scholar  

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2019). Developing young children’s computational thinking with educational robotics: An interaction effect between gender and scaffolding strategy. Comput. Hum. Behav. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.018

B.S. Bloom, M.D. Engelhart, E.J. Furst, W.H. Hill, D.R. Krathwohl, Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain (David McKay Company, New York, 1956)

Bostrom, N. (1998). How long before superintelligence? Retrieved from https://nickbostrom.com/superintelligence.html

R. Cellan-Jones, Stephen hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind. BBC. News. 2 , 2014 (2014)

M.T.H. Chi, R. Glaser, E. Rees, in Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence , ed. by R. S. Sternberg. Expertise in problem solving (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 1982), pp. 7–77

H.L. Chiesi, G.J. Spliich, J.F. Voss, Acquisition of domain-related information in relation to high and low domain knowledge. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 18 , 257–273 (1979)

Article   Google Scholar  

L. Darling-Hammond, What can PISA tell US about US education policy? N. Engl. J. Publ. Policy. 26 (1), 4 (2014)

M. Davies, in Higher education: Handbook of theory and research . A Model of Critical Thinking in Higher Education (Springer, Cham, 2015), pp. 41–92

Chapter   Google Scholar  

A.C. Doyle, in The Strand Magazine . The adventure of the blanched soldier (1926) Retrieved from https://www.dfw-sherlock.org/uploads/3/7/3/8/37380505/1926_november_the_adventure_of_the_blanched_soldier.pdf

S.E. Dreyfus, H.L. Dreyfus, A five-stage model of the mental activities involved in directed skill acquisition (no. ORC-80-2) (University of California-Berkeley Operations Research Center, Berkeley, 1980)

Book   Google Scholar  

C.P. Dwyer, M.J. Hogan, I. Stewart, An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Think. Skills Creat. 12 , 43–52 (2014)

R.H. Ennis, Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educ. Res. 18 , 4–10 (1989)

R.H. Ennis, Critical thinking across the curriculum: A vision. Topoi. 37 (1), 165–184 (2018)

Epstein, Z. (2016). Has artificial intelligence already surpassed the human brain? Retrieved from https://bgr.com/2016/03/10/alphago-beats-lee-sedol-again/

K.A. Ericsson, R.T. Krampe, C. Tesch-Römer, The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol. Rev. 100 (3), 363–406 (1993)

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction [Report for the American Psychology Association]. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED315423.pdf

J. Fang, H. Su, Y. Xiao, Will Artificial Intelligence Surpass Human Intelligence? (2018). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3173876

K.W. Fischer, A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies of skills. Psychol. Rev. 87 , 477–431 (1980)

J.H. Flavell, Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive development inquiry. Am. Psychol. 34 (10), 906–911 (1979)

R.M. Gagné, The conditions of learning and theory of instruction , 4th edn. (Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, New York, 1985)

I.J. Good, Speculations concerning the first ultraintelligent machine. Adv Comput. 6 , 31-88 (1966)

C.S. Haller, D.S. Courvoisier, Personality and thinking style in different creative domains. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 4 (3), 149 (2010)

D.L. Hatcher, Is critical thinking across the curriculum a plausible goal? OSSA. 69 (2013) Retrieved from https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA10/papersandcommentaries/69

Hitchcock, D. (2018). Critical thinking. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-thinking/

B.K. Hofer, G.M. Sinatra, Epistemology, metacognition, and self-regulation: Musings on an emerging field. Metacogn. Learn. 5 (1), 113–120 (2010)

D.H. Jonassen, Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 48 (4), 63–85 (2000)

D.H. Jonassen, Learning to Solve Problems: A Handbook for Designing Problem-Solving Learning Environments (Routledge, New York, 2011)

D.J. Ketelhut, B.C. Nelson, J. Clarke, C. Dede, A multi-user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 41 (1), 56–68 (2010)

R. Luckin, W. Holmes, M. Griffiths, L.B. Forcier, Intelligence Unleashed: An Argument for AI in Education (Pearson Education, London, 2016) Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/50104/1/Luckin%20et%20al.%20-%202016%20-%20Intelligence%20Unleashed.%20An%20argument%20for%20AI%20in%20Educ.pdf

R. Paul, L. Elder, The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools , 4th edn. (2006) Retrieved from https://www.criticalthinking.org/files/Concepts_Tools.pdf

J. Piaget, Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2 (3), 176–186 (1964)

S.J. Russell, P. Norvig, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 3rd edn. (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2009) ISBN 978-0-136042594

G. Schraw, K.J. Crippen, K. Hartley, Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Res. Sci. Educ. 36 (1–2), 111–139 (2006)

D.H. Schunk, Metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: Research recommendations. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 20 (4), 463–467 (2008)

K. Siau, Y. Yang, in Twelve Annual Midwest Association for Information Systems Conference (MWAIS 2017) . Impact of artificial intelligence, robotics, and machine learning on sales and marketing (2017), pp. 18–19

D. Silver, A. Huang, C.J. Maddison, A. Guez, L. Sifre, G. Van Den Driessche, et al., Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature. 529 (7587), 484 (2016)

J. M. Spector, M. C. Polson, D. J. Muraida (eds.), Automating Instructional Design: Concepts and Issues (Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, 1993)

J.M. Spector, Smart Learning Environments: Concepts and Issues . In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2728–2737). (Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Savannah, GA, United States, 2016). Retrieved June 4, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/172078/ .

J. M. Spector, Thinking and learning in the anthropocene: The new 3 Rs . Discussion paper presented at the International Big History Association Conference, Philadelphia, PA (2018). Retrieved from http://learndev.org/dl/HLAIBHA2018/Spector%2C%20J.%20M.%20(2018).%20Thinking%20and%20Learning%20in%20the%20Anthropocene.pdf .

J. M. Spector, Complexity, Inquiry Critical Thinking, and Technology: A Holistic and Developmental Approach . In Mind, Brain and Technology (pp. 17–25). (Springer, Cham, 2019).

R.J. Sternberg, Intelligence as developing expertise. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 24 (4), 359–375 (1999)

The Reboot Foundation. (2018). The State of Critical Thinking: A New Look at Reasoning at Home, School, and Work. Retrieved from https://reboot-foundation.org/wp-content/uploads/_docs/REBOOT_FOUNDATION_WHITE_PAPER.pdf

V. Vinge, The Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Era . Resource document. NASA Technical report server. Retrieved from https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19940022856.pdf . Accessed 20 June 2019.

D. Zhang, M. Xie, Artificial Intelligence’s Digestion and Reconstruction for Humanistic Feelings . In 2018 International Seminar on Education Research and Social Science (ISERSS 2018) (Atlantis Press, Paris, 2018)

X. Zhu, in Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence . Machine Teaching: An Inverse Problem to Machine Learning and an Approach toward Optimal Education (2015)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We wish to acknowledge the generous support of NetDragon and the Digital Research Centre at the University of North Texas.

Initial work is being funded through the NetDragon Digital Research Centre at the University of North Texas with Author as the Principal Investigator.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Learning Technologies, University of North Texas Denton, Texas, TX, 76207, USA

Jonathan Michael Spector & Shanshan Ma

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors contributed equally to the effort. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Michael Spector .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Spector, J.M., Ma, S. Inquiry and critical thinking skills for the next generation: from artificial intelligence back to human intelligence. Smart Learn. Environ. 6 , 8 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-019-0088-z

Download citation

Received : 06 June 2019

Accepted : 27 August 2019

Published : 11 September 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-019-0088-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Artificial intelligence
• Critical thinking
• Developmental model
• Human intelligence
• Inquiry learning

• Formative Assessment Techniques
• Engaging Hands-on Activities and Experiments
• State Science Standards and Benchmarks
• Life Science Lesson Plans for K-5 Learners
• Classroom Management
• Behavior management techniques
• Classroom rules
• Classroom routines
• Classroom organization
• Assessment Strategies
• Summative assessment techniques
• Formative assessment techniques
• Portfolio assessment
• Performance-based assessment
• Teaching Strategies
• Active learning
• Inquiry-based learning
• Differentiated instruction
• Project-based learning
• Learning Theories
• Behaviorism
• Social Learning Theory
• Cognitivism
• Constructivism
• Critical Thinking Skills
• Analysis skills
• Creative thinking skills
• Problem-solving skills
• Evaluation skills
• Metacognition
• Metacognitive strategies
• Self-reflection and metacognition
• Goal setting and metacognition
• Teaching Methods and Techniques
• Direct instruction methods
• Indirect instruction methods
• Lesson Planning Strategies
• Lesson sequencing strategies
• Unit planning strategies
• Differentiated Instruction Strategies
• Differentiated instruction for English language learners
• Differentiated instruction for gifted students
• Standards and Benchmarks
• State science standards and benchmarks
• National science standards and benchmarks
• Curriculum Design
• Course design and alignment
• Backward design principles
• Curriculum mapping
• Instructional Materials
• Textbooks and digital resources
• Instructional software and apps
• Engaging Activities and Games
• Hands-on activities and experiments
• Cooperative learning games
• Learning Environment Design
• Classroom technology integration
• Classroom layout and design
• Instructional Strategies
• Collaborative learning strategies
• Problem-based learning strategies
• 9-12 Science Lesson Plans
• Life science lesson plans for 9-12 learners
• Earth science lesson plans for 9-12 learners
• Physical science lesson plans for 9-12 learners
• K-5 Science Lesson Plans
• Earth science lesson plans for K-5 learners
• Life science lesson plans for K-5 learners
• Physical science lesson plans for K-5 learners
• 6-8 Science Lesson Plans
• Earth science lesson plans for 6-8 learners
• Life science lesson plans for 6-8 learners
• Physical science lesson plans for 6-8 learners
• Science Teaching
• Inquiry-Based Learning: An Introduction to Teaching Strategies

Learn about inquiry-based learning, a teaching approach that encourages students to ask questions, find answers, and make meaningful connections. Discover key strategies for implementing inquiry-based learning in your classroom.

Inquiry-based learning requires teachers to shift the focus away from delivering content and instead emphasize the process of learning. To help students gain a deeper understanding of the world around them, teachers can use Profs online neuroscience tutors to provide guidance and support during the inquiry-based learning process. Teachers should create an environment where students feel comfortable asking questions, exploring ideas, and taking risks through inquiry-based methods. To ensure that students are engaged in their learning, teachers should incorporate opportunities for inquiry-based collaboration and discussion among students.

Moreover, teachers should design meaningful assignments that require students to think critically and make connections between concepts using inquiry-based approaches. To ensure that students are actively involved in their learning, teachers should also provide timely feedback on student progress through inquiry-based methods. This can include providing written or verbal feedback on assignments as well as offering guidance on how to improve work. Teachers can also encourage students to reflect on their own learning process by asking them to think about what worked well and what could be improved upon. Finally, teachers should also consider how they can assess student learning in an inquiry-based classroom. Rather than relying solely on traditional tests or quizzes, teachers should look for ways to assess student understanding through more creative methods such as projects or presentations.

Providing Meaningful Assignments

Additionally, assigning group projects or activities that allow students to collaborate on solving problems is an effective way to further engage students in the inquiry process. In order to create meaningful assignments, teachers should consider providing students with a range of materials to work with. For example, providing students with primary sources such as historical documents or scientific experiments can help them develop a more comprehensive understanding of the material. Additionally, providing students with a range of options for how they can present their research and solutions can help to engage them in the inquiry process.

Offering Timely Feedback

Using technology to provide real-time feedback, giving oral feedback, providing written feedback, using visual aids, creating an inquiry-based learning environment, encourage collaboration:, encourage risk-taking:, provide resources:, be patient:, assessing student learning, observation, performance-based assessments.

This means creating a classroom atmosphere that is conducive to exploration, experimentation, and critical thinking. One way to create an inquiry-based learning environment is to encourage collaboration among students. Group activities and projects can be a great way to foster a collaborative atmosphere in the classroom, as it allows students to work together to find answers to their questions. Additionally, providing students with the freedom to explore and ask questions without fear of being wrong can help create an environment that encourages inquiry.

It is also important for teachers to provide their students with the necessary resources for inquiry-based learning. This includes access to textbooks, reference materials, and other resources such as computers and technology. When students have access to these materials, they are able to research and discover answers on their own. Finally, it is important for teachers to provide guidance and support when necessary.

2.Dialogue:

3.online discussion forums:, 4.peer feedback:, observation:, class discussions:, tests and quizzes:.

By providing meaningful assignments, offering timely feedback, and assessing student understanding through creative methods, teachers can help create an environment where students feel comfortable asking questions and engaging in meaningful discussions. Inquiry-based learning can be used to help students develop critical thinking skills and make meaningful connections that will serve them in their academic and professional lives. Through inquiry-based learning, teachers can help students explore their own curiosities and develop their problem-solving abilities. By encouraging students to ask questions and search for answers, teachers can help create a classroom environment that fosters creativity and collaboration. With the right strategies in place, inquiry-based learning can be a powerful tool for engaging and motivating students.

Shahid Lakha

Shahid Lakha is a seasoned educational consultant with a rich history in the independent education sector and EdTech. With a solid background in Physics, Shahid has cultivated a career that spans tutoring, consulting, and entrepreneurship. As an Educational Consultant at Spires Online Tutoring since October 2016, he has been instrumental in fostering educational excellence in the online tutoring space. Shahid is also the founder and director of Specialist Science Tutors, a tutoring agency based in West London, where he has successfully managed various facets of the business, including marketing, web design, and client relationships. His dedication to education is further evidenced by his role as a self-employed tutor, where he has been teaching Maths, Physics, and Engineering to students up to university level since September 2011. Shahid holds a Master of Science in Photon Science from the University of Manchester and a Bachelor of Science in Physics from the University of Bath.

New Articles

• Earth Science Lesson Plans for 6-8 Learners

Learn about earth science lesson plans for 6-8 learners, including how to create and implement engaging lesson plans for this age group.

• An Overview of Metacognitive Strategies

Learn about metacognitive strategies for science learning and how to apply them in your studies.

• Effective Classroom Organization Strategies for Science Teaching

This article provides a comprehensive guide to effective strategies for organizing classrooms for teaching science. Learn what strategies work best, how to use them, and how to get the most out of your classroom organization efforts.

