Effects of using inquiry-based learning on science achievement for fifth-grade students

The purpose of the current research study was to determine if the use of Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) instruction in science would improve achievement, attitudes, and engagement in fifth-grade students. The teacher-researcher compared the results of 6 weeks of instruction with the use of IBL and the use of traditional instruction by administering the Physical Science Knowledge Assessment (PSKA), and a Student Attitudes Survey as a pretest and posttest to the IBL and traditional instruction groups. A Student Behavior Checklist and fieldnotes were used to document student engagement. By the end of the 6-week unit of study, students in the IBL group showed an increase in academic achievement, attitudes, and engagement.

Research question one stated, will the science achievement scores of fifth-grade students increase with the implementation of inquiry-based learning strategies as compared with traditional instructional strategies? The PSKA revealed that the IBL group showed a gain between the pretest and the posttest. While the students in the group that received the IBL intervention showed gains, the difference was not statistically significant. The results were consistent with results reported by Kazempour (2009), Aydeniz et al. (2012), and Drake and Long (2009) who found that students taught with IBL methods scored higher on content knowledge assessments as compared to students taught in a traditional manner.

Research question two stated, will the attitudes of fifth-grade students increase with the implementation of inquiry-based learning strategies as compared with traditional instructional strategies? Both the Science Attitudes Survey (SAS) and fieldnotes revealed that with the use of IBL methods there was an insignificant decrease in positive attitudes toward science. The attitudes survey revealed that attitudes about enjoying science decreased by 4% after using IBL interventions. Student attitudes toward learning about science helping them understand the world around them decreased by 29% as revealed on the SAS. The mean scores in attitudes on the importance of learning about science showed no change, and the desire to know about science showed only a slight increase of 5%. The decrease observed in attitudes of students on learning about science is in contrast to the research by Aydeniz et al. (2012) where it was reported that student attitudes improved and that IBL had a positive impact on student attitudes. The teacher-researcher noted in the fieldnotes that students complained about writing in journals about their IBL experiences in the science lab, did not always like being paired with certain students as lab partners, and did not enjoy reading and researching information about topics in science by themselves.

Research question three stated, will the levels of engagement of fifth-grade students increase with the implementation of inquiry-based learning strategies as compared with traditional instructional strategies? Data from the Student Engagement Checklist revealed that students in the IBL group were engaged and on task 16% more often than students in the traditional group. Although the IBL group showed a greater level of engagement than the traditional group, the difference was not statistically significant. The data from the current study validates the research question of whether IBL instruction results in greater engagement of students during science. The research findings of the current study were consistent with the literature where Drake and Long (2009) found an increase of on task behavior in students in IBL classes.

Fieldnotes recorded by the teacher-researcher also provided engagement data, which revealed that students asked daily if they were going to work in the science lab. When assigned a task to complete, students involved in inquiry were focused more often on resolving the problem posed in the task than those who had traditional instruction and teacher direction. Students in the IBL group worked cooperatively with other group members to research the task and find a resolution to the assigned problem. According to the fieldnotes, students exhibited in seat behaviors and helped each other to understand what steps were being taken in their group to complete the task. IBL student’s brainstormed ideas for solutions and as a whole class shared their ideas about the order of steps to perform in the activity. Students in the IBL group made comments such as, “I will hold this wire and you hold the battery and you can hold the light bulb.” These kinds of comments revealed that the students remained on task, assigned tasks within the group, and completed the task with very little assistance from the teacher-researcher.

Significance/Impact on Student Learning

According to research reported by Liu, Lee, and Linn (2010), science scores for students in the United States have been on the decline for decades. Instruction in science has not been an area of emphasis, and the United States has fallen behind other countries of the world in science achievement. The research school’s SIP (2012) goal for science indicated that students scoring in the meets or exceeds performance level in science achievement on the CRCT would increase by 5%. The current research study intervention did result in an increase in science scores from the pretest to the posttest for students in the IBL group, although the increase in scores was not significant. In post intervention surveys, a majority of students stated “doing experiments” was the most enjoyable part of learning in science. Learning, attitude, and engagement increased as a result of participating in hands-on experimentation and inquiry. Students in the IBL group of the present study had greater scores in achievement and higher levels of engagement. PSKA results indicated an improvement in achievement from 74.95 to 78.82. The IBL class exhibited engagement in lessons 79% of the time as compared to the traditional class that was engaged in lessons 63% of the time. Student engagement was positive; indicating that the IBL method provided support for the hypothesis that student engagement in science would increase.

