Inquiry education: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 09:16, 7 June 2021 edit39.37.161.216 (talk) →See also Tag: section blanking← Previous edit		Revision as of 04:04, 21 July 2021 edit undoGoingBatty (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers640,470 edits removed empty section, General fixes, typo(s) fixed: 40-52 → 40–52Tag: AWB Next edit →
Line 2:		Line 2:

	==Overview==		==Overview==
	The inquiry method is motivated by Postman and Weingartner's recognition that good learners and sound reasoners center their attention and activity on the dynamic process of inquiry itself, not merely on the end product of static knowledge. They write that certain characteristics are common to all good learners (Postman and Weingartner, pp. 31–33), saying that all good learners have:		The inquiry method is motivated by Postman and Weingartner's recognition that good learners and sound reasoners center their attention and activity on the dynamic process of inquiry itself, not merely on the end product of static knowledge. They write that certain characteristics are common to all good learners (Postman and Weingartner, pp. 31–33), saying that all good learners have:
	:* Self-confidence in their learning ability		:* Self-confidence in their learning ability
	:* Pleasure in problem solving		:* Pleasure in problem solving
Line 13:		Line 13:
	:* No need for final answers to all questions, and comfort in not knowing an answer to difficult questions rather than settling for a simplistic answer		:* No need for final answers to all questions, and comfort in not knowing an answer to difficult questions rather than settling for a simplistic answer

	In an attempt to instill students with these qualities and behaviors, a teacher adhering to the inquiry method in ] must behave very differently from a traditional teacher. Postman and Weingartner suggest that inquiry teachers have the following characteristics (pp. 34–37):		In an attempt to instill students with these qualities and behaviors, a teacher adhering to the inquiry method in ] must behave very differently from a traditional teacher. Postman and Weingartner suggest that inquiry teachers have the following characteristics (pp. 34–37):
	:* They avoid telling students what they "ought to know".		:* They avoid telling students what they "ought to know".
	:* They talk to students mostly by questioning, and especially by asking ].		:* They talk to students mostly by questioning, and especially by asking ].
Line 22:		Line 22:
	:* Their lessons pose problems to students.		:* Their lessons pose problems to students.
	:* They gauge their success by change in students' inquiry behaviors (with the above characteristics of "good learners" as a goal).		:* They gauge their success by change in students' inquiry behaviors (with the above characteristics of "good learners" as a goal).

	==See also==

	==References==		==References==
Line 29:		Line 27:

	==Further reading==		==Further reading==
	* Awbrey, Jon, and Awbrey, Susan (1995), "Interpretation as Action: The Risk of Inquiry", '']'' 15, ~~40-52~~.		* Awbrey, Jon, and Awbrey, Susan (1995), "Interpretation as Action: The Risk of Inquiry", '']'' 15, 40–52.
	{{Neil Postman}}		{{Neil Postman}}

	]		]
	]		]

Revision as of 04:04, 21 July 2021

Inquiry education (sometimes known as the inquiry method) is a student-centered method of education focused on asking questions. Students are encouraged to ask questions which are meaningful to them, and which do not necessarily have easy answers; teachers are encouraged to avoid giving answers when this is possible, and in any case to avoid giving direct answers in favor of asking more questions. In this way it is similar in some respects to the Socratic method. The method was advocated by Neil Postman and Charles Weingartner in their book Teaching as a Subversive Activity.

Overview

The inquiry method is motivated by Postman and Weingartner's recognition that good learners and sound reasoners center their attention and activity on the dynamic process of inquiry itself, not merely on the end product of static knowledge. They write that certain characteristics are common to all good learners (Postman and Weingartner, pp. 31–33), saying that all good learners have:

Self-confidence in their learning ability
Pleasure in problem solving
A keen sense of relevance
Reliance on their own judgment over other people's or society's
No fear of being wrong
No haste in answering
Flexibility in point of view
Respect for facts, and the ability to distinguish between fact and opinion
No need for final answers to all questions, and comfort in not knowing an answer to difficult questions rather than settling for a simplistic answer

In an attempt to instill students with these qualities and behaviors, a teacher adhering to the inquiry method in pedagogy must behave very differently from a traditional teacher. Postman and Weingartner suggest that inquiry teachers have the following characteristics (pp. 34–37):

They avoid telling students what they "ought to know".
They talk to students mostly by questioning, and especially by asking divergent questions.
They do not accept short, simple answers to questions.
They encourage students to interact directly with one another, and avoid judging what is said in student interactions.
They do not summarize students' discussion.
They do not plan the exact direction of their lessons in advance, and allow it to develop in response to students' interests.
Their lessons pose problems to students.
They gauge their success by change in students' inquiry behaviors (with the above characteristics of "good learners" as a goal).

References

Postman, Neil, and Weingartner, Charles (1969), Teaching as a Subversive Activity, Dell, New York, NY.

Revision as of 04:04, 21 July 2021

Overview

References

Further reading