• Unit Planning Strategies

This article provides an overview of unit planning strategies, including how to create a cohesive unit plan and how to use these strategies in the classroom.

Leave Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree that spam comments wont´t be published

• Behavior Management Techniques
• Behaviorism: A Comprehensive Overview
• Social Learning Theory Explained
• Summative Assessment Techniques: An Overview

Active Learning: A Comprehensive Overview

• Understanding Cognitivism: A Learning Theory
• Analysis Skills: Understanding Critical Thinking and Science Learning

Creative Thinking Skills

• Constructivism: Exploring the Theory of Learning
• Problem-solving Skills: A Comprehensive Overview
• Classroom Rules - A Comprehensive Overview
• Exploring Portfolio Assessment: An Introduction
• Differentiated Instruction: A Comprehensive Overview
• Evaluation Skills: A Comprehensive Overview
• Classroom Routines: A Comprehensive Overview
• Project-Based Learning: An In-Depth Look
• Performance-Based Assessment: A Comprehensive Overview
• Understanding Direct Instruction Methods
• Course Design and Alignment
• The Advantages of Textbooks and Digital Resources
• Backward Design Principles: Understanding Curriculum Design
• Engaging Cooperative Learning Games
• Integrating Technology into the Classroom
• Understanding Classroom Layout and Design
• Lesson Sequencing Strategies: A Comprehensive Overview
• Instructional Software and Apps: A Comprehensive Overview
• Understanding Curriculum Mapping
• Collaborative Learning Strategies
• Indirect Instruction Methods: A Comprehensive Overview
• Understanding National Science Standards and Benchmarks
• Exploring Problem-Based Learning Strategies
• Exploring Self-Reflection and Metacognition
• Exploring Goal Setting and Metacognition
• Life Science Lesson Plans for 9-12 Learners
• Earth Science Lesson Plans for K-5 Learners
• Differentiated Instruction for English Language Learners

Earth Science Lesson Plans for 9-12 Learners

• Life Science Lesson Plans for 6-8 Learners
• Physical Science Lesson Plans for 9-12 Learners
• Physical Science Lesson Plans for K-5 Learners
• Physical Science Lesson Plans for 6-8 Learners
• Differentiated Instruction Strategies for Gifted Students

Recent Posts

Which cookies do you want to accept?

• Original article
• Open access
• Published: 30 June 2020

Effects of using inquiry-based learning on EFL students’ critical thinking skills

• Bantalem Derseh Wale 1 &
• Kassie Shifere Bishaw 2  

Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education volume  5 , Article number:  9 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

40k Accesses

25 Citations

Metrics details

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of using inquiry-based learning on students’ critical thinking skills. A quasi-experimental design which employed time series design with single group participants was used. A total of 20 EFL undergraduate students who took advanced writing skills course were selected using comprehensive sampling method. Tests, focus group discussion, and student-reflective journal were used to gather data on the students’ critical thinking skills. The participants were given a series of three argumentative essay writing pretests both before and after the intervention, inquiry-based argumentative essay writing instruction. While the quantitative data were analyzed using One-Way Repeated Measures ANOVA, the qualitative data were analyzed through narration. The findings of the study revealed that using inquiry-based argumentative writing instruction enhances students’ critical thinking skills. Therefore, inquiry-based instruction is suggested as a means to improve students’ critical thinking skills because the method enhances students' interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation skills which are the core critical thinking skills.

Introduction

Critical thinking is the ability to ask and/or answer insightful questions in a most productive way in order to reach on a comprehensive understanding (Hilsdon, 2010 ). It consists interpretation, analysis, evaluation, synthesize explanation, inference, and self-regulation. Empowering critical thinking skills among students in higher education especially in academic writing through the integration of critical thinking into the teaching learning process is essential in order to develop students’ problem solving, decision making and communication skills (Abdullah, 2014 ; Adege, 2016 ; McLean, 2005 ). Inquiry-based learning develops students’ critical thinking skills because it helps students to develop interpreting, analyzing, evaluating, inferring, explaining, and self-regulation skills which are the core critical thinking skills (Facione, 2011 ; Facione & Facione, 1994 ; Hilsdon, 2010 ).

The level of thinking depends on the level of questioning as long as the questioning leads to new perspectives (Buranapatana, 2006 ). When students learn to ask their own thought-provoking questions in and outside the classroom, and provide explanatory answers, they are well on the way to self-regulation of their learning. In inquiry-based writing instruction, students engaged in writing lessons and tasks that enhance their ability to apply these critical thinking skills because the method emphasize to produce texts through inquisition and investigation. In writing, when students’ written papers realize these skills, the students considered that their critical thinking skills are developed.

Inquiry-based learning is the act of gaining knowledge and skills through asking for information (Lee, 2014 ). It is a discovery method of learning that involves students in making observations; posing questions; examining sources; gathering, analyzing, interpreting, and synthesizing data; proposing answers, explanations and predictions; communicating findings through discussion and reflection; applying findings to the real situation, and following up new questions that may arise in the process. Inquiry-based learning emphasizes students’ abilities to critically view, question, and explore various perspectives and concepts of the real world. It takes place when the teacher facilitates and scaffolds learning than gives facts and knowledge so that students engage in investigating, questioning, and explaining their world in a student-centered learning environment.

Although inquiry-based learning is intended for science as it is classified as scientific approach, it can be implemented in language field. Rejeki ( 2017 ) mentioned that inquiry-based language learning is useful in promoting lifelong education that enables EFL learners to continue the quest for knowledge throughout life. Similarly, Lee ( 2014 ) stated that inquiry-based learning is an analogy for communicative approach. The principles of inquiry-based learning are compatible with Communicative Language Teaching because communicative approach focuses on communicative proficiency rather than mere mastery of structure to develop learners’ communicative competence as to inquiry-based learning. Inquiry-based learning is, therefore, a form of Communicative Language Teaching which serves to bring down the general principles of communicative approach, and implement in language classrooms in an inquisitive and discovery manner (Lee, 2014 ; Qing & Jin, 2007 ; Richards & Rodgers, 2001 ). While communicative approach is an umbrella of various active language learning methods, inquiry-based learning is one of the active learning methods that drive learning through inquisition and investigation. It mainly focuses on discovery and learner cognitive development to be achieved using thoughtful questions.

In inquiry-based writing instruction, students engaged in pre-writing tasks through generating ideas, narrowing and clarifying topics; exploring information on their writing topics from various sources; explaining their discoveries gained from the exploration, and elaborating their thinking through transforming their understanding into the real world situation. When students come up through this distinct process in manipulating such tasks, their critical thinking skills can be enhanced because this process develops students’ ability to analyze, synthesis, and evaluate concepts.

This study also revealed that students’ critical thinking skills has been enhanced through inquiry-based writing instruction because the method focuses on the process of knowledge discovery that involves students in seeking, collecting, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information; creating ideas, and solving problems through communication, collaboration, deep thinking, and learner autonomy. The study can contribute to the field of foreign language learning by possibly leading English language teachers and learners into a more effective language learning method. The study has applicable significances to EFL teachers to understand the nature and application of inquiry-based learning.

Literature review

Developing students’ critical thinking skills through inquiry-based writing instruction.

Inquiry-based learning develops students’ critical thinking skills because the method improves the students’ mental activities such as interpretation, analysis, evaluation, explanation, inference, and self-regulation. Previous studies have shown that students’ critical thinking abilities are significantly higher when students are taught through inquiry-based learning comparing with traditional teaching methods. Having a free medium of student learning class where students will share good experiences through an inquiry process that is based on curiosity is a preferred learning method to the act of teaching that characterized with teaching by forced (Ahmad, Sitti, Abdul, Mohammad, & Sanitah, 2014 ; Iakovos, 2011 ).

By using inquiry-based learning in writing lessons, students can develop critical thinking skills, and learn how to generate and organize ideas through investigation or/and discussion to find out alternative ideas, and produce sound written papers. Accordingly, students who used inquiry-based learning techniques in their language learning are better achievers because they have an active role in choosing the writing topics, and on developing the outcomes of their own investigations. Inquiry-based learning has impacts in EFL classes to help students improve the target language, and develop other abilities needed to understand this constantly changing world. When students participate in real life situations, they can develop effective research skills, adapt and respond better to change, and they are also prepared to the development of critical thinking skills (Escalante, 2013 ; Ismail, 2006 ; Lessner & Craig, 2010 ).

Similar studies conducted by Ash and Kluger-Bell ( 2012 ); Byker, Harden, Heafner, and Holzberg ( 2017 ); Ahmad et al. ( 2014 ) discovered that learners preferred and performed much better with confirmation level of inquiry compared to guided, structured and open inquiry because teachers provide every needed conditions and allow the student the freedom to learn independently in the confirmation level. In the same vein, Ghaemi and Mirsaeed ( 2017 ) investigated the impacts of inquiry-based learning approach on critical thinking skill of EFL students, and revealed that doing inquiry-based activities in EFL classroom increased the critical thinking ability of the students.

Finally, Naryanti ( 2017 ) who conducted an action research to explore the extent to which inquiry-based learning method can improve grade eight students’ ability in writing a descriptive text find out that inquiry-based learning method is able to improve the students’ descriptive writing skills. The students concerned actively in the learning process, especially in conveying their opinions, asking and responding questions, and enthusiasm in producing written texts.

In sum, the aforementioned studies indicated that using inquiry-based learning in ESL/EFL writing classroom improves students’ critical thinking skills, and help them to become lifelong mind seekers. However, most of the aforementioned studies were conducted on pretest-posttest two groups design unlike the present study which followed single group pretest-posttest design employing time serious design. On the other hand, the finding of these study show the effects of using inquiry-based learning excluding the local context, where the present study was conducted. However, in the study area, inquiry-based learning seems to have been a missing feature of English as a foreign language leaning in general and writing skills in particular. Thus, examining the effects of using inquiry-based learning on EFL students’ critical thinking skills in the local context was relevant to fill the research gap.

Why inquiry-based learning for EFL students’ critical thinking skills?

Critical thinking plays a significant role for higher education ESL/EFL learners’ in order to produce sound written texts including argumentative essays (Klimova, 2013 ; Ghaemi & Mirsaeed, 2017 ). However, various studies conducted on students’ critical thinking skills and writing performance revealed that students are commonly challenged to support their arguments through referring to and synthesizing academic sources due to poor reasoning and unsupported claims. Especially, synthesizing sources is a complex task to second and foreign language learners to comprehend, paraphrase, and summarize written texts (Alagozlu, 2007 ; Goodwin, 2014 ). Evaluating and synthesizing sources into their own writing are the elements of critical thinking that students find challenging to express their own academic thoughts (Ahmad et al., 2014 ; Melles, 2009 ; Wette, 2010 ).

Fostering critical thinking skills is a challenging task nowadays since learners are exposed to an enormous information influx, such as the Internet (Klimova, 2013 ). They are offered pre-chewed chunks of ideas and opinions and often, they are not made to think about them. However, a critical thinker should be alerted and in his/ her inquisitive nature inquire, judge and evaluate all such sources critically. Hence, using inquiry-based learning in writing classes is helpful to foster students’ critical thinking skills.

Paul and Elder ( 2007 ) states that the conventional way of teaching, the product approach, is criticized in its inadequacy to prepare university graduates to deal with existing complex situations, because students are assumed to develop critical thinking skills depending on books, lecture notes, and handouts. It also led students learn with lack of interest on topics, receive rather than to think critically and search for knowledge. The students were not mostly motivated to observe their environment critically, inquire things, investigate problems, and create new knowledge (Ferris & Hedgcock, 2013 ; Graham, MacArthur, & Fitzgerald, 2013 ; Yen, 2014 ). However, in learning situations like inquiry-based learning where critical thinking is emphasized; students aim to understand ideas with range of explorations and follow new leads; learn with curiosity or interest of topics, and reach on implications.

Local researchers like Daniel ( 2004 ); Dawit and Yalew ( 2008 ) find out that conventional teaching methods are still in use though teachers are expected to use active learning methods. The lecture method, which is considered as the conventional method of teaching, is used in colleges that teachers usually focus on giving lectures, and students depend primarily on lecture where discovery is not that much encouraged. The researcher’s language teaching experience also shows that students were not that much learning to improve their critical thinking skills in writing classes. In other terms, the students’ papers were not adequately developed due to lack of interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. However, there are no local studies conducted to investigate the effects of using inquiry-based writing instruction in EFL context. Therefore, the present study examines the effects of using inquiry-based learning on EFL students’ critical thinking skills since the method involves students in seeking, collecting, analyzing, synthesizing and evaluating information based on student interest.

Research question

This study was designed to answer the following research question:

What are the effects of using inquiry-based learning on EFL students’ critical thinking skills?

Research methodology

Design of the study.

The research design of the study was quasi-experimental that employs a time series design with single group participants. For the purpose of this study, the participants were given a series of three argumentative essay writing pretests before the intervention, inquiry-based argumentative writing instruction, and other three similar series of argumentative essay writing posttests.

Participants

In this study, a total of 20 EFL second year undergraduate university students who were enrolled for advanced writing skills course were selected using comprehensive sampling method. In the students’ university stay, Advanced Writing Skills Course is the final writing course given to them. Before this course, the students have taken both Communicative English Skills and Basic Writing Skills, and Intermediate Writing Skills Courses in their university stay. Earlier to these university courses, they have learned English language subject beginning from grade one to university.

Data gathering instruments

The data on the students’ critical thinking skills were gathered through tests, focus group discussion, and student-reflective journal.

The test that comprises both pretests and posttests was used to gather data on students’ critical thinking skills. Three consecutive argumentative essay writing pre-tests were given to understand the students’ existing critical thinking skills. Likewise, other three consecutive argumentative essay writing posttests were also given to determine the effects of the intervention, whether students’ critical thinking skills were improved. The tests were developed by the researchers considering the students’ local context and their background knowledge.

The critical thinking skills rubric was adapted from Facione ( 2015 ), “Critical Thinking: What It is and Why It Counts” (from APA Report: Expert Consensus Statement on Critical Thinking) incorporating common critical thinking skills including interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, and explanation. The rubric is a four point scale from one to four that refers to poor, good, very good, and excellent respectively. Two experienced EFL university teachers marked students’ argumentative essays independently based on the given criteria. Training on the use of the rubric was given to the raters. Inter-rater reliability was calculated with Pearson’s correlations (Pearson’s, r), and it was 0.75 which shows the reliability of the test.

