scholarly journals Students’ report on an open inquiry

2021 ◽  
Vol 56 (6) ◽  
pp. 063007
Author(s):  
Freek Pols ◽  
Lennard Duynkerke ◽  
Jels van Arragon ◽  
Kevin van Prooijen ◽  
Luuk van der Goot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Inquiry

scholarly journals Primary Prevention: Another Perspective

1983 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Nelson ◽  
Harry Potasznik ◽  
Edward M. Bennett
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
British Columbia ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Health Planning ◽  
Mental Health Policy ◽  
Open Inquiry

This paper is a response to the British Columbia mental health planning report's position on primary prevention. The report adopts the position of Lamb and Zusman (1979) that research and service aimed at primary prevention should not be funded with money allocated for mental health, and arguments are presented to support this viewpoint. This paper critically reviews the ideological underpinnings, the research base, and the action implications of these arguments, and provides another paradigm for mental health policy in Canada. It is proposed that a spirit of open inquiry is needed so that alternative paradigms can be explored and innovations in both rehabilitation and primary prevention can be allowed to develop.

scholarly journals How to open inquiry teaching? An alternative teaching scaffold to foster students’ inquiry skills

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Armin Baur ◽  
Markus Emden
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Education Research ◽  
Scientific Inquiry ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Approaches To Learning ◽  
Inquiry Teaching ◽  
Science Classrooms ◽  
Inquiry Skills ◽  
Open Inquiry ◽  
Alternative Teaching

AbstractStudents are expected to learn scientific inquiry. It consists of several individual processes that need to be coordinated. Recent teaching concepts have suggested fading students into a limited set of interconnected processes, mostly using backwards-fading techniques. The efficiency of open approaches to learning has been criticized repeatedly in science education research. Following a brief discussion of previous scaffolded inquiry teaching concepts developing students into “open inquiry”, it is argued that these have been interpreted too strictly in science classrooms: (i) restricting inquiry to too few processes; (ii) delivering support to students in an all-or-nothing fashion; (iii) understanding opening of inquiry as a one-way-street insensitive to needs of momentary closing. This is not justified by the situated character of pedagogical considerations that depend on learners’ needs and potentials, teachers’ strengths and insecurities, and potential constraints from content. An alternative matrix for teaching inquiry is suggested that distinguishes five processes in four variations of openness. An example from chemistry shows that the achieved degree of openness is derived from situated considerations and is not ruled by a priori decisions on openness. Nor is this decision governed by faithfully adhering to a schematic sequence (confirmatory → structured → guided → open inquiry).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document