Return to search

Teachers' understanding of inquiry

This multi-case study compared the practices and knowledge of six experienced teachers who perceive themselves to use an inquiry approach to instruction, to those of two teachers who do not, and compared their conceptualizations to a portrait of the inquiry literature. The inquiry teachers were purposively selected from three levels---elementary, secondary, and university---and different subjects. / They and two non-inquiry teachers contributed three interviews each. Transcripts were coded using codes derived from the literature, then open coding using the teachers' own words to represent categories. Four postulated constructs of inquiry, process, content, strategy, and context, were found in the literature and in experienced inquiry teachers' detailed conceptualizations of inquiry as shown in their definitions, interviews, and concept maps. Inquiry teachers were distinguished from the non-inquiry teachers by the relative difference in the frequency of their use of the four constructs. The inquiry teachers each had one predominant construct that they emphasized more in their teaching, and their identity could be expressed in terms of their pedagogical use of these four constructs. The non-inquiry teachers made fewer inquiry statements when compared to the literature and when compared to their own personal statements. Inquiry teachers' background, education, and informal experiences were also directly related to their conceptualizations of inquiry.
Date January 2003
CreatorsManconi, Lynn
ContributorsShore, Bruce M. (advisor), Aulls, Mark W. (advisor)
PublisherMcGill University
Source SetsLibrary and Archives Canada ETDs Repository / Centre d'archives des thèses électroniques de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada
Detected LanguageEnglish
TypeElectronic Thesis or Dissertation
CoverageDoctor of Philosophy (Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology.)
RightsAll items in eScholarship@McGill are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.
Relationalephsysno: 002084266, proquestno: AAINQ98318, Theses scanned by UMI/ProQuest.

Page generated in 0.0021 seconds