1
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.