Focus group discussion

The focus group discussion was needed to gather qualitative data on students’ critical thinking skills empowerment. The students were asked to forward their views on the relevance of inquiry-based learning to enhance their skills to interpret, analyze, evaluate, infer, explain, and self-regulate in writing argumentative essays.

Student-reflective journal

The Student-Reflective Journal was employed to collect data on the effectiveness of inquiry-based learning on students’ critical thinking skills. Accordingly, the participants were reported their feelings on the effectiveness of inquiry-based learning method and their critical thinking skills empowerment.

Procedure and data collection

In the data collection, first, a teaching material used to teach argumentative essay writing was prepared using the literature in accordance with inquiry-based learning method and critical thinking skills. In other terms, the teaching was developed in the way that enable the students to make observations; pose questions; examine sources; gather, analyze, interpret, and synthesize data; propose answers, explain and predict; communicate findings through discussion and reflection; apply their findings to the real situation, and follow up new questions that arise in the process because these are the focuses of inquiry-based learning. On the other hand, it also developed in the way that enable students to interpret, analyze, infer, evaluate, explain, and self-regulate which are the core critical thinking skills. In sum, the teaching material was prepared considering the components of inquiry-based learning, and critical thinking skills.

Then, three consecutive argumentative essay writing pre-tests were administered to the students to identify their critical thinking performance before the intervention. Following the pre-tests, the intervention was given.

The intervention was an inquiry-based argumentative essay writing instruction delivered for 4 weeks using the aforementioned teaching material. In the teaching-learning process students discover their own writing topics, generate ideas, evaluate what they have and what they need, gather and evaluate information from different sources, write up drafts with evidences, discuss with colleague and subject area experts for feedback, and write up essays related to their real life situation. When the intervention was given, the Student-Reflection Journal was collected from the students.

Next to the completion of the teaching-learning practice, the participants were given three consecutive argumentative essay writing post-tests which were identical with the pre-tests. The post-tests were needed to determine whether the inquiry-based essay writing instruction make improvements on students’ critical thinking skills. By the completion of the post-tests, the focus group discussion was conducted.

Data analysis methods

The quantitative data which were gathered through pre-tests and post-tests were analyzed using One-Way Repeated Measures ANOVA , using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 23 software program. One-Way Repeated Measures ANOVA was used to examine whether there were differences on students’ critical thinking skills in writing argumentative essays before and after the intervention. On the other hand, the qualitative data which were collected through focus group discussion and student-reflective journal were analyzed through narration.

Result and discussion

Essay writing tests.

The students were given three essay writing pretests and other three essay writing posttests in order to measure their critical thinking skills before and after the intervention. Accordingly, this section presents the students’ test results gained from the pretests and posttests which were analyzed using One Way Repeated Measures ANOVA .

Table 1 indicates that the students’ Mean scores in Pretest-1, Pretest-2, and Pretest-3, were 38.15, 38.00, and 38.35, respectively. The table also depicts that the students’ Mean scores in Posttest-1, Posttest − 2, and Posttest − 3, were 65.90, 65.70, and 66.25, respectively. From these results, we can understand that the students’ Mean scores in the pretests were similar. Likewise, their Mean scores in the Posttests were also similar. However, when the Mean scores in the Pretests and Posttests were compared, they have differences. In other words, the students’ Mean scores in the posttests were greater than those of the pretests. It indicates that the intervention made the differences on the students’ pretest and posttest Mean scores. In sum, it can be understood that the inquiry-based argumentative essay writing instruction has positive effects on the students’ critical thinking skills.

The findings of this study imply that inquiry-based learning has improved EFL students’ critical thinking skills which includes interpretation, analysis, inference, evaluation, explanation, and self-regulation. In line with this research finding, previous studies also show that inquiry-based learning has positive impacts on students’ critical thinking skills. Ash and Kluger-Bell ( 2012 ) find out that by using inquiry-based learning in writing lessons, students develop critical thinking skills, and learn how to generate and organize ideas through investigation or/and discussion to find out alternative ideas, and produce sound written papers. Inquiry-based learning is appropriate when deep discipline knowledge; higher-order thinking skills or strategies including reasoning skills; adequate motivational beliefs or attitude and value are intended as learning outcomes, rather than lower-order thinking skills like, to recall facts.

Table 2 shows the Within-Subjects Effects of the tests. In the table, the Sphericity Assumed indicated that 5 with-in subjects df, and 95 errors df . The Mean Square is 4632.348 with 8.468 F, and Significance value is .000. F (5, 95) = 547.065, p  < 0.005. It means that the students test scores have differences based on time, but the differences in all times are not the same.

Thus, in order to identify the difference among each of the test scores, Post Hoc analysis was run. The Post Hoc analysis for a repeated measures variable is a paired sample t-test.

Table 3 depicts that there were no difference between pretest-1 and pretest-2 (.603); pretest-1 and pretest-3 (.163); pretest-2 and pretest-3 (.273). In the same manner, there were no differences between posttest-1 and posttest-2 (.464); posttest-1 and posttest-3 (.376); posttest-2 and posttest-3 (.280). In contrast, there were differences in all of the remaining combinations (.000). It indicates that the differences were made due to the intervention given to the students. Thus, it can be concluded that the inquiry-based argumentative writing instruction improves the students’ critical thinking skills.

This finding shows that using inquiry-based learning in EFL classroom fosters students’ abilities to interpret, analyze, infer, evaluate, explain, and self-regulate which are the core critical thinking skills. In line with this research finding, Ghaemi and Mirsaeed ( 2017 ) revealed that doing inquiry-based activities in EFL classroom increased the critical thinking ability of the students which enable them to analyze, evaluate, and explain information. Thus, it shows that using inquiry-based writing instruction enhances students’ critical thinking skills.

The students’ focus group discussion result revealed that the use of inquiry-based learning in argumentative essay writing classes can enhance students’ critical thinking skills. Most of the focus group discussion participants reported that they had not wrote effective argumentative essays before they use inquiry-based learning method. However, after using this method of learning, they have developed their critical thinking skills including interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. For instance, one of the participants reported that his critical thinking skills have been enhanced after learning argumentative essay writing through inquiry-based learning method because he has developed the way to interpret, analyze, and evaluate information. He can generate logical ideas which are better to persuade his audiences, and write essays without emotional feelings.

The other focus group discussion participant voiced that the learning method empowers her critical thinking skills because before using inquiry-based learning her writings were not appropriate for audience. However, after taking the lessons in the intervention, she knows what to write considering her purpose and audience, how to analyze information, and how to produce reasonable argumentative essays.

The other student also mentioned his performance as follows:

My critical thinking skills such as interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation are very good now. Especially, when I pick two points from these points, analysis and evaluation, I can analyze and evaluate written arguments because of the inquiry-based essay writing instruction. So now, I can easily interpret, analyze, and evaluate data, and even regulate myself to write my argumentative essay to persuade my audience.

In a similar manner, another participant also reported that in inquiry-based learning, she discovered her writing topic, searched for information, and evaluated, criticized and analyzed the collected data, and wrote drafts, incorporated necessary feedbacks, and produced effective essays in contrast to the previous methods. She further explained that during this process, her critical thinking skills were enhanced due to the instruction given through inquiry-based learning. Similarly, another respondent also said that after learning through inquiry-based learning, his critical thinking skills were enhanced. As he further elaborated, he could become to analyze and evaluate information in writing argumentative essays while using this method.

In addition, the students reported that the critical thinking skills that they enhanced in the teaching learning process were relevant to their real life situations. One of them stated that “every English language graduate person and critical thinking towards writing dependently go together. I am going to do two things in the future as an English graduate man. These are critically writing texts and critically evaluating what another person has written. So, I think, the critical thinking skills that I developed through inquiry-based writing instruction are helpful to the rest of my life”.

The students mentioned that critical thinking helps in their work life as university graduate students because it has a lot of things for them. According to their speech, they should be competitive enough to become successful in their work life. So, being a good critical thinker helps to think differently, and to be successful. They further voiced that skills can also help them to make good decisions in their real life situations apart from their working environment. In sum, the students’ focus group discussion results indicated that the students’ critical thinking skills including interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation were enhanced due to the inquiry-based writing instruction. In the same manner, Ghaemi and Mirsaeed ( 2017 ) revealed that most of the participants who used inquiry-based learning believed that their critical thinking abilities changed positively. Therefore, it is worth mentioning that there should be opportunities for students to have enough exposure to inquiry-based learning.

The data gained from the students’ reflective journal indicated that when the students used inquiry-based essay writing instruction, they have developed their critical thinking skills including interpretation, analysis, and evaluation, synthesize, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. They note that the strategies used in the teaching learning process and incorporated in the teaching material were effective to improve their critical thinking skills. The students reported that the way they learned argumentative writing has enhanced their critical thinking skills like interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation.

In line with this finding, a study conducted in Whittier College, USA to assess students’ feedback on the effectiveness of inquiry-based teaching in second language pedagogy shows that the method reinforced students’ understanding of the course material (Lee, 2014 ). In addition, McLean ( 2005 ); Abdullah ( 2014 ); Adege ( 2016 ) also revealed that empowering critical thinking skills among students in higher education especially in academic writing through the integration of critical thinking into the teaching learning process is essential in order to develop students’ problem solving, decision making and communication skills which are needed for their future carrier.

Therefore, based on the findings of the study, all together, it can be understood that using inquiry-based learning in argumentative essay writing class empowers students’ critical thinking skills including interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. In other terms, when the students have used inquiry-based argumentative writing instruction, they comprehend and expressed the meaning of their writing issues and judgments in their argumentative essays. They recognized the then argumentative issues and described them in their essays. The students have collected data on their topics and constructed categories of protagonist and antagonist ideas for their argumentative essay development. They also paraphrased ideas taken from other sources in their own words. These indicate that the students have developed their interpretation skills which is one of the core critical thinking skills.

In the same vein, the students have enhanced their analysis skills through inquiry-based learning. In inquiry-based writing instruction, the students identified the intended and actual inferential relationships among statements to express beliefs in their argumentative writing. The students examined ideas, detected, and analyzed arguments in their writing. They identified the similarities and differences between opposing ideas in developing their persuasive essays. The students drafted the relationship of sentences or/and paragraphs to each other and the main purpose of their argumentative essays. They also constructed convincing reasons to support or criticize a given argumentative idea, and reach on a strong conclusion. Thus, it shows that the students have enhanced their analysis skills which is one of the core critical thinking skills.

The results revealed that the students have developed their evaluation skills using inquiry-based instruction. In other words, in the teaching-learning process, the students have determined the credibility of their source of information while they gathered data for their writing topics. They assessed and compared the logical strengths and weaknesses of opposing arguments. They also judged whether the evidence at their hands did not contradict each other, and support their conclusion. Finally, they judged if their arguments in their argumentative essays were relevant and applicable in an existing real-life situation. It implies that the students have developed their evaluation skills, one of the core critical thinking skills through inquiry-based learning.

The students have also enhanced their inference skills in writing their argumentative essays through inquiry. This means that the students have identified pertinent thoughts needed to draw reasonable conclusions in their essays. In doing so, they formed conjectures and hypotheses; considered the relevant information, and educed consequences flowing their data. They questioned their evidence, conjectured alternatives, and drawn conclusions when they developed argumentative essays through inquiry-based learning. They constructed meaning from their readings and formulated synthesis of related ideas into a coherent perspective to produce sound argumentative essays.

Beyond interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, the students explained what they think, and how they arrived at their judgments in developing their essays. In other terms, the students have developed their explanation skills due to the inquiry-based writing instruction. They have presented their argumentative essays in a cogent and coherent way. They stated and justified reasons in terms of their evidential and contextual considerations upon which their results were based. They presented their reasons in the form of persuasive arguments in their essays. They also reflected on the methods, procedures, and techniques (in the classroom) they used in writing their argumentative essays.

Finally, the data gained from the student-reflective journal and focus group discussion revealed that the students have developed their self-regulation skills, which is one of the core critical thinking skills, through using inquiry-based learning. Accordingly, the students confirmed that they self-consciously monitored or corrected their judgments in analyzing and evaluating contradictory ideas in producing their argumentative essays. They questioned themselves to examine, correct, and confirm their reasons for producing essays. They double-checked their reasons by recalculating their evidence. The students reconsidered their interpretations and judgments in the view of further analysis. They revised their answers in view of the errors they discovered in their argumentative essay writing. Even, they have changed some of their concluding ideas in view of the realization that they had misjudged the importance of certain factors when coming to their earlier decisions. Altogether, using inquiry-based argumentative writing instruction enhanced EFL students’ interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation skills which are the core critical thinking skills.

In sum, though the findings of this study are in line with previous studies, most of them have examined the enhancement of critical thinking skills through using inquiry-based learning in writing classes in general rather than showing the effects of the method in argumentative essay writing classes in particular. Thus, the present study exclusively revealed the effects of using inquiry-based argumentative essay writing instruction on EFL students’ critical thinking skills. In other terms, it contributed to the existing literature in disclosing the effects of using inquiry-based argumentative writing instruction on EFL students’ critical thinking skills. Besides, the present study can contribute to the field of English as a foreign language education by showing the effects of using inquiry-based learning on students’ critical thinking skills in the local context where this study has been conducted. This is because, in the study area, inquiry-based learning seems to have been a missing feature of English as a foreign language learning.

Conclusion and implication

The findings of the study revealed that the use of inquiry-based learning in foreign language learning classroom empowers students’ critical thinking skills. Inquiry-based learning has positive impacts on students’ critical thinking skills which include interpretation, analysis, inference, evaluation, explanation, and self-regulation. In other terms, when the students have used inquiry-based argumentative essay writing instruction in their academic writing classes, they have comprehended and expressed their essay writing queries (interpretation); identified and examined arguments, reasons and claims (analysis); identified elements of claims, estimated alternatives, and drawn reasonable conclusions in writing their argumentative essays (inference). In the same manner, they also assessed the credibility of claims and quality of arguments made in their conclusions (evaluation); stated results, justified procedures, and presented arguments (explanation), and consciously monitored and corrected their writing activity (self-regulation) in producing argumentative essays. Thus, the students have developed their critical thinking skills by using inquiry-based argumentative writing instruction.

