Issue

Vol. 9 No. 1 (2020)

Reinvigorating Inquiry-based Instruction in Science Classrooms in Tanzania: Lessons from South Africa and the United States

https://doi.org/10.56279/jhss.v9i1.35
mjege kinyota,

Corresponding Author(s) : mjege kinyota,

mjege.kinyota@duce.ac.tz

Journal of Humanities & Social Science (JHSS), Vol. 9 No. 1 (2020)

Abstract

Inquiry-based instruction (IBI) is widely renowned as one of the best approaches to
teaching school science. Nonetheless, while science teachers in Tanzania might involve in
teaching activities consistent with inquiry, IBI is not yet recognised as a formal approach
to teaching science. Hence, this study investigated the extent to which IBI is promoted in
Tanzanian secondary science curriculum documents. Additionally, it proposed
suggestions on how to adopt IBI in the context of Tanzania. Using document analysis as a
method of inquiry, six syllabi for secondary school science subjects in Tanzania were
analysed to assess the extent to which they support the IBI practice. Further, curriculum
documents for secondary school science from South Africa and the United States were
also analysed. This was done to compare between education systems that have recognised
IBI as a formal approach to teaching science with that of Tanzania. Results indicated that
while teaching methods, goals and objectives of education support the practice of IBI, a
few aspects such as the time allocated and resources suggested for accomplishing
investigative learning activities are the barriers to practising IBI. By reflecting on these
results and lessons learned from the US and South Africa, the study provides
recommendations such as allocating enough time for carrying out scientific investigations,
changing teachers’ beliefs, revision of some learning objectives, and promoting teacher
professional development in case Tanzania wishes to adopt IBI.