Factors Influencing Implementation

Several factors influenced the outcome of the current research to varying degrees. In both the IBL and Traditional classes, six participants were absent one or more days due to illness, discipline, and unknown issues. In the IBL group, one participant was absent one-third of the intervention time, while another was absent four days. Replication of the discussions and participation during the IBL lessons for students who were absent was not possible. Absent students had gaps in their knowledge because they did not have access to discussions, reviews, and experimentation with their fellow students. The results may have been influenced substantially if all students had been present for all classes.

In both the IBL and traditional groups, there were students who had displayed attention deficits by exhibiting behaviors that revealed their distractibility. The fact that these students were frequently off task and displayed difficulty in attending to the task at hand was evident in their achievement scores on the posttest and on the engagement checklist. Not only did the behaviors of the students who were off task affect their achievement, but it also affected the ability of those in their lab groups to attend to the research, organize materials, and perform inquiry tasks in the science lab.

Although a calendar of events and lessons were prepared by the teacher-researcher, several unscheduled occurrences interfered with the current study. The teacher-researcher was unable to attend class on two days. On these days, participants were not able to participate in inquiry or experimentation and observations were not performed. Another interference was the scheduling of a local law enforcement officer to present to the classes an educational program on drug awareness, which replaced one day of the study. Although there were several unforeseen events that disrupted the schedule of the teacher-researcher, adjustments to the instructional calendar provided the additional instructional time required to complete the study. The disruptions were not significant enough to affect the study results.

Implications

The implications of this study are important for the research school because of the positive impact in achievement that resulted in the IBL group and the percentage of engagement students exhibited. The findings of this study supported the research regarding positive gains in the engagement of students participating in IBL. The teacher-participant has used experimentation in classes for over a decade, but has been hesitant to relinquish control of the inquiry to the students. Using this strategy revealed that allowing students to engage, discover, draw conclusions and report their findings increased their abilities to reason and problem solve. As students participated in IBL, they gradually learned to investigate, reason, and organize knowledge and then to incorporate that knowledge into their understanding without intervention from the teacher-participant. The current research study challenged the teacher-researcher to relinquish control of the science lesson content information and allow students to control participation in their own acquisition of knowledge and develop higher-order thinking skills. During the intervention, the teacher-researcher became a facilitator, and not merely a distributor of scientific facts and methods on how to perform experiments.

The findings from the current research study have implications beyond the grade level at which the current research was performed. The teacher-researcher sought permission to share the results of the current study with members of the faculty at the research school during a faculty meeting or professional development day. The teacher-researcher also intended to share the results of the study with other schools in the county during professional development. Using methods of inquiry would be beneficial to students in all grade levels for increasing achievement and implementing higher-order thinking skills and assists in assimilating these skills in other areas of study such as social studies, mathematics, and language arts where they must make connections and relate information to themes in their studies. IBL is a system of learning that supports the development of problem solving and critical thinking that transfers from school into everyday activities.

There were many implications for the teacher-researcher from the current research study, which influenced teaching practice and pedagogy. The importance of allowing students the opportunity to investigate problems and reach their own conclusions by using scientific processing skills was magnified in the current study. The teacher-researcher realized the importance of being a facilitator and allowing students to participate in the inductive process of reasoning. The materials were provided and the problem presented by the teacher-researcher in the role of facilitator, however the students conducted the majority of the work. The students were given the opportunity to construct questions, develop concepts, and inquire as to how to accurately solve a problem. The teacher-researcher realized that not only did achievement increase, but also discipline problems decreased when IBL methods were utilized due to the higher level of engagement of students.

Limitations

Although there was a positive impact on student achievement and engagement, a few limitations must be addressed. The participant convenience sample was composed of a relatively small number of students. The significance of the impact of the intervention may have been different had there been a larger sample of participants. The data were narrow because of so few participants observed in the present study. The two classes differed in the numbers of students with disabilities and the number of students labeled as gifted. There may have been a different outcome had the two class populations been more similar.

The length of time for the study was another limitation. The study was performed over a period of six weeks, which was not a significant amount of time to measure extensive changes during the current research. If the current research study had continued throughout the entire school year, additional pre- and posttests, and the CRCT scores could also have served to provide data for increases in student achievement.

A further limitation of the study was having only one teacher-researcher implementing the study. Another participant may have helped to reduce teacher bias with fieldnotes by conducting additional observations on engagement and by assisting with tallying behaviors on the student engagement checklist. Although the PKSA and the SAS were quantitative and were easily measured, the student behavior checklist and fieldnotes were qualitative and could unintentionally have been subjected to bias.

Further research is needed to investigate whether the intervention may significantly increase achievement, attitudes, and engagement over a longer period of time and with larger groups of students. Additionally, it would be interesting to observe whether students who were given the opportunity to use IBL strategies in science began to use them in other areas of study. Further studies may investigate whether the use of higher-order thinking skills increased in students, and whether there was a transfer of the use of critical thinking to real-world situations.