In inquiry-based writing instruction, the students discover writing topics; explore information on their topics; explain their discoveries, and elaborate their thinking through transforming their understanding into their real life situations. Thus, when the students came up through this distinct process in manipulating such tasks, their critical thinking skills enhance because this process develops the students’ abilities to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate various thoughts. Using inquiry-based learning in argumentative writing class enhance the students’ argumentative essay writing performance since the method enables them to discover their own writing topics, generate ideas, gather and evaluate information, write up drafts with evidences, discuss with colleagues and subject area experts, and produce sound argumentative essays.

When the students use inquiry-based learning in argumentative essay writing lessons, they generate and organize ideas through investigation and discussion, and later produce sound written texts. The students develop reasoning skills, collaborative working, and make connections to real life experiences when they learn through inquiry-based learning. The critical thinking skills that the EFL students develop through the inquiry-based writing instruction are relevant to their future working environment to write convincing texts and critically evaluate what other individuals have written. The abilities to interpret, analyze, evaluate, infer, explain, and self-regulate help the university students to be lifelong learners, and to be competitive enough in their future working life.

Therefore, inquiry-based writing instruction is suggested as a means to improve EFL students’ critical thinking skills because the method incorporates activity oriented learning, logical arguments, and collaboration. This is to imply the need to promote inquiry-based learning which is based on a discovery approach that mostly involve students in seeking, collecting, analyzing, synthesizing and evaluating information based on students’ interest. It is because using inquiry-based learning in writing classes promotes students’ academic performance and makes students active, problem solver, autonomous, and lifelong learners. Accordingly, EFL teachers should use inquiry-based learning in their language classrooms in order to develop students’ critical thinking skills. Similarly, teaching material developers need to consider the inquiry-based learning principles in developing language teaching materials so that students’ improve their critical thinking skills. Students should also use the inquiry-based learning techniques to produce effective argumentative texts, to be critical thinkers, and become lifelong learners.

Finally, the number of participants and the time given to the intervention were relatively small. However, it does not mean that the findings of the study are not representative since the selected participants have similarities with other students. In addition, it does not mean that the intervention is completely inadequate since the students practiced the whole inquiry process repeatedly. It is to mean that the findings of the study would have been more representatives and convincing if a greater number of participants had been included, and more time to the intervention had been used in the study. As a result, such future exploration would have contributed to the current study and is certainly an area ripe for future research. Furthermore, future studies should be also conducted on the effects of using inquiry-based learning on students’ speaking, reading, and listening skills to widen the use of inquiry-based learning in EFL instruction.

Availability of data and materials

Please contact corresponding author for data requests.

Abbreviations

English as a Foreign Language

Analysis of Variance

Statistical Package for Social Sciences

Abdullah, T. (2014). Developing critical thinking skills through writing in an internet-based environment. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4 (1), 169–78.

Adege, A. (2016). The effects of explicit instruction in critical thinking on student achievement in writing academic papers, general critical thinking ability, and critical thinking dispositions. [doctoral dissertation]. Addis Ababa University.

Ahmad, J. S., Sitti, H. R., Abdul, R. H., Mohammad, N. A. G., & Sanitah, M. Y. (2014). Levels of inquiry-based learning on writing skill in English language among high school students: A study in Makassar Indonesia. Journal of Language and Literature., 5 (2), 62–66.

Article   Google Scholar  

Alagozlu, N. (2007). Critical thinking and voice in EFL writing. Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 9 (3), 118–136.

Google Scholar  

Ash, Doris & Kluger-Bell, Barry (2012). Identifying inquiry in the k-5 classroom. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2000/nsf99148/ch_10.html .

Buranapatana, M. (2006). Enhancing critical thinking of undergraduate Thai students through dialogic inquiry. Doctoral dissertation. Australia: Canberra University.

Byker, C., Harden, G., Heafner, B., & Holzberg. (2017). Hoping to teach someday? Inquire within: examining inquiry-based learning with first-semester undergrads. Journal of Inquiry & Action in Education., 8 (2), 54–80.

Daniel, D. (2004). Observations and reflections of the higher education teachers on the quality of teaching and learning in higher education in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian Journal of Education., 1 (1), 63–81.

Dawit, M. & Yalew, E. (2008). The role of teachers in the teaching learning process and the development of education: past, present, and future. A paper presented in an educational seminar held in August 2008. (Amharic version).

Escalante, P.A. (2013). Inquiry-Based Learning in an English as a Foreign Language Class: A Proposal. Journal of Modern Language, 19 : 479–485.

Facione, P., & Facione, N. (1994). Holistic critical thinking scoring rubric . Santa Clara: Santa Clara University.

Facione, P. A. (2011). Critical thinking: what it is and why it counts . Millbrae, CA: Measured Reasons and The California Academic Press.

Facione, P.A. (2015). Critical thinking: what it is and why it counts , from APA report: Expert consensus statement on critical thinking.

Ferris, D., & Hedgcock, J. (2013). Teaching L2 composition: purpose, process, and practice . Mahwah, NJ, New York, NY: Routledge: McGraw-Hill.

Book   Google Scholar  

Ghaemi, F., & Mirsaeed, S. (2017). The impact of inquiry-based learning approach on critical thinking skill of EFL students. EFL Journal, 2 (2), 89–102.

Goodwin, B. (2014). Teach critical thinking to teach writing. Educational Leadership, 71 (7), 78–80.

Graham, S., MacArthur, C. A., & Fitzgerald, J. (2013). Best practices in writing instruction . New York: Guilford Press.

Hilsdon, J. (2010). Critical thinking. Learning development with Plymouth University . Retrieved from: http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/learn

Iakovos, T. (2011). Critical and creative thinking in the English language classroom. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1 (8), 82–86.

Ismail, N., Alias, S., & Albakri, I. (2006). Inquiry-Based Learning: A New Approach to Classroom Learning. English Language Journal, 2 (1)13–24.

Klimova, B. F. (2013). Developing thinking skills in the course of academic writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93 , 508–511.

Lee, Y. H. (2014). Inquiry-based teaching in second and foreign language pedagogy. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5 (6), 1236–1244 Academy Publisher Manufactured in Finland.

Lessner, S., & Craig, C. (2010). Invention as inquiry-based learning in first year writing. Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, 1 (1), 126–45.

McLean, C. (2005). Evaluating critical thinking skills: two conceptualizations. The Journal of Distance Education., 20 (2), 1–20.

Melles, G. (2009). Teaching and evaluation of critical appraisal skills to postgraduate ESL engineering students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46 (2), 161–170.

Naryanti (2017). Improving students’ english writing skill through inquiry-based learning mthod. (Master’s Thesis). State Institute for Islamic Studies.

Paul & Elder (2007). A guide for educators to critical thinking competency standards: standards, principles, performance indicators, and outcomes with a critical thinking master rubric. The Foundation for Critical Thinking. http://www.criticalthinking.org/ .

Qing, L., & Jin, S. (2007). An analysis of language teaching approaches and methods: effectiveness and weakness. US-China Education Review., 4 (1), 69–71.

Rejeki, S. (2017). Inquiry-based language learning (IBLL): theoretical and practical views in English classroom. English Franca., 1 (2), 135–148.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wette, R. (2010). Evaluating student learning in a university-level EAP unit on writing using sources. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19 (3), 158–177.

Yen, P.H. (2014). The Impact of PPP and TBLT on Vietnamese Students’ Writing Performance and Self-Regulation. [Doctoral thesis]. KU Leuven University.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not Applicable.

The study did not receive any funding.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Woldia University, Woldia, Ethiopia

Bantalem Derseh Wale

Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Humanities, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia

Kassie Shifere Bishaw

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Both authors of the research had their own contributions in the process of conception and design, acquisition of data, and analysis and interpretation of data. Both have been involved in revising the manuscript critically. Both take public responsibility for the whole content. Both are equally accountable for all aspects of the work. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bantalem Derseh Wale .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Wale, B.D., Bishaw, K.S. Effects of using inquiry-based learning on EFL students’ critical thinking skills. Asian. J. Second. Foreign. Lang. Educ. 5 , 9 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-020-00090-2

Download citation

Received : 30 January 2020

Accepted : 24 June 2020

Published : 30 June 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-020-00090-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Inquiry-based learning
• Critical thinking skills
• Argumentative essay
• Writing instruction
• Time series design
• English as a foreign language

Part 3: Instructional Methods/Learning Activities

Inquiry-based learning.

Inquiry-based learning  (also  enquiry-based learning  in  British English ) [1]  starts by posing questions, problems or scenarios—rather than simply presenting established facts or portraying a smooth path to knowledge. The process is often assisted by a  facilitator . Inquirers will identify and research issues and questions to develop their knowledge or solutions. Inquiry-based learning is closely related to  problem-based learning , and is generally used in small scale investigations and projects, as well as  research . [2]  Inquiry-based instruction allows students to develop and practice critical thinking skills. [3]

Inquiry-based learning is primarily a  pedagogical  method, developed during the  discovery learning  movement of the 1960s as a response to traditional forms of instruction – where people were required to memorize information from instructional materials. [4]  The philosophy of inquiry based learning finds its antecedents in  constructivist learning  theories, such as the work of  Piaget ,  Dewey ,  Vygotsky , and  Freire  among others, [5] [6] [7]  and can be considered a constructivist philosophy. Generating information and making meaning of it based on personal or societal experience is referred to as constructivism. [8]  Dewey’s experiential learning pedagogy (that is, learning through experiences) comprises the learner actively participating in personal or authentic experiences to make meaning from it. [9] [10]  Inquiry can be conducted through experiential learning because inquiry values the same concepts, which include engaging with the content/material in questioning, as well as investigating and collaborating to make meaning. Vygotsky approached constructivism as learning from an experience that is influenced by society and the facilitator. The meaning constructed from an experience can be concluded as an individual or within a group. [8] [9]

In the 1960s Joseph Schwab called for inquiry to be divided into four distinct levels. [11]  This was later formalized by Marshall Herron in 1971, who developed the Herron Scale to evaluate the amount of inquiry within a particular lab exercise. [12]  Since then, there have been a number of revisions proposed and inquiry can take various forms. There is a spectrum of inquiry-based teaching methods available. [13]

Characteristics

Specific learning processes that students engage in during inquiry-learning include: [14]

• Creating questions of their own
• Obtaining supporting evidence to answer the question(s)
• Explaining the evidence collected
• Connecting the explanation to the knowledge obtained from the investigative process
• Creating an argument and justification for the explanation

Inquiry learning involves developing questions, making observations, doing research to find out what information is already recorded, developing methods for experiments, developing instruments for data collection, collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data, outlining possible explanations and creating predictions for future study. [15]

There are many different explanations for inquiry teaching and learning and the various levels of inquiry that can exist within those contexts. The article titled  The Many Levels of Inquiry  by Heather Banchi and Randy Bell (2008) [15]  clearly outlines four levels of inquiry.

Level 1 : Confirmation Inquiry The teacher has taught a particular science theme or topic. The teacher then develops questions and a procedure that guides students through an activity where the results are already known. This method is great to reinforce concepts taught and to introduce students into learning to follow procedures, collect and record data correctly and to confirm and deepen understandings.

Level 2 : Structured Inquiry The teacher provides the initial question and an outline of the procedure. Students are to formulate explanations of their findings through evaluating and analyzing the data that they collect.

Level 3 : Guided Inquiry The teacher provides only the research question for the students. The students are responsible for designing and following their own procedures to test that question and then communicate their results and findings.

Level 4 : Open/True Inquiry Students formulate their own research question(s), design and follow through with a developed procedure, and communicate their findings and results. This type of inquiry is often seen in science fair contexts where students drive their own investigative questions.

Banchi and Bell (2008) explain that teachers should begin their inquiry instruction at the lower levels and work their way to open inquiry in order to effectively develop students’ inquiry skills. Open inquiry activities are only successful if students are motivated by intrinsic interests and if they are equipped with the skills to conduct their own research study. [16]

Open/true inquiry learning

An important aspect of inquiry-based learning (and science) is the use of open learning, as evidence suggests that only utilizing lower level inquiry is not enough to develop critical and scientific thinking to the full potential. [17] [18] [19]  Open learning has no prescribed target or result that people have to achieve. There is an emphasis on the individual manipulating information and creating meaning from a set of given materials or circumstances. [20]  In many conventional and structured learning environments, people are told what the outcome is expected to be, and then they are simply expected to ‘confirm’ or show evidence that this is the case.

Open learning has many benefits. [19]  It means students do not simply perform experiments in a routine like fashion, but actually think about the results they collect and what they mean. With traditional non-open lessons there is a tendency for students to say that the experiment ‘went wrong’ when they collect results contrary to what they are told to expect. In open learning there are no wrong results, and students have to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the results they collect themselves and decide their value.

Open learning has been developed by a number of science educators including the American  John Dewey  and the German  Martin Wagenschein . [ citation needed ] 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 ]  Wagenschien used this example to show the importance of understanding over knowledge. [21]

Inquiry-based science education

History of science education.

Inquiry learning has been used as a teaching and learning tool for thousands of years, however, the use of inquiry within public education has a much briefer history. [22] Ancient Greek and Roman educational philosophies focused much more on the art of agricultural and domestic skills for the middle class and oratory for the wealthy upper class. It was not until the Enlightenment, or the Age of Reason, during the late 17th and 18th century that the subject of Science was considered a respectable academic body of knowledge. [23]  Up until the 1900s the study of science within education had a primary focus on memorizing and organizing facts. Unfortunately, there is still evidence that some students are still receiving this type of science instruction today.

