IPSG

2019

The case for Inquiry Based Learning (IBL) Approach

Students have difficulty answering planning questions in Paper 4

due to the difficulty of visualising the experiments in a laboratory

setting and linking them to theories.

Because they lack access to the apparatus and the relevant

exposure to controlled experimentations, they often give scanty

details when describing the procedure.

Here, we adopted a scaffold approach to developing their planning

skills. We referred to the Singapore Teaching Practices (STP) at

OPAL and use the S.T.A.R. process as an authentic application to

inquiry-based learning (IBL).

Scenario analysis,

Team inquiry,

Application,

Reflection

HOME > PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES > LESSON ENACTMENT > ACTIVATING PRIOR KNOWLEDGE > SCENARIO ANALYSIS, TEAM INQUIRY, APPLICATION AND REFLECTION (S.T.A.R.)

Objective

Methodology.

Findings / Outcomes

Pros

Many appreciated the ‘scaffold’ approach

Able to discuss and question their assumptions as opposed

to doing the experiments as instructed by tutors.

They have free rein over how to do the experiment and the

interaction with tutors helped them to see potential flaws in

their ‘design’. Their thought process was made more visible

and they got to probe deeper in their planning skills.

Cons

Some students didn’t like the open inquiry approach and

prefer that the tutor tell them what to do.

Time and human resource constraints.

Great for stimulating inquiring minds but whether it can

translate into better written answers is an endeavour to be

achieved through reinforced teaching and learning.