ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************
In my humble opinion inquiry does not at all equal interactive or vice
versa. I have participated in many an interactive activity without
experiencing a lick of inquiry. Just because I let you touch the materials
does not mean you will be engaged in inquiry learning. Just because I ask
you questions, does not mean I am opening up the learning experience to your
own inquiry of the subject matter.
On the other hand, I have indeed had inquiry experiences without any
interactivity. The trouble with "lecture" style and inquiry is that the
inquiry can be very subtle and it is more highly dependant on the internal
workings of the individuals involved.
What I mean by that is that when something is interactive, there is
opportunity for individuals to act on one another to generate questions,
alter perspectives and to motivate more investigation. When you are
witnessing a lecture or one sided presentation, whether inquiry occurs
depends on an individual's interest in the subject matter, ability to let
the information interact with previous knowledge and the willingness of the
individual to change his thoughts on the matter. It also depends on the
presenter's ability to engage the audience to level where those things can
occur.
These are all big variables when you are talking about engaging people in an
inquiry experience. I think that is why interactivity is the preferred
technique to engage people in inquiry. An educator can be more deliberate,
assess the individual in front of her and adjust technique to engage the
individual in an inquiry experience.
Again, however, this is not to say that inquiry cannot occur without
interactivity. I believe all of us could identify a time where we were
engaged in a lecture or presentation in such a way that our perspectives
were changed and we walked away asking more questions and seeking the
answers on our own. The trouble is we can probably identify even more where
that was not the case.
These are only my opinions and I honestly have nothing to back it up, but my
own experience. But I am willing to engage, hear what more of you have to
say and even change my mind. Inquiring minds want to know :-).
Heather Gibbons
Education Enrichment Manager
Pacific Science Center
200 Second Ave N| Seattle, WA 98109
Phone: 206/443-3636 | Fax: 206/443-6600
-----Original Message-----
From: Informal Science Education Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 12:12 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Non-interactive inquiry?
ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related
institutions.
****************************************************************************
*
We've veered off a bit from podcasting...
Anyhoo, David said (about what Mat said)...
========
I disagree with the implied equivalence of inquiry and interactive in
this statement. A non-interactive event such as a lecture (or podcast)
can, in the right circumstances, lead to inquiry learning (by which I
mean learning that is motivated by the need to answer a question and
that is based on the collection and analysis of data - see the essential
features of inquiry discussed in the National Science Education
Standards, etc.) The problem is that a lecture can only lead to inquiry
learning if I bring to it the question it was designed to answer, if I
am at the level of pre-existing understanding for which the lecture was
designed, and if it presents data for my analysis (as opposed to
preformed conclusions presented as factoids).
=========
But on the subject of inquiry... does the question necessarily have be
brought to the table ahead of time? Could one go to a non-interactive
lecture (or, more likely to the point for most science centers, a
demonstration) with no questions in mind, but have the lecture/demo create
those questions, thus catalyzing the inquiry?
And is the level of pre-existing understanding necessarily a deal-breaker?
After all, couldn't the lecture/demo lead to new understanding (and then on
to further inquiry)?
And for that matter, couldn't this take place considerably down the line?
For example, say I do an inertia demo for an audience that includes first
graders. They may not (probably not!) grok Newton's first law, certainly not
in its entirety... but when they encounter this law again in the future,
they may be able to successfully relate it to "that one time when I saw this
science doofus* do this thing with dishes and a tablecloth." [*Remember -
they're talking about yours truly.] This could spur on further
understanding, via inquiry, or some other method, in fact.
Jonah Cohen
Outreach & Public Programs Manager
Science Center of Connecticut
Science Doofus
"There's more than one way to skin a cat - and I happen to know that's
literally true!"
-Richard Wilkins III
***********************************************************************
More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at
http://www.astc.org.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]
***********************************************************************
More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at http://www.astc.org.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]
|
