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]