John Dewey, a well-known philosopher of education at the beginning of the 20th century, was the first to criticize the fact that science education was not taught in a way to develop young scientific thinkers. Dewey proposed that science should be taught as a process and way of thinking – not as a subject with facts to be memorized. [22] While Dewey was the first to draw attention to this issue, much of the reform within science education followed the lifelong work and efforts of Joseph Schwab. Joseph Schwab was an educator who proposed that science did not need to be a process for identifying stable truths about the world that we live in, but rather science could be a flexible and multi-directional inquiry driven process of thinking and learning. Schwab believed that science in the classroom should more closely reflect the work of practicing scientists. Schwab developed three levels of open inquiry that align with the breakdown of inquiry processes that we see today. [24]

• Students are provided with questions, methods and materials and are challenged to discover relationships between variables
• Students are provided with a question, however, the method for research is up to the students to develop
• Phenomena are proposed but students must develop their own questions and method for research to discover relationships among variables

Today, we know that students at all levels of education can successfully experience and develop deeper level thinking skills through scientific inquiry. [25]  The graduated levels of scientific inquiry outlined by Schwab demonstrate that students need to develop thinking skills and strategies prior to being exposed to higher levels of inquiry. [24]  Effectively, these skills need to be scaffold ed by the teacher or instructor until students are able to develop questions, methods, and conclusions on their own. [26]  A catalyst for reform within North American science education was the 1957 launch of Sputnik, the Soviet Union satellite. This historical scientific breakthrough caused a great deal of concern around the science and technology education the American students were receiving. In 1958 the U.S. congress developed and passed the National Defense Education Act in order to provide math and science teachers with adequate teaching materials. [15]

America’s National Science Education Standards (NSES) (1996) [25]  outlines six important aspects pivotal to inquiry learning in science education.

• Students should be able to recognize that science is more than memorizing and knowing facts.
• Students should have the opportunity to develop new knowledge that builds on their prior knowledge and scientific ideas.
• Students will develop new knowledge by restructuring their previous understandings of scientific concepts and adding new information learned.
• Learning is influenced by students’ social environment whereby they have an opportunity to learn from each other
• Students will take control of their learning.
• The extent to which students are able to learn with deep understanding will influence how transferable their new knowledge is to real life contexts.

In other disciplines/programs

Science naturally lends itself to investigation and collection of data, but it is applicable in other subject areas where people are developing critical thinking and investigation skills. In  history , for example, Robert Bain in his article in  How Students Learn , describes how to “problematize” history. [27]  Bain’s idea is to first organize a learning curriculum around central concepts. Next, people studying the curriculum are given a question and primary sources such as eye witness historical accounts, and the task for inquiry is to create an interpretation of history that will answer the central question. It is held that through the inquiry people will develop skills and factual knowledge that supports their answers to a question. They will form an hypothesis, collect and consider information and revisit their hypothesis as they evaluate their data.

Ontario’s kindergarten program

After Charles Pascal’s report in 2009, Ontario’s Ministry of Education decided to implement a full day kindergarten program that focuses on inquiry and play-based learning, called The Early Learning Kindergarten Program. [28]  As of September 2014, all primary schools in Ontario started the program. The  curriculum document outlines the philosophy, definitions, process and core learning concepts for the program. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model, Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development, Piaget’s child development theory and Dewey’s experiential learning are the heart of the program’s design. As research shows, children learn best through play, whether it is independently or in a group. Three forms of play are noted in the curriculum document, Pretend or “pretense” play, Socio-dramatic play and Constructive play. Through play and authentic experiences, children interact with their environment (people and/or objects) and question things; thus leading to inquiry learning. A chart on page 15 clearly outlines the process of inquiry for young children, including initial engagement, exploration, investigation, and communication.  [29]  The new program supports holistic approach to learning. For further details, please see the  curriculum document .

Since the program is extremely new, there is limited research on its success and areas of improvement. One government research report was released with the initial groups of children in the new kindergarten program. The Final Report: Evaluation of the Implementation of the Ontario Full-Day Early-Learning Kindergarten Program from Vanderlee, Youmans, Peters, and Eastabrook (2012) conclude with primary research that high-need children improved more compared to children who did not attend Ontario’s new kindergarten program. [30]  As with inquiry-based learning in all divisions and subject areas, longitudinal research is needed to examine the full extent of this teaching/learning method.

Misconceptions about inquiry

There are several common misconceptions regarding inquiry-based science, the first being that inquiry science is simply instruction that teaches students to follow the scientific method. Many teachers had the opportunity to work within the constraints of the scientific method as students themselves and figure inquiry learning must be the same. Inquiry science is not just about solving problems in six simple steps but much more broadly focused on the intellectual problem-solving skills developed throughout a scientific process. [25]  Additionally, not every hands-on lesson can be considered inquiry.

Some educators believe that there is only one true method of inquiry, which would be described as the level four: Open Inquiry. While open inquiry may be the most authentic form of inquiry, there are many skills and a level of conceptual understanding that the students must have developed before they can be successful at this high level of inquiry. [26]  While inquiry-based science is considered to be a teaching strategy that fosters higher order thinking in students, it should be one of several methods used. A multifaceted approach to science keeps students engaged and learning.

Not every student is going to learn the same amount from an inquiry lesson; students must be invested in the topic of study to authentically reach the set learning goals. Teachers must be prepared to ask students questions to probe their thinking processes in order to assess accurately. Inquiry-science requires a lot of time, effort, and expertise, however, the benefits outweigh the cost when true authentic learning can take place [ citation needed ] .

Neuroscience complexity

The literature states that inquiry requires multiple cognitive processes and variables, such as causality and co-occurrence that enrich with age and experience. [31] [32] Kuhn, et al. (2000) used explicit training workshops to teach children in grades six to eight in the United States how to inquire through a quantitative study. By completing an inquiry-based task at the end of the study, the participants demonstrated enhanced mental models by applying different inquiry strategies. [31]  In a similar study, Kuhan and Pease (2008) completed a longitudinal quantitative study following a set of American children from grades four to six to investigate the effectiveness of scaffolding strategies for inquiry. Results demonstrated that children benefitted from the scaffolding because they outperformed the grade seven control group on an inquiry task. [32]  Understanding the neuroscience of inquiry learning the scaffolding process related to it should be reinforced for Ontario’s primary teachers as part of their training.

Notes for educators

Inquiry-based learning is fundamental for the development of higher order thinking skills. According to Bloom’s Taxonomy, the ability to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information or new understandings indicates a high level of thinking. [33]  Teachers should be encouraging divergent thinking and allowing students the freedom to ask their own questions and to learn the effective strategies for discovering the answers. The higher order thinking skills that students have the opportunity to develop during inquiry activities will assist in the critical thinking skills that they will be able to transfer to other subjects.

As shown in the section above on the neuroscience of inquiry learning, it is significant to scaffold students to teach them how to inquire and inquire through the four levels. It cannot be assumed that they know how to inquire without foundational skills. Scaffolding the students at a younger age will result in enriched inquiring learning later. [31] [32]

Inquiry-based learning can be done in multiple formats, including:

• Case studies
• Investigations
• Individual and group projects
• Research projects

Remember to keep in mind… [34]

• Don’t wait for the perfect question
• Place ideas at the centre
• Work towards common goal of understanding
• Don’t let go of the class
• Remain faithful to the students’ line of inquiry
• Teach directly on a need-to-know basis

Necessity for teacher training

There is a necessity for professional collaboration when executing a new inquiry program (Chu, 2009; Twigg, 2010). The teacher training and process of using inquiry learning should be a joint mission to ensure the maximal amount of resources are used and that the teachers are producing the best learning scenarios. The scholarly literature supports this notion. Twigg’s (2010) education professionals who participated in her experiment emphasized year round professional development sessions, such as workshops, weekly meetings and observations, to ensure inquiry is being implemented in the class correctly. [10]  Another example is Chu’s (2009) study, where the participants appreciated the professional collaboration of educators, information technicians and librarians to provide more resources and expertise for preparing the structure and resources for the inquiry project. [35]  To establish a professional collaboration and researched training methods, administration support is required for funding.

Criticism and Research

Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) [36]  review of literature found that although constructivists often cite each other’s work, empirical evidence is not often cited. Nonetheless the constructivist movement gained great momentum in the 1990s, because many educators began to write about this philosophy of learning.

Hmelo-Silver, Duncan, & Chinn cite several studies supporting the success of the constructivist  problem-based  and inquiry learning methods. For example, they describe a project called GenScope, an inquiry-based science software application. Students using the GenScope software showed significant gains over the control groups, with the largest gains shown in students from basic courses. [37]

In contrast, Hmelo-Silver et al. also cite a large study by Geier on the effectiveness of inquiry-based science for middle school students, as demonstrated by their performance on high-stakes standardized tests. The improvement was 14% for the first cohort of students and 13% for the second cohort. This study also found that inquiry-based teaching methods greatly reduced the achievement gap for African-American students. [37]

Based on their 2005 research, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute concluded that while inquiry-based learning is fine to some degree, it has been carried to excess. [38]

Richard E. Mayer from the University of California, Santa Barbara, wrote in 2004 that there was sufficient research evidence to make any reasonable person skeptical about the benefits of discovery learning—practiced under the guise of cognitive constructivism or social constructivism—as a preferred instructional method. He reviewed research on discovery of problem-solving rules culminating in the 1960s, discovery of conservation strategies culminating in the 1970s, and discovery of LOGO programming strategies culminating in the 1980s. In each case, guided discovery was more effective than pure discovery in helping students learn and transfer. [39]

It should be cautioned that inquiry-based learning takes a lot of planning before implementation. It is not something that can be put into place in the classroom quickly. Measurements must be put in place for how students knowledge and performance will be measured and how standards will be incorporated. The teacher’s responsibility during inquiry exercises is to support and facilitate student learning (Bell et al., 769–770). A common mistake teachers make is lacking the vision to see where students’ weaknesses lie. According to Bain, teachers cannot assume that students will hold the same assumptions and thinking processes as a professional within that discipline (p. 201).

While some see inquiry-based teaching as increasingly mainstream, it can be perceived as in conflict with  standardized testing  common in  standards-based assessment  systems which emphasise the measurement of student knowledge, and meeting of pre-defined criteria, for example the shift towards “fact” in changes to the National Assessment of Educational Progress as a result of the American  No Child Left Behind  program. [ citation needed ]

Programs such as the International Baccalaureate (IB) Primary Years Program can be criticized for their claims to be an inquiry based learning program. [ citation needed ] While there are different types of inquiry (as stated above) the rigid structure of this style of inquiry based learning program almost completely rules out any real inquiry based learning in the lower grades. Each “unit of inquiry” is given to the students, structured to guide them and does not allow students to choose the path or topic of their inquiry. Each unit is carefully planned to connect to the topics the students are required to be learning in school and does not leave room for open inquiry in topics that the students pick. Some may feel that until the inquiry learning process is open inquiry then it is not true inquiry based learning at all. Instead of opportunities to learn through open and student-led inquiry, the IB program is viewed by some to simply be an extra set of learning requirements for the students to complete. [ citation needed ]

Additional scholarly research literature

Chu (2009) used a mixed method design to examine the outcome of an inquiry project completed by students in Hong Kong with the assistance of multiple educators. Chu’s (2009) results show that the children were more motivated and academically successful compared to the control group. [40]

Cindy Hmelo-Silver reviewed a number of reports on a variety studies into problem based learning. [41]

Edelson, Gordin and Pea describe five significant challenges to implementing inquiry-based learning and present strategies for addressing them through the design of technology and curriculum. They present a design history covering four generations of software and curriculum to show how these challenges arise in classrooms and how the design strategies respond to them.  [42]

• Action learning
• Jerome Bruner
• Design-based learning
• Discovery learning
• McMaster Integrated Science
• Networked learning
• Jean Piaget
• Problem-based learning
• Progressive inquiry
• Project-based learning
• Science education
• Scientific literacy
• Three-part lesson

