Deploying some form of process or cycle to facilitate inquiry-based learning makes a lot of sense. What can seem like a messy and complicated process becomes a more manageable one thanks to the degree of structure that an inquiry process brings. By breaking the multifaceted task of managing a robust inquiry down into steps or phases, we are better able to both plan for and then monitor our progress towards a positive conclusion.
There is an abundance of models available to choose from. Some are aimed at a particular type of inquiry, and some are more generalist. If the intent is to develop a design based solution as a result of an inquiry, then a model that incorporates aspects of design thinking is likely to suit our purposes. Indeed the design thinking process with its key phases of understanding the needs and wants of the intended audience, imagining a possible solution, developing and prototyping a solution and then evaluating the result is a model that works well for many forms of inquiry. Even in a streamlined form such as that suggested by Project Zero's Agency by Design team where one begins by looking closely, moves on to exploring complexity and finding opportunity is a model that might be adapted to many scenarios requiring an inquiry process. The Global Digital Citizenship Foundation offers a range of inquiry models, or fluencies, which target specific types of inquiry. As the name implies, their Solutions Fluency is crafted to suit the purpose of developing a response to a design challenge. In contrast, their Information Fluency is well suited to a more traditional inquiry that builds knowledge.
Generalist models also abound, but in these, we also see similar patterns. Typically the process begins with a stimulus material that aims to inspire curiosity. This is followed by a process aimed at building a list of focus questions that will guide the inquiry and then a phase of gathering and then analysing information. Once the information is gathered, there are opportunities to make use of this and in many cases, to share new knowledge or insights with an audience. It is also typical for an action phase to be included where the knowledge gained from the inquiry is applied in some practical way, often for the benefit of others and all models include a reflective phase. The model depicted below is synthesised from several models.
If we believe that all learning is a consequence of thinking, then we should consider what types of thinking our learners are likely to benefit from at each phase of their inquiry. This is where the Understanding Map, developed by Ritchhart, Church & Morrison offers useful guidance. By contemplating the demands of each phase of our chosen inquiry model, we can plan for how we might scaffold thinking moves which will enhance our learners' learning. With these thinking moves in mind, we can then plan for how we will make this thinking routine for our learners and offer them tools in the form of thinking routines to enhance the quality of their thinking.
An example of this is provided in the image below. In this, a six-step inquiry process has been described and presented as a cycle. Learners might move through this cycle sequentially, or might move back and forth in the cycle as necessary or even skip steps if that is appropriate. For each phase of the process, a set of likely thinking moves have been identified from the Understanding Map. The language used in this cycle has been selected to align with the language moves exhibited in the Understanding Map in recognition of the power that consistent language choices have in supporting continuous learning across the multiple learning environments where this model might be used.
This inquiry model, with its associated thinking moves, is offered as a resource for anyone interested in linking the inquiry process with the thinking moves. If you use this, I would love to know how it goes and share your experience here.
By Nigel Coutts
Click Image for Enlargement