Making Sense of Inquiry

Dr. Shelley Robinson, Assistant Principal

I still grapple with making sense of inquiry-based learning, and have discovered that thinking about inquiry in the following ways, helps me to better understand it as an educator and a parent.

Inquiry is the process of seeking information through questioning. The levels of questioning can vary depending on the type of knowledge being sought after and the degree to which a student must understand. We seek to learn by asking “Why?” and this question lingers in the background of all essential understanding. From there we build in the “Where? What? When? How?” which stems from a variety of research strategies and starting points. These essential questions drive the program and are often generated and shared by both teachers and students.

These questions are cognitive and metacognitive in nature:

How do I know?
Can I ever know that?
What is the evidence?
How did I arrive at that decision?
How can I improve my system of learning for the next inquiry?

The teacher’s role is to help guide and model the questioning process where necessary to find congruence with curricular outcomes without stifling the natural inquiry process that develops in the classroom. Deep levels of questioning and reflection need to be nurtured.

Inquiry involves finding and understanding useful and meaningful knowledge while finding natural resolutions to questions, some of which are not always definitively right or wrong. Inquiry allows students to construct meaning while still considering the recommendations of curriculum developers. We must consider the provincial curriculum while encouraging the “living” curriculum. We sometimes need a road map, but we want to be part of creating the journey with our students so that it includes many applicable and meaningful diversions.

We want to move from transmitting information to children to allowing students to transform information into significant and long-lasting knowledge. This means that we collaboratively craft programs so that time is effectively used to teach and learn in constructive and authentic ways. Teachers and students need to be partners in learning.

The teacher encourages a variety of assessment procedures that include peer, self, mentor and teacher assessment referencing the learning process. This type of assessment is an ongoing part of the learning process and helps to gauge the successful process or uncover the obstacles impeding the learning process.

CSS Library: "Little Blurts of Info"

Ian Brown just won the coveted Charles Taylor Prize for literary nonfiction, and before that, for this same book, the National Award for Canadian Non-Fiction.

During his acceptance speech, Mr. Brown was quoted in The Globe and Mail Feb. 09/10, A(2) referring to online reading as “little blurts of information”.

Do we approach online research differently than print research? Technology does offer fast food information. Do we go deeper when needed? More importantly, do we structure our teaching and inquiry projects to lead students to search deeply, question sources and relevancy of information offered, or do these little blurts of information suffice?

Historical Ditigal Storytelling Presentation

One of our Humanities Teachers, Chris Dittmann, recently gave a presentation at the South Western Alberta Teachers Conference (SWATCA) on a grade 5 digital storytelling project.

The project has previously been explained on this post.

Here's a copy of the presentation given by Chris, with one of the full examples of grade 5 student work:

Canada Our Stories Conference Presentation

View more presentations from Calgary Science School

CSS Library: Digital Immigrants teaching Natives

Donna Alden, Teacher-Librarian

What assumptions do we as educators (digital immigrants) make, while planning for inquiry-based projects for students who are digital natives?

As an educator, library professional and digital immigrant, what do I need to consider in a school with a one-to-one laptop project underway, with students who are indisputably digital natives? As a constructivist, I approach teaching as a “facilitator/scaffolder”. With Wiggins and McTigue’s ‘“understanding by design” format engrained in my thinking, I consider what students need to learn, and develop activities for students, working from what they know and understand, to what has been identified as needing to be learned.

My task is to consider what the teacher (as the key curriculum professional) has identified as the important curriculum outcomes in an inquiry project, and match those to some information literacy outcomes the students require in order to locate, select, synthesize and communicate their inquiry project’s findings. At this point we identify one or more related information literacy outcomes those students in this project require some integrated instruction on, in order to be successful. But what are we assuming those students already know, or are skilled in?