References and further reading

• Jump up  ^   The UK dictionaries Collins and Longman list the spelling “inquiry” first, and Oxford simply calls it another spelling, without labeling it as US English.
• Jump up  ^   What is Inquiry Based Learning (EBL)?  Centre for Excellence in Enquiry-Based Learning. University of Manchester. Retrieved October 2012
• Jump up  ^   Dostál, J. (2015).  Inquiry-based instruction : Concept, essence, importance and contribution.  Olomouc: Palacký University,  ISBN 978-80-244-4507-6 , doi 10.5507/pdf.15.24445076
• Jump up  ^   Bruner, J. S. (1961). “The act of discovery”. Harvard Educational Review 31 (1): 21–32.
• Jump up  ^   Dewey, J (1997) How We Think, New York: Dover Publications.
• Jump up  ^   Freire, P. (1984) Pedagogy of the Oppressed, New York: Continuum Publishing Company.
• Jump up  ^   Vygotsky, L.S. (1962) Thought and Language, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   BACHTOLD, MANUEL (2013).  “WHAT DO STUDENTS “CONSTRUCT” ACCORDING TO CONSTRUCTIVISM IN SCIENCE EDUCATION?” .  RESEARCH IN SCIENCE EDUCATION   43 : 2477–96.  DOI : 10.1007/S11165-013-93697 . RETRIEVED  11 OCTOBER  2014 .
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   ROTH, WOLFF-MICHAEL; JORNET, ALFREDO (2013). “TOWARD A THEORY OF EXPERIENCE”.  SCIENCE EDUCATION   98  (1): 106–26.  DOI : 10.1002/SCE.21085 .
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   TWIGG, VANI VEIKOSO (2010). “TEACHERS’ PRACTICES, VALUES AND BELIEFS FOR SUCCESSFUL INQUIRY-BASED TEACHING IN THE INTERNATIONAL BACCALAUREATE PRIMARY YEARS PROGRAMME”.  JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION   9  (1): 40–65.  DOI : 10.1177/1475240909356947 .
• Jump up  ^   Schwab, J. (1960)  Inquiry, the Science Teacher, and the Educator . The School Review © 1960 The University of Chicago Press
• Jump up  ^   Herron, M.D. (1971). The nature of scientific enquiry. The school review, 79(2), 171–212.
• Jump up  ^   Wilhelm, J. G., & Wilhelm, P. J. (2010). Inquiring minds learn to read, write, and think: Reaching all learners through inquiry. Middle School Journal, May 2010, 39–46.
• Jump up  ^   BELL, T.; URHAHNE, D.; SCHANZE, S.; PLOETZNER, R. (2010). “COLLABORATIVE INQUIRY LEARNING: MODELS, TOOLS, AND CHALLENGES”.  INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION   3  (1): 349–377.
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   c   National Institute for Health. (2005). Doing Science: The Process of Science Inquiry.  http://science.education.nih.gov/supplements/nih6/inquiry/guide/info_process-a.htm
• Jump up  ^   Yoon, H., Joung, Y. J., Kim, M. (2012). The challenges of science inquiry teaching for pre-service teachers in elementary classrooms: Difficulties on and under the scene. Research in Science & Technological Education, 42(3), 589–608.
• Jump up  ^   Berg C A R, Bergendahl V C B, Lundberg B K S and Tibell L A E (2003) Benefiting from an open-ended experiment? A comparison of attitudes to, and outcomes of, an expository versus an open-inquiry version to the same experiment. International Journal of Science Education 25, 351-372
• Jump up  ^   Yen C F and Hunang S C (2001) Authentic learning about tree frogs by preservice biology teachers in an open-inquiry research settings. Proc. Natl. Sci. Counc. ROC(D) 11, 1–10.
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   Zion, M., Sadeh, I. (2007). Curiosity and open inquiry learning. Journal of Biological Education, 41(4), 162–168.
• Jump up  ^   Hannafin, M., Land, S., Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundation, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models. A new paradigm of instructional theory Volume II (pp. 115–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
• Jump up  ^   http://ed.fnal.gov/trc_new/sciencelines_online/fall97/activity_inserts.html
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   National Research Council. 2000. Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• Jump up  ^   Murphy, M. (2006). The History and Philosophy of Education: Voices of Educational Pioneers Upper Saddle River, NJ.: Pearson Education, Inc.  ISBN 0130955507
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   Schwab, J. 1966. The Teaching of Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   c   National Science Education Standards. (1996). National Academy Press. Washington, DC.
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   Ban chi, H., & Bell, R. (2008). The Many Levels of Inquiry. Science and Children, 46(2), 26–29.
• Jump up  ^   Bain, R.B., Donovan, M.S. & Bransford, J.D. (Eds). (2005). “They thought the world was flat?”: Applying the principles of How People Learn in teaching high school history. How Students Learn. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.  http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309074339
• Jump up  ^   PASCAL, CHARLES.  “WITH OUR BEST FUTURE IN MIND”  (PDF) . RETRIEVED  11 OCTOBER  2014 .
• Jump up  ^   MINISTRY OF EDUCATION.  “EARLY LEARNING KINDERGARTEN PROGRAM”  (PDF) . RETRIEVED  11 OCTOBER  2014 .
• Jump up  ^   VANDERLEE, MARY-LOUISE; YOUMANS, S; PETERS, R; EASTABROOK, J.  “FINAL REPORT: EVALUATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ONTARIO FULL-DAY EARLY-LEARNING KINDERGARTEN PROGRAM”  (PDF).
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   c   KUHN, D; BLACK, J; KESELMAN, A; KAPLAN, D (2000). “THE DEVELOPMENT OF COGNITIVE SKILLS TO SUPPORT INQUIRY LEARNING”.  COGNITION AND INSTRUCTION   18  (4): 495–523.  DOI : 10.1207/S1532690XCI1804_3 .
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   c   KUHN, D; PEASE, M (2008). “WHAT NEEDS TO DEVELOP IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INQUIRY SKILLS?”.  COGNITION AND INSTRUCTION   26 : 512–59.  DOI : 10.1080/07370000802391745 .
• Jump up  ^   Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.
• Jump up  ^   “INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING”  (PDF). ONTARIO MINISTRY OF EDUCATION.
• Jump up  ^   CHU, K.W.S (2009). “INQUIRY PROJECT-BASED LEARNING WITH A PARTNERSHIP OF THREE TYPES OF TEACHERS AND THE SCHOOL LIBRARIAN.”.  JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   60  (8): 1671–86.  DOI : 10.1002/ASI.21084 .
• Jump up  ^   Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E. (2006)  Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching . Educational Psychologist 41 (2) 75–86
• ^  Jump up to:  a   b   HMELO-SILVER; DUNCAN; CHINN (2007).  “SCAFFOLDING AND ACHIEVEMENT IN PROBLEM-BASED AND INQUIRY LEARNING: A RESPONSE TO KIRSCHNER, SWELLER, AND CLARK (2006)” (PDF).  EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST   42  (2): 99–107.  DOI : 10.1080/00461520701263368 .
• Jump up  ^   Walker, M. (2015)  [1] .
• Jump up  ^   MAYER, R (2004).  “SHOULD THERE BE A THREE-STRIKES RULE AGAINST PURE DISCOVERY LEARNING? THE CASE FOR GUIDED METHODS OF INSTRUCTION”  (PDF).  AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST   59  (1): 14–19.  DOI : 10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14 .
• Jump up  ^   Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004)  Problem Based Learning: What and how do students learn .  Educational Psychology Review , Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2004
• Jump up  ^   Edelson, D., Gordin, D., Pea, R. (1999)  Addressing the Challenges of Inquiry-Based Learning Through Technology and Curriculum Design  . Edelson, Daniel, Douglas Gordin, and Roy Pea. Journal of the Learning Sciences 8.3 (1999): 391–450.

Primed To Learn

Embark on Your Learning Journey

Inquiry-Based Learning: 11 Benefits of Fostering Curiosity and Critical Thinking

Inquiry-based learning is a dynamic and immersive educational approach that is reshaping classrooms worldwide. This pedagogical strategy turns the traditional model of instruction on its head by encouraging students to lead their own learning journey, fostering curiosity, exploration, and critical thinking skills. This blog post will delve into the principles and benefits of inquiry-based learning, providing valuable insights for educators seeking to invigorate their teaching methods and inspire their students.

Nurturing curiosity, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills is crucial in fostering Inquiry-Based Learning. This pedagogical approach encourages students to question, explore, and make sense of the world around them. By doing so, it instills a lifelong love for learning, cultivates intellectual curiosity, and empowers learners to seek knowledge independently. 

Critical thinking enables students to analyze information objectively and make reasoned judgments, fostering intellectual independence. Equally essential are problem-solving skills, which equip learners with the ability to devise effective solutions to challenges, promoting resilience and adaptability. Hence, nurturing these skills not only enriches the learning experience but also prepares students for a complex, rapidly-changing world.

Benefits of Inquiry-Based Learning

Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) offers a wide range of benefits that contribute to a more effective and engaging educational experience for students. These benefits go beyond rote memorization and standardized testing, focusing on fostering skills and attitudes that are crucial for success in the modern world. Here are some of the key benefits of IBL:

1. Fostering Curiosity and Engagement

Inquiry-based learning taps into students’ natural curiosity by presenting them with intriguing questions and real-world problems to solve. This approach ignites their interest, driving them to explore topics in-depth and stay engaged throughout the learning process.

2. Developing Critical Thinking Skills

Inquiry-based learning encourages students to think critically and analytically. They must evaluate information, analyze evidence, consider multiple perspectives, and make informed decisions. These skills are essential for making sense of complex information and navigating the challenges of the 21st century.

3. Promoting Problem-Solving Abilities

By grappling with open-ended questions and real-world challenges, students develop strong problem-solving skills. They learn to approach problems systematically, apply creative thinking, and devise effective solutions – a valuable skill set for both academic and real-life scenarios.

4. Encouraging Active and Self-Directed Learning

Inquiry-based learning places students in the driver’s seat of their education. They actively seek out information, conduct research, and construct their understanding. This self-directed learning approach equips students with the ability to take ownership of their education beyond the classroom.

5. Building Communication and Collaboration Skills

Collaborative learning is integral to Inquiry-based learning. Students work together, exchange ideas, and engage in discussions to solve complex problems. This enhances their communication skills, teaches them how to collaborate effectively, and prepares them for teamwork in diverse settings.

6. Enhancing Information Literacy

In an era of vast information availability, IBL teaches students how to find reliable sources, critically evaluate information, and distinguish between credible and unreliable content. These skills are essential for making informed decisions in a data-rich world.

7. Cultivating Lifelong Learning Habits

Inquiry-based learning nurtures a love for learning that extends beyond formal education. Students develop the mindset and skills to seek out information, ask questions, and continue learning throughout their lives, adapting to new challenges and opportunities.

8. Empowering Creativity and Innovation

Inquiry-based learning encourages students to think outside the box, experiment with ideas, and generate innovative solutions. This creative approach helps students develop an entrepreneurial spirit and adapt to rapidly changing industries and technologies.

9. Increasing Retention and Deep Understanding

Inquiry-based learning promotes meaningful learning by connecting new information to existing knowledge and personal experiences. This approach enhances retention and fosters a deeper, more comprehensive understanding of concepts.

10. Preparation for Real-World Challenges

Inquiry-based learning simulates real-world problem-solving scenarios, better preparing students for the challenges they will face in their personal and professional lives. The skills developed through IBL are directly applicable to a wide range of situations.

11. Boosting Intrinsic Motivation

Engaging in self-directed exploration and problem-solving inherently boosts students’ intrinsic motivation to learn. The sense of accomplishment that comes from finding solutions to complex questions or issues serves as a powerful motivator.

Incorporating Inquiry-based learning into education nurtures well-rounded individuals equipped with the skills, attitudes, and habits necessary for success in a rapidly changing world. By fostering curiosity, critical thinking, and collaboration, IBL empowers students to become lifelong learners and active participants in their own education.

Understanding Inquiry-Based Learning

Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) is a dynamic and student-centered approach to education that encourages learners to seek answers to their questions through exploration and investigation. In this framework, education becomes less about memorizing facts, and more about constructing knowledge and understanding through the process of inquiry. In essence, IBL puts the student in the driver’s seat of their learning journey, stimulating curiosity, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills.

The role of questions in this learning process cannot be overstated. Questions serve as the catalysts that ignite the spark of curiosity in learners, inspiring them to embark on a quest for knowledge. These are not merely answers to be found, but challenges to be unraveled. They provide direction to the learning process, guiding learners as they navigate the vast seas of knowledge. Every answer found opens up new questions, keeping the cycle of inquiry alive, and establishing a lifelong love for learning.

Key Features of Inquiry-Based Learning

Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) is characterized by several key features that distinguish it from traditional teaching methods. These features emphasize active engagement, critical thinking, and student autonomy in the learning process. Let’s discuss these features in more detail:

1. Open-Ended Questions and Problems

In IBL, learning begins with thought-provoking questions or real-world problems that do not have a single correct answer. These questions encourage students to explore, research, and investigate various perspectives and solutions, fostering deeper understanding and curiosity.

2. Student Autonomy and Ownership of Learning

IBL places students at the center of their learning journey. They have the freedom to choose their topics, formulate their own questions, and design their research strategies. This autonomy cultivates a sense of responsibility for their education and enhances intrinsic motivation.

3. Collaborative Learning and Peer Interaction

Collaboration is a crucial component of IBL. Students are encouraged to work together in groups, share ideas, discuss findings, and provide feedback to one another. This collaborative environment mirrors real-world scenarios and promotes teamwork and effective communication skills.

4. Active Engagement and Exploration

IBL encourages active participation and hands-on experiences. Students engage in experiments, fieldwork, research, and projects that require them to apply theoretical concepts to practical situations. This active involvement deepens comprehension and helps retain knowledge.

5. Real-World Relevance

IBL connects classroom learning to real-life contexts. By addressing authentic problems or issues, students recognize the relevance of their studies in the broader world. This approach enhances motivation and helps students see the practical applications of what they are learning.

6. Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving

Critical thinking is at the heart of IBL. Students are challenged to analyze information critically, evaluate evidence, make informed judgments, and develop creative solutions to complex problems. This cultivates higher-order cognitive skills essential for lifelong learning.

7. Iterative Process of Inquiry

IBL is not a linear process; it involves iteration and refinement. Students continually refine their questions, hypotheses, and methodologies based on new information and insights gained during their investigation. This iterative approach mirrors the dynamic nature of real-world problem-solving.

8. Instructor as a Facilitator

In IBL, educators take on the role of facilitators rather than authoritative lecturers. They guide students’ inquiries, provide resources, and support the learning process, while allowing students to take the lead in their exploration.

9. Interdisciplinary Connections

IBL often encourages interdisciplinary learning, as students explore topics that cross traditional subject boundaries. This approach highlights the interconnectedness of knowledge and prepares students to address complex, multifaceted challenges.

10. Emphasis on Process and Reflection

The learning process itself is emphasized in IBL, not just the final outcomes. Students engage in reflection, self-assessment, and metacognition, helping them understand how they learn, what strategies are effective, and how to improve their learning skills over time.

Incorporating these key features of IBL into teaching practices can have a transformative impact on education. By fostering curiosity, critical thinking, collaboration, and independent learning, IBL equips students with the skills and mindset needed to thrive in an ever-evolving world.

Implementing Inquiry-Based Learning

Implementing Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) involves creating an environment that supports student-driven exploration, critical thinking, and active engagement. Here are some key strategies and methods for successfully implementing IBL in the classroom:

1. Design Thought-Provoking Questions

Start with open-ended questions that stimulate curiosity and prompt investigation. These questions should encourage students to explore, analyze, and seek out information to develop their understanding.

2. Choose Real-World Problems

Select problems that are relevant to students’ lives and have real-world applications. This helps students see the value and significance of their learning and motivates them to find solutions.

3. Provide Autonomy and Choice

Allow students to choose topics or areas of interest within a broader theme. Giving them ownership of their learning empowers them to take responsibility for their education and explore areas they are passionate about.

4. Structure Inquiry Phases

Guide students through the inquiry process by breaking it into manageable phases. These phases might include asking questions, researching, analyzing data, brainstorming solutions, and presenting findings.

5. Utilize Multiple Learning Resources

Offer a variety of resources such as books, articles, videos, and online platforms to support students’ research. Encourage them to explore diverse sources and evaluate their credibility.

6. Facilitate Collaborative Learning

Foster a collaborative environment where students work in groups to share ideas, brainstorm solutions, and engage in discussions. Collaboration enhances critical thinking and communication skills.

7. Provide Scaffolding

Offer guidance and support as needed, especially at the beginning of the inquiry process. Gradually reduce assistance as students become more comfortable with self-directed learning.