Keywords

classroom inquiry curriculum documents inquiry-based instruction science education scientific inquiry
Reinvigorating Inquiry-based Instruction in Science Classrooms in Tanzania: Lessons from South Africa and the United States. (2020). Journal of Humanities & Social Science (JHSS), 9(1). https://doi.org/10.56279/jhss.v9i1.35
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Anangisye, W. A. 2011. Developing Quality Teacher Professionals: A Reflective Inquiry on the Practices and
  2. Challenges in Tanzania. Retrieved from http://aadcice.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/e/publications/sosho4_2-
  3. pdf.
  4. Anderson, R.D. 2002. Reforming Science Teaching: What Research Says About Inquiry. Journal of
  5. Science Teacher Education, 13: 1–12.
  6. Areepattamannil, S. 2012. Effects of Inquiry-based Science Instruction on Science Achievement and
  7. Interest in Science: Evidence from Qatar. The Journal of Education Research, 105(2): 134–146.
  8. Arnove, R. F. 2007. Introduction: Reframing Comparative Education: The Dialectic of the Global and
  9. the Local. In R. F. Arnove & C. A. Torres (eds.), Comparative Education: The Dialectic of the Global
  10. and The Local (3rd ed., pp. 1–20). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
  11. Booth, M.Z. 2006. “Neither A Borrower, Nor A Lender Be”: Educational Reform Through
  12. Transnational Borrowing and Lending. Comparative Education Review, 50(2): 278–287.
  13. Bowen, G. A. 2009. Document Analysis as A Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research
  14. Journal, 9(2): 27–40.
  15. Cairns, D & S. Areepattamannil. 2019. Exploring the Relations of Inquiry-based Teaching? To
  16. Science Achievement and Dispositions in 54 Countries. Research in Science Education, 49: 1–23.
  17. Capps, D.K., B.A. Crawford & M.A. Constas. 2012. A Review of Empirical Literature on Inquiry
  18. Professional Development: Alignment with Best Practices and a Critique of the Findings?.
  19. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(3): 291–318
  20. Crujeiras-Pérez, B &? M.P. Jiménez-Aleixandre. 2019. Students’ Progression in Monitoring
  21. Anomalous Results Obtained in Inquiry-based Laboratory Tasks. Research in Science Education, 49:
  22. –264.
  23. Dudu, W.T &E. Vhurumuku. 2012a. Exploring South African Grade 11 Learners’ Perception of Classroom
  24. Inquiry: Validation of A Research Instrument. Science Education International, 23(2): 150–165.
  25. Dudu, W.T & E. Vhurumuku. 2012b. Teachers' Practices of Inquiry When Teaching Investigations: A
  26. Case Study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(6): 579–600.
  27. Edelson, D.C., D.N. Gordin & R.D. Pea. 1999. Addressing the Challenges of Inquiry-based Learning
  28. through Technology and Curriculum Design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3&4): 391–
  29. Erduran, S & A. Msimanga. 2014. Science Curriculum Reform in South Africa: Lessons for
  30. Professional Development from Research on Argumentation in Science Education. Education as
  31. Change, 18(S1): S33–S46.
  32. Fang, S.-C. 2020. Towards Scientific Inquiry in Secondary Earth Science Classrooms: Opportunities
  33. and Realities. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, https://doi.org/
  34. 1007/s10763–020–10086–6
  35. Fitzgerald, M., L. Danaia & D.H. McKinnon. 2019. Barriers Inhibiting Inquiry-based Science
  36. Teaching? and Potential Solutions: Perceptions of Positively Inclined Early Adopters. Research
  37. in Science Education, 49: 543–566.Hutchins, K.L & P.J. Friedrichsen. 2012. Science Faculty Belief Systems in a Professional
  38. Development Program: Inquiry in College Laboratories?. Journal of Science Teacher Education,
  39. (8): 867–887.?
  40. Jiang, F & W.F. McComas. 2015. The Effects of Inquiry Teaching on Student Science Achievement
  41. and Attitudes: Evidence from Propensity Score Analysis of PISA Data. International Journal of
  42. Science Education, 37(3): 554–576.?
  43. Kafyulilo, A.C & F. Tilya. 2019. Learning Technology by design: Experiences from In-service Science
  44. and Mathematics Teachers in Tanzania. Journal of Education, Humanities and Sciences, 8(1): 16–29.
  45. Kang, J & T. Keinonen. 2018. The Effect of Student-Centred Approaches on Students’ Interest and
  46. Achievement in Science: Relevant Topic-Based, Open and Guided Inquiry-Based,?and
  47. Discussion-Based Approaches. Research in Science Education, 48: 865–885.
  48. Kinyota, M & P.S. Kavenuke. 2018. Whose Name Are in Science Textbooks? Justifying the Need for
  49. Critical Pedagogy in Tanzania Science Classrooms. Journal of Education, Humanities and Sciences,
  50. (1): 31–44.
  51. Kinyota, M., P.S. Kavenuke & R.J. Mwakabenga. 2019. Promoting Teacher Professional Learning in
  52. Tanzanian Schools: Lessons from Chinese School-Based Professional Learning Communities.
  53. Journal of Education, Humanities and Sciences, 8(1): 47–63