To understand that topics develop from general and broad to specific and narrow, and to be adept at generating alternative search terms, are easily demonstrated and learned when using print resources. But, they are also necessary skills for searching online library catalogues. When those skills and understandings transfer to students’ online searches, aren’t they more skillful searchers and consumers of online information? My knowledge base includes what resources are best sources for specific searches. Is that necessary in the digital information world? Is there a schema in our students’ approaches to locating, selecting and synthesizing relevant information? Is it the same as mine? Doubtful. Mine was developed from a print-based setting- our students’ from a digitally based setting. What implications does this present when we plan, implement, teach and evaluate a simple research project, or an inquiry project?

CSS Library: Changes So Far...

Donna Alden, Teacher-Librarian

What changes in the school library program and collection have I already made in response to the 24/7-technology access our students have at this school?

For sure, over the past two years, when planning learning activities with teachers, I’m putting much less emphasis into instructional strategies for accessing information in print resources, and more on introducing and providing opportunities for students develop knowledge and skills associated with online information sources, including online databases and Internet sites. What stays the same is that these learning activities remain embedded in project activities, and are not separate or isolated “library lessons”.

Secondly, the school library collection reflects changes in the way it is being developed. Many topics students include in research and inquiry projects are truly better researched online. Topics as diverse as Canadian politics and legislation, cultural and demographic information, health topics, natural disasters and the pine beetle epidemic are examples that can best be searched via the Internet and online databases. It’s neither practical nor effective to try to develop those parts of the nonfiction collection that require constant weeding and updating. Many magazines, journals and newspapers are available online and through online databases. Websites like Stats Canada and various almanacs make print sources obsolete and impractical for most school libraries. That doesn’t mean the book collection is neglected- it simply takes on a different makeup because of the access our students have to online resources. For instance, the areas such as social justice and controversial topics in the 300’s are maintained for currency and balance, whereas careers section has been weeded and has few titles. The science and math areas – the 500’s- are continually managed to reflect broad and specific topic areas that support and expand upon the curriculum content areas. Literature in the 800’s require the same type of attention as the 500’s, but I think this and the history section are good investments when weighing the value of books versus online. Online and print resources on historical topics support and supplement each other.


There is still value in a school library collection for some almanacs, atlases and other works of ready reference, as well as general and specific nonfiction areas. Access to some information is quicker than online (believe it…we test this often!). I’m also convinced that being familiar with works of reference and nonfiction in a concrete format leads to a better understanding of how certain kinds of information are categorized and organized for access, and this understanding should be solid in a student’s mind. To understand that topics move from general and broad, to specific and narrow, and to be adept at generating alternative search terms, are easily demonstrated and reinforced when using print resources. But, they are also necessary skills for searching online library catalogues, and when those skills and understandings transfer to students’ online searches, I believe they become more skillful searchers and consumers of online information.

Google Docs versus Wikis

Here at the Science School, I would say that Google Docs has become one of the tech tools that has had the greatest uptake across our classrooms. Over the last couple years, students and teachers have begun using this tool to take collaborative notes and study guides, peer edit across classes and grades, make group presentations and have shared planning sessions with other teachers.

A couple of our classrooms have also begun to design work using wikis as the tool for collaboration, rather than Google Docs. Wikis are a type of webpage that are easily created and edited by anyone you give permission to.

I believe the power of wikis comes when you have multiple topics or perspectives that are being examined side by side. For example, in this grade 8 project, students are researching 8 different elements of the Italian Renaissance, and then gathering local expertise. Using a Google Doc would still have allowed each group to get in contact and receive insights from experts outside the school. The power of the wiki lies in the fact that each group has access to all the other groups findings. On this site, you can see an example of how each group has set up a page for their topics, and also how easy it is to access all the other groups findings.

This takes the work from being an isolated gathering of information, into a collaborative knowledge building space. Each student-generated presentation now has many audiences: (1) the experts and (2) all the other students.

By designing a final question that pulls together all the different groups findings ("Does Calgary have the necessary conditions to become a renaissance city?") the work becomes public and purposeful. Each group is relying on the quality of the other groups research, presentations, questions and findings.

However, all of this is built upon design and crafted a good question that pulls all the student work together. And this becomes the hardest part of designing strong inquiry work.