8. Use Inquiry-Based Projects

Assign projects that require students to investigate, research, and present their findings. These projects can take various forms, such as presentations, reports, debates, or multimedia creations.

9. Encourage Reflection

Incorporate reflection periods where students evaluate their progress, the strategies they’ve used, and the challenges they’ve encountered. This helps them develop metacognitive skills and improve their learning approach.

10. Leverage Technology

Use technology tools to facilitate research, collaboration, and presentation. Online databases, research platforms, and communication tools can enhance the inquiry process.

11. Promote Questioning Skills

Teach students how to formulate effective questions. Encourage them to ask both lower-level and higher-order questions to guide their investigations.

12. Provide Flexibility in Assessment

Rethink traditional assessment methods. Consider using rubrics, peer evaluations, self-assessments, and portfolios that emphasize the learning process and growth rather than just final outcomes.

13. Incorporate Fieldwork and Experiments

Engage students in hands-on experiences, field trips, and experiments to apply theoretical concepts in practical settings. These experiences deepen their understanding and appreciation for the subject matter.

14. Model Inquiry

Demonstrate the inquiry process by engaging in discussions, conducting research, and asking questions yourself. Your enthusiasm for learning will inspire students to do the same.

15. Adapt to Individual Learning Styles

Recognize that students have different learning styles and paces. Provide opportunities for independent work, group activities, and one-on-one guidance to accommodate diverse needs.

16. Create a Safe Learning Environment

Foster a classroom atmosphere where students feel comfortable asking questions, taking risks, and expressing their thoughts without fear of judgment.

17. Share Success Stories

Share examples of previous students’ successful inquiries to inspire and motivate current learners. This can demonstrate the potential outcomes of the inquiry process.

Remember that the implementation of IBL may require adjustments and experimentation. It’s important to be flexible, responsive to student needs, and open to refining your approach based on the feedback and outcomes you observe.

Overcoming Challenges in Inquiry-Based Learning

Overcoming challenges in Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) necessitates strategic planning and implementation. Here are some ways to address common obstacles:

1. Time Constraints

IBL requires more time than traditional teaching methods. To manage this, plan ahead, clearly establish learning objectives, and ensure the inquiry questions are concise yet thought-provoking. Incorporate time-saving tools like online collaboration platforms to enhance efficiency.

2. Lack of Resources

Lack of appropriate resources can inhibit IBL. Teachers can overcome this by using open-source resources available online, partnering with local organizations for field trips, or engaging industry professionals to provide real-world insights.

3. Student Resistance

Students accustomed to traditional learning methods may resist IBL. Gradual introduction of IBL, along with continuous guidance and encouragement can alleviate this issue. 

4. Assessment Difficulties

Assessing IBL activities can be challenging due to their open-ended nature. Rubrics designed specifically for IBL, focusing on critical thinking, collaboration, and problem-solving skills, can be used to evaluate student performance effectively.

5. Teacher Preparation

Educators may find it difficult to shift from direct instruction to a facilitator role. Professional development, collaborative planning, and peer support can equip teachers with the necessary skills for implementing IBL.

While challenges exist, they can be overcome with strategic planning, resourcefulness, gradual implementation, and an appropriate assessment approach. In the end, the benefits of IBL — enhancing students’ critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and fostering a love for learning — far outweigh the challenges.

Inquiry-Based Learning serves as a powerful tool in the educational landscape, fostering curiosity, encouraging critical thinking, and nurturing lifelong learning habits in students. By shifting the focus from mere information delivery to active exploration, this approach motivates learners to take ownership of their education, leading to a deeper understanding and appreciation of the subject matter. Remember, the goal is not just to teach, but to inspire a thirst for knowledge that transcends the confines of the classroom.

You might also like:

• Goal Setting for Effective Learning: 12 Top Benefits
• Adaptive Learning: 7 Remarkable Benefits of Personalized Learning in the Digital Age

• Good to Great Schools Australia Pilot Program
• Online teaching and learning resources to support mathematics and numeracy
• Support for Arts and Languages
• Support for Humanities and Social Sciences
• Support for Literacy and Numeracy
• National STEM School Education Strategy 2016–2026
• STEM Education Resources Toolkit
• STEM program evaluations in the early years and schooling 
• Research into Best Practice Models in mathematics teaching and learning
• Support for Social Cohesion
• Year 1 Phonics Check

Inquiry-based learning

On this page:, what is it.

Inquiry-based learning is an education approach that focuses on investigation and problem-solving. Inquiry-based learning is different from traditional approaches because it reverses the order of learning. Instead of presenting information, or ‘the answer’, up-front, teachers start with a range of scenarios, questions and problems for students to navigate.

Inquiry-based learning prioritises problems that require critical and creative thinking so students can develop their abilities to ask questions, design investigations, interpret evidence, form explanations and arguments, and communicate findings.

How does it help?

Students learn key STEM and life skills through inquiry-based learning. Inquiry-based learning also promotes:

• Social interaction. This helps attention span and develops reasoning skills. Social interaction encourages students to generate their own ideas and critique in group discussions. It develops agency, ownership and engagement with student learning .
• Exploration. This allows students to investigate, design, imagine and explore, therefore developing curiosity, resilience and optimism.
• Argumentation and reasoning. This creates a safe and supportive environment for students to engage in discussion and debate. It promotes engagement in scientific discussion and improves learning of scientific concepts. It encourages students to generate questions , formulate positions and make decisions.
• Positive attitudes to failure. The iterative and evaluative nature of many STEM problems means failure is an important part of the problem-solving process. A healthy attitude to failure encourages reflection, resilience and continual improvement.

How do you do it?

• set a challenge for students
• encourage active student investigations
• make generalisations
• For more information on inquiry-based learning and examples of classroom strategies. Griffith University has prepared a useful resource.

Want to know more?

Research reports.

• STEM Education: A review of the contribution of the disciplines of science, technology, engineering and mathematics - Science Education International Vol. 27, Issue 4, 2016, 530-569
• Opening up pathways : Engagement in STEM across the Primary-Secondary school transition. A review of the literature concerning supports and barriers to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics engagement at Primary- Secondary transition. Commissioned by the Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. June, 2008
• Studies in Science Education - Volume 44, 2008 - Issue 1 - Students' questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science
• From concept to classroom Translating STEM education research into practice - Australian Council for Educational Research - June 2016

Case study: reSolve: Mathematics by Inquiry

reSolve: Mathematics by Inquiry is a national program to help teachers adopt inquiry-based methods when teaching primary and secondary mathematics. The reSolve approach encourages students to ask questions, test ideas, seek meaning and explain reasons. reSolve provides classroom resources, professional learning modules and a protocol that underpins excellent inquiry-based teaching and learning. It also trains ‘reSolve Champions’: teachers and leaders who take the messages and resources of reSolve into the wider mathematics teaching community. Approximately 300 teachers and leaders have either completed or are undertaking a 12-month professional learning program to become reSolve Champions. The reSolve program is funded by the Australian Government Department of Education Skills and Employment.

Constructivist Learning Theory and Creating Effective Learning Environments

• First Online: 30 October 2021

Cite this chapter

• Joseph Zajda 36  

Part of the book series: Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research ((GCEP,volume 25))

3751 Accesses

9 Citations

This chapter analyses constructivism and the use of constructivist learning theory in schools, in order to create effective learning environments for all students. It discusses various conceptual approaches to constructivist pedagogy. The key idea of constructivism is that meaningful knowledge and critical thinking are actively constructed, in a cognitive, cultural, emotional, and social sense, and that individual learning is an active process, involving engagement and participation in the classroom. This idea is most relevant to the process of creating effective learning environments in schools globally. It is argued that the effectiveness of constructivist learning and teaching is dependent on students’ characteristics, cognitive, social and emotional development, individual differences, cultural diversity, motivational atmosphere and teachers’ classroom strategies, school’s location, and the quality of teachers. The chapter offers some insights as to why and how constructivist learning theory and constructivist pedagogy could be useful in supporting other popular and effective approaches to improve learning, performance, standards and teaching. Suggestions are made on how to apply constructivist learning theory and how to develop constructivist pedagogy, with a range of effective strategies for enhancing meaningful learning and critical thinking in the classroom, and improving academic standards.

The unexamined life is not worth living (Socrates, 399 BCE).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abdullah Alwaqassi, S. (2017). The use of multisensory in schools . Indiana University. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/2022/21663/Master%20Thesis%20in%

Acton, G., & Schroeder, D. (2001). Sensory discrimination as related to general intelligence. Intelligence, 29 , 263–271.

Google Scholar  

Adak, S. (2017). Effectiveness of constructivist approach on academic achievement in science at secondary level. Educational Research Review, 12 (22), 1074–1079.

Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the middle ground: Constructivism in world politics. European Journal of International Relations, 3 , 319–363.

Akpan, J., & Beard, B. (2016). Using constructivist teaching strategies to enhance academic outcomes of students with special needs. Journal of Educational Research , 4 (2), 392–398. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1089692.pdf

Al Sayyed Obaid, M. (2013). The impact of using multi-sensory approach for teaching students with learning disabilities. Journal of International Education Research , 9 (1), 75–82. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1010855

Alt, D. (2017).Constructivist learning and openness to diversity and challenge in higher education environments. Learning Environments Research, 20 , 99–119. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-016-9223-8

Arends, R. (1998). Learning to teach . Boston: McGraw Hill.

Ayaz, M. F., & Şekerci, H. (2015). The effects of the constructivist learning approach on student’s academic achievement: A meta-analysis study . Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1072.4600&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Barlett, F. (1932), Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge: CUP.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory . New York: General Learning Press.

Beck, C., & Kosnik, C. (2006). Innovations in teacher education: A social constructivist approach . New York, NY: SUNY Press.

Black, A., & Ammon, P. (1992). A developmental-constructivist approach to teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 43 (5), 323–335.

Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America . London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Brooks, J., & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms . Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Bruner, J. (1963). The process of education . New York: Vintage Books.

Bynum, W. F., & Porter, R. (Eds.). (2005). Oxford dictionary of scientific quotations . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carnoy, M. (1999). Globalization and education reforms: What planners need to know . Paris: UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning.

Crogman, H., & Trebeau Crogman, M. (2016). Generated questions learning model (GQLM): Beyond learning styles . Retrieved from https://www.cogentoa.com/article/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1202460

Dangel, J. R. (2011). An analysis of research on constructivist teacher education . Retreived from https://ineducation.ca/ineducation/article/view/85/361

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education . New York: Collier Books.

Doll, W. (1993). A post-modem perspective on curriculum . New York: Teachers College Press.

Doolittle, P. E., & Hicks, D. E. (2003). Constructivism as a theoretical foundation for the use of technology in social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 31 (1), 71–103.

Dunn, R., & Smith, J. B. (1990). Chapter four: Learning styles and library media programs. In J. B. Smith (Ed.), School library media annual (pp. 32–49). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

Dunn, R., et al. (2009). Impact of learning-style instructional strategies on students’ achievement and attitudes: Perceptions of educators in diverse institutions. The Clearing House, 82 (3), 135–140. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/30181095

Fontana, D. (1995). Psychology for teachers . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.). (1989). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice . New York: Teacher's College Press.

Fosnot, C. T., & Perry, R. S. (2005). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice . New York: Teacher’s College Press.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences . New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century . New York: Basic Books.

Gredler, M. E. (1997). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Gupta, N., & Tyagi, H. K. (2017). Constructivist based pedagogy for academic improvement at elementary level . Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321018062_constructivist_based_pedagogy_for_academic_improvement_at_elementary_level

Guzzini, S. (2000). A reconstruction of constructivism in international relations. European Journal of International Relations, 6 , 147–182.

Hirtle, J. (1996). Social constructivism . English Journal, 85 (1), 91. Retrieved from. https://search.proquest.com/docview/237276544?accountid=8194

Howe, K., & Berv, J. (2000). Constructing constructivism, epistemological and pedagogical. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education (pp. 19–40). Illinois: The National Society for the Study of Education.

Hunter, W. (2015). Teaching for engagement: part 1: Constructivist principles, case-based teaching, and active learning . Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301950392_Teaching_for_Engagement_Part_1_Co

Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology. Educational Technology, 34 (4), 34–37.

Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Revisiting activity theory as a framework for designing student-centered learning environments. In D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 89–121). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kelly, G. A. (1955/1991). The psychology of personal constructs . Norton (Reprinted by Routledge, London, 1991).

Kharb, P. et al. (2013). The learning styles and the preferred teaching—Learning strategies of first year medical students . Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3708205/

Kim, B. (2001). Social constructivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology . http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/SocialConstructivism.htm

Kim, J. S. (2005). The effects of a constructivist teaching approach on student academic achievement, self-concept, and learning strategies. Asia Pacific Education Review, 6 (1), 7–19.

Kolb, D. A., & Fry, R. (1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of group process . London: John Wiley.

Kukla, A. (2000). Social constructivism and the philosophy of science . London: Routledge.

Mahn, H., & John-Steiner, V. (2012). Vygotsky and sociocultural approaches to teaching and learning . https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118133880.hop207006

Martin, J., & Sugarman, J. (1999). The psychology of human possibility and constraint . Albany: SUNY.

Matthews, M. (2000). Constructivism in science and mathematics education. In C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education, ninety-ninth yearbook of the national society for the study of education, Part 1 (pp. 159–192). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Maypole, J., & Davies, T. (2001). Students’ perceptions of constructivist learning in a Community College American History 11 Survey Course . Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/009155210102900205

McInerney, D. M., & McInerney, V. (2018). Educational psychology: Constructing learning (5th ed.). Sydney: Pearson.

McLeod, S. (2019). Constructivism as a theory for teaching and learning . Retrieved from https://www.simplypsychology.org/constructivism.html

OECD. (2007). Equity and quality in education . Paris: OECD.

OECD. (2009a). Key factors in developing effective learning environments: Classroom disciplinary climate and teachers’ self-efficacy. In Creating effective teaching and learning environments . Paris: OECD.

OECD. (2009b). Education at a glance . Paris: OECD.

OECD. (2009c). The schooling for tomorrow . Paris: OECD, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation.