  54. Kitta, S. & F. Tilya. 2010. The Status of Learner-Centred Learning and Assessment in Tanzania in The
  55. Context of the Competence-Based Curriculum. Papers in Education and Development, 29: 77–90.
  56. Komba, W. & E. Nkumbi. 2008. Teacher Professional Development in Tanzania: Perceptions and
  57. Practices. Journal of International Cooperation in Education, 11(3): 67–83.
  58. Lehesvuori, S., U. Ramnarain & J. Viiri. 2018. Challenging Transmission Modes of Teaching in Science
  59. Classrooms: Enhancing Learner-Centeredness? Through Dialogicity. Research in Science
  60. Education, 48: 1049–1069.
  61. Manz, E., R. Lehrer, & L. Schauble. 2020. Rethinking the Classroom Science Investigation. Journal of
  62. Research in Science Teaching, 1–27. DOI: 10.1002/tea.21625
  63. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (MDESE). 2016. Massachusetts
  64. Science and Technology/engineering Curriculum Framework. Malden, Massachusetts: MDESE
  65. Ministry of Education and Vocational Training [MoEVT]. 2005. Biology Syllabus for Secondary
  66. Education, Form I–IV (Edition of 2012). Dar es Salaam: Tanzania Institute of Education.
  67. —. 2007. Physics Syllabus for Ordinary Secondary Education, Form I–IV (Edition of 2017). Dar es Salaam:
  68. Tanzania Institute of Education.
  69. —. 2009a. Biology Syllabus for Advanced Level Secondary Education, Form V–VI. Dar es Salaam (Edition of
  70. : Tanzania Institute of Education.
  71. —. 2009b. Chemistry Syllabus for Advanced Secondary Education, Form V–VI. Dar es Salaam (Edition of
  72. : Tanzania Institute of Education.
  73. —. 2009c. Chemistry Syllabus for Ordinary Secondary Education, Form I–IV. Dar es Salaam (Edition of
  74. : Tanzania Institute of Education
  75. —. 2009d. Physics Syllabus for Advanced Secondary Education, Form V–VI. Dar es Salaam (Edition of 2017):
  76. Tanzania Institute of Education.Mkimbili, S.T., D. Tiplic & M. Ødegaard. 2017. The Role Played by Contextual Challenges in
  77. Practising Inquiry-based Science Teaching in Tanzania Secondary Schools. African Journal of
  78. Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, DOI:10.1080/18117295.2017.1333752
  79. Moote, J. 2019. Investigating the Longer-Term Impact of the CREST Inquiry-based Learning
  80. Programme on Student Self-Regulated Processes and Related Motivations: Views of Students
  81. and Teachers. Research in Science Education, 49: 265–294.
  82. Nadelson, L.S., J. Callahan, P. Pyke, A. Hay, M. Dance & J. Pfiester. 2013. Teacher STEM Perception
  83. and Preparation: Inquiry-based STEM Professional Development for Elementary Teachers. The
  84. Journal of Educational Research, 106(2): 157–168.
  85. National Research Council (NRC). 1996. National Science Education Standards: Observe, Interact,
  86. Change, Learn: Washington, DC: National Academic Press
  87. Phillips, D. 2004. Toward a Theory of Policy Attraction in Education. In G. Steiner-Khamsi& T.S.
  88. Popkewitz (eds.), The Global Politics of Educational Borrowing and Lending (54– 67). London & New
  89. York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
  90. Republic of South Africa Department of Education [RSADoE]. 2008. National Curriculum Statement,
  91. Learning Program Guidelines: Physical sciences: Pretoria: Government Printers
  92. Schramm, J.W., H. Jin, E.G. Keeling, M. Johnson & H.J. Shin. 2018. Improved Student Reasoning
  93. About Carbon-Transforming Processes Through Inquiry-based Learning Activities Derived from
  94. an Empirically Validated? Learning Progression. Research in Science Education, 48: 887–911.
  95. Steiner-Khamsi, G. 2006. The Economics of Policy Borrowing and Lending: A Study of Late Adopters,
  96. Oxford Review of Education, 32(5): 665–678.
  97. Vhurumuku, E. 2011. High School Chemistry Students’ Scientific Epistemologies and Perceptions of
  98. Laboratory Inquiry. Chemistry Education, Research and Practice, 12: 47–56.
  99. Wee, B.V & D. Banister. 2016. How to Write a Literature Review Paper? Transport Reviews, 36(2):
  100. –288.
  101. Williams, M., K. Tang & M. Won. 2019. ELL’s Science Meaning Making in Multimodal Inquiry: A CaseStudy in A Hong Kong Bilingual School?. Asia-Pacific Science Education) 5:3 https://doi.org/
  102. 1186/s41029-019-0031-1
  103. Windschitl, M. 2003. Inquiry Projects in Science Teacher Education: What Can Investigative
  104. Experiences Reveal About Teacher Thinking and Eventual Classroom Practice? Science Education,
  105. (1): 112–143.
  106. Yin, R. K. 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Read More
Author biographies is not available.

How to Cite

Reinvigorating Inquiry-based Instruction in Science Classrooms in Tanzania: Lessons from South Africa and the United States. (2020). Journal of Humanities & Social Science (JHSS), 9(1). https://doi.org/10.56279/jhss.v9i1.35
Download

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.