OECD. (2013). Synergies for better learning: An international perspective on evaluation & assessment . Retrieved from // www.oecd.org/edu/school/Evaluation_and_Assessment_Synthesis_Report.pdf

OECD. (2019a). PISA 2018 results (volume III): What school life means for students’ lives . Paris: OECD.

Oldfather, P., West, J., White, J., & Wilmarth, J. (1999). Learning through children’s eyes: Social constructivism and the desire to learn . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

O’Loughin, M. (1992). Rethinking science education: Beyond Piagetian constructivism toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2 (8), 791–820.

Onuf, N. (2003). Parsing personal identity: Self, other, agent. In F. Debrix (Ed.), Language, agency and politics in a constructed world (pp. 26–49). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Onuf, N. G. (2013). World of our making . Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Packer, M., & Goicoechea, J. (2000). Sociocultural and constructivist theories of learning: Ontology, not just epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 35 (4), 227–241.

Phillips, D. (2000). An opinionated account of the constructivist landscape. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education, Ninety-ninth yearbook of the national society for the study of education, Part 1 (pp. 1–16). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Piaget, J. (1936). Origins of intelligence in the child . London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Piaget, J. (1967). Biologie et connaissance (Biology and knowledge). Gallimard.

Piaget, J. (1972). The principles of genetic epistemology (W. Mays, Trans.). Basic Books.

Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures . (A. Rosin, Trans.). The Viking Press.

Postman, N., & Weingartner, C. S. (1971). Teaching as a subversive activity . Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

Puacharearn, P. (2004). The effectiveness of constructivist teaching on improving learning environments in thai secondary school science classrooms . Doctor of Science Education thesis. Curtin University of Technology. Retrieved from https://espace.curtin.edu.au/bitstream/handle/20.500.11937/2329/14877_

Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105 (9), 1623–1640.

Sadler-Smith, E. (2001). The relationship between learning style and cognitive style. Personality and Individual Differences, 30 (4), 609–616.

Searle, J. R. (1995). The construction of social reality . New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Shah, R. K. (2019). Effective constructivist teaching learning in the classroom . Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED598340.pdf

Sharma, H. L., & Sharma, L. (2012). Effect of constructivist approach on academic achievement of seventh grade learners in Mathematics. International Journal of Scientific Research, 2 (10), 1–2.

Shively, J. (2015). Constructivism in music education. Arts Education Policy Review: Constructivism, Policy, and Arts Education, 116 (3), 128–136.

Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Slavin, R. (1984). Effective classrooms, effective schools: A research base for reform in Latin American education . Retrieved from http://www.educoas.org/Portal/bdigital/contenido/interamer/BkIACD/Interamer/

Slavin, R. E. (2020). Education psychology: theory and practice (12th ed.). Pearson.

Steffe, L., & Gale, J. (Eds.). (1995). Constructivism in education . Hillsdale, NJ.: Erlbaum.

Stoffers, M. (2011). Using a multi-sensory teaching approach to impact learning and community in a second-grade classroom . Retrieved from https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1109&context=etd

Thomas, A., Menon, A., Boruff, J., et al. (2014). Applications of social constructivist learning theories in knowledge translation for healthcare professionals: A scoping review. Implementation Science, 9 , 54. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-54 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Thompson, P. (2000). Radical constructivism: Reflections and directions. In L. P. Steffe & P. W. Thompson (Eds.), Radical constructivism in action: Building on the pioneering work of Ernst von Glasersfeld (pp. 412–448). London: Falmer Press.

von Glaserfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning . London: The Falmer Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1934a). Myshlenie i rech (Thought and language). State Socio-Economic Publishing House (translated in 1986 by Alex Kozulin, MIT).

Vygotsky. (1934b). Thought and language . Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

Vygotsky, L. (1968). The psychology of art . Moscow: Art.

Vygotsky, L. (1973). Thought and language (A. Kozulin, Trans. and Ed.). The MIT Press. (Originally published in Russian in 1934.)

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Watson, J. (2003). Social constructivism in the classroom . Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9604.00206

Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Zajda, J. (Ed.). (2008a). Learning and teaching (2nd ed.). Melbourne: James Nicholas Publishers.

Zajda, J. (2008b). Aptitude. In G. McCulloch & D. Crook (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education . London: Routledge.

Zajda, J. (2008c). Globalisation, education and social stratification. In J. Zajda, B. Biraimah, & W. Gaudelli (Eds.), Education and social inequality in the global culture (pp. 1–15). Dordrecht: Springer.

Zajda, J. (2018a). Motivation in the classroom: Creating effective learning environments. Educational Practice & Theory, 40 (2), 85–103.

Zajda, J. (2018b). Effective constructivist pedagogy for quality learning in schools. Educational Practice & Theory, 40 (1), 67–80.

Zajda, J. (Ed.). (2020a). Globalisation, ideology and education reforms: Emerging paradigms . Dordrecht: Springer.

Zajda, J. (Ed.). (2021). 3rd international handbook of globalisation, education and policy research . Dordrecht: Springer.

Zajda, J., & Majhanovich, S. (Eds.). (2021). Globalisation, cultural identity and nation-building: The changing paradigms . Dordrecht: Springer.

Zaphir, L. (2019). Can schools implement constructivism as an education philosophy? Retrieved from https://www.studyinternational.com/news/constructivism-education/

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Education & Arts, School of Education, Australian Catholic University, East Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Joseph Zajda

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Zajda, J. (2021). Constructivist Learning Theory and Creating Effective Learning Environments. In: Globalisation and Education Reforms. Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research, vol 25. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71575-5_3

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71575-5_3

Published : 30 October 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-71574-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-71575-5

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Events Calendar
• Featured Story

UCLA Lab School: Nature-based Education Summit Emphasizes Importance of Climate Instruction

Experts and educators at the inaugural event on May 4 highlighted the importance of fostering a healthy relationship between children and nature.

Transforming schools as hubs for connecting children with nature and climate solutions is critical to raising environmentally conscious citizens and protecting the future of the planet, according to experts and educators at the inaugural Nature-based Education Summit, held at UCLA Lab School on May 4. The importance of fostering a healthy relationship between children and nature was a theme echoed throughout the event, hosted by the Alana Foundation and the UCLA School of Education & Information Studies.

UCLA Lab School was built in 1950 and designed by Richard Neutra and Robert Alexander, pioneers of mid-20th Century architecture, who utilized the natural setting of the northern end of the University to advantage, including a redwood forest, Stone Canyon Creek, and 28 species of trees. Environmental thought leaders, educators, activists, and policymakers gathered at the site to discuss the primary role of nature in play and learning, as well as the transformation of schools and communities into spaces of climate resilience.

Wasserman Dean Christina Christie welcomed guests to the Summit and underscored the role of schools in helping to shape the future of the planet.

Photo by Ruth Souza

“We are honored to have the opportunity to help gather experts, create connections, and facilitate the discussion around such critical topics,” said Christina Christie, Wasserman Dean of SEIS. “Schools and educators play a central role in helping shape the future of our planet.”

Ana Lucia Vilela, founder and president of the Alana Foundation opened the event and helped relay the critical importance of motivating others to expand nature-based education throughout schools and communities.

“The idea is to inspire and connect the nature-based education community in the U.S. and around the world,” said Vilela. “The first essential is an intense love of nature.”

Ana Lucia Vilela, founder and president of the Alana Foundation, addressed the Summit, saying that, "an intense love of nature" is needed to inspire and connect the global education community.

Lais Fleury, head of partnerships with the Alana Foundation, a socio-environmental impact group of organizations that promotes and inspires a better world for children, was direct in her assessment.

“We only protect what we know and love,” Fleury said. “There is an urgent need to continue to nurture the connection between children and nature.”

Observing that climate change disproportionately affects children, summit topics included “How Green Schoolyards Create Economic Value” and “Schools as Spaces of Climate Resilience and Health for Children and Cities.” In addition, best-selling author Richard Louv underscored passages from his best-selling book, “Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder.”

Dune Lankard, founder and president of the Native Conservancy, discussed the harmful environmental impacts of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.

Keynote speaker Dune Lankard, founder and president of the Native Conservancy, emphasized the importance of connecting children to the environment as he discussed the catastrophic impacts to Alaska’s Prince William Sound from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. An Alaskan Eyak, Lankard highlighted his native experiences and environmental work – including the preservation of the salmon habitat in Alaska in order to sustain the future of his ancestral region, its indigenous people, and sacred places – accentuating the important role indigenous wisdom plays in nature-based education.  

“There’s still oil beneath the surface, still dead areas in Prince William Sound,” Lankard said.

UCLA Lab School demonstration teachers Noelani Morris and Chris Wilson and Assistant Principal Renata Christina Gusmão-Garcia Williams articulated how environmental education is enhanced by an inquiry-based approach to learning and how to develop a love for nature with young students, highlighting gardening projects within the school’s Climate Justice Education Program. In addition, best-selling author Richard Louv’s remarks underscored passages from his best-selling book, “Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder.”

UCLA Lab School Assistant Principal Renata Christina Gusmão-Garcia Williams (seated, second from right) and teachers Chris Wilson and Noelani Morris (seated, first and second from left) delineated the school's commitment to inquire-based environmental education.

“In the sustainable gardening projects we’ve done this year, we’ve often asked children to consider the question: ‘What is your relationship to the land?’” said Wilson. “We really do view the environment as another teacher.” 

• Chris Wilson
• Christina Christie
• Noelani Morris
• Renata Christina Gusmão-Garcia Williams
• UCLA Lab School

Pueblo D60 has secured an 'unprecedented' federal grant. Here's how it plans to use it

Pueblo School District 60 has accepted an "unprecedented" $15 million federal grant that will create magnet school programs at three neighborhood schools within the district.

Through the grant, Pueblo D60's "Project Heroes" will introduce Science, Technology, Reading, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics (STREAM) programs at Park View Elementary, the Risley International Academy of Innovation and Centennial High School.

Students currently attending other Pueblo D60 neighborhood schools, charter schools and schools in neighboring districts will be given the opportunity to enroll in the STREAM programs through the school choice process, according to Pueblo D60.

Ted Johnson, Pueblo D60's assistant superintendent of teaching and learning services, told the Chieftain that Project Heroes' STREAM programming will consist of an "inquiry-based model" leveraging STEM and arts-related programming to a degree not currently seen in other Pueblo D60 schools.

"One of the goals of this project is to create greater diversity within each school," Johnson told the Chieftain in an email. "By having an elementary, middle, and high school participate, we are able to create a K12 pathway of STREAM programming."

A Pueblo D60 news release said STREAM programming also encourages "creativity, collaboration, and use of social and critical thinking skills, while boosting curiosity and offering opportunities for real-world applications."

“We are pleased that we will be able to advance integration and equity through the establishment of three new Magnet Schools,” Pueblo D60 Superintendent Charlotte Macaluso said in the release. “This substantial grant will allow us to offer specialized instruction and innovative academic offerings.”

The grant funding for Project Heroes is part of the U.S. Department of Education Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) and its efforts to "further desegregate" schools throughout the nation by diversifying their racial, ethnic and socioeconomic makeup, according to a White House news release .

In commemoration of Brown v. Board of Education's 70th anniversary, President Joe Biden requested a 2025 budget investment of $139 million for MSAP. Pueblo D60's $15 million grant to establish Project Heroes will fund necessary equipment, personnel and professional development at the project's three schools.

Efforts to implement Project Heroes will begin immediately with a year of planning and design, Johnson said. STREAM programs at Park View, Risley and Centennial are slated to officially start during the 2025-26 academic year.

"We are very excited to utilize this grant to provide an exciting opportunity for students in our community!" Johnson told the Chieftain. "It will also be an outstanding opportunity for our educators to develop their craft by receiving quality professional development in curriculum and instructional practices that promote innovation and responsive learning environments."

More education news: Hitting the Books: Sixteen Bulldog artists published in 2 books through statewide contest

Pueblo Chieftain reporter James Bartolo can be reached at [email protected]. Support local news, subscribe to the Pueblo Chieftain at subscribe.chieftain.com.

Accessibility Links

• Skip to content
• Skip to search IOPscience
• Skip to Journals list
• Accessibility help
• Accessibility Help

Click here to close this panel.

Purpose-led Publishing is a coalition of three not-for-profit publishers in the field of physical sciences: AIP Publishing, the American Physical Society and IOP Publishing.

Together, as publishers that will always put purpose above profit, we have defined a set of industry standards that underpin high-quality, ethical scholarly communications.

We are proudly declaring that science is our only shareholder.

Critical-Inquiry-Based-Learning: Model of Learning to Promote Critical Thinking Ability of Pre-service Teachers

S Prayogi 1 , L Yuanita 2 and Wasis 2

Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd Journal of Physics: Conference Series , Volume 947 , Mathematics, Informatics, Science and Education International Conference (MISEIC) 9 September 2017, Surabaya, Indonesia Citation S Prayogi et al 2018 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 947 012013 DOI 10.1088/1742-6596/947/1/012013

Article metrics

4314 Total downloads

Share this article

Author e-mails.

[email protected]

Author affiliations

1 Institut Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan (IKIP) Mataram, Jl. Pemuda No. 59A, Mataram 83126, Indonesia.

2 Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Jl. Ketintang, Surabaya 60231, Indonesia.

Buy this article in print

This study aimed to develop Critical-Inquiry-Based-Learning (CIBL) learning model to promote critical thinking (CT) ability of preservice teachers. The CIBL learning model was developed by meeting the criteria of validity, practicality, and effectiveness. Validation of the model involves 4 expert validators through the mechanism of the focus group discussion (FGD). CIBL learning model declared valid to promote CT ability, with the validity level (Va) of 4.20 and reliability (r) of 90,1% (very reliable). The practicality of the model was evaluated when it was implemented that involving 17 of preservice teachers. The CIBL learning model had been declared practice, its measuring from learning feasibility (LF) with very good criteria ( LF- score = 4.75). The effectiveness of the model was evaluated from the improvement CT ability after the implementation of the model. CT ability were evaluated using the scoring technique adapted from Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test . The average score of CT ability on pretest is - 1.53 (uncritical criteria), whereas on posttest is 8.76 (critical criteria), with N-gain score of 0.76 (high criteria). Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that developed CIBL learning model is feasible to promote CT ability of preservice teachers.

Export citation and abstract BibTeX RIS

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence . Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.