Inquiring Minds: Group Inquiry Better than Solo Investigations?

I've been reading Teaching the New Writing, a great new book from the National Writing Project. One section describes Greely High School in Maine, which takes an inquiry approach to science. All ninth-graders take a course called Foundations of Science, and everyone enters the school science fair as a common assessment.
What caught my eye was a deliberate shift at the start of these projects. Previously, students would work 1:1 with a teacher to refine their question. But as the authors point out, "this method of developing ideas does not foster the collaborative nature of science practice, and it does not recognize the potential for novel input from student peers." So now there's a peer review process--right at the start of the research phase--to hone the investigation.
I'm wondering, are two (or more) heads always better than one when it comes to inquiry? In a group setting, how do you coax out those novel/quirky/off-the-wall ideas that might push everyone's thinking?

0 members like this

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Shane Krukowski on February 4, 2010 at 5:30pm

I think it's important to have students discover inquiry first on their own, then stretched into collaborative experiences. I like the shift at the start of the projectss this book seems to suggest. The reason being, typical students are used to what I call amateur projects where the assignment is laid out for them and feedback loops are practically non-existent until the final grade or, if lucky, rubric. With this past experience the basis of project work, moving into groups won't incite the type of questions and discernment really needed to gain value from the group (or build a culture of inquiry for that matter), undermining the theoretical benefit. In other words, if a student has not experienced a self-driven process with deliberate modeling of inquiry, the group becomes a cloak, hiding a lack of inquiry.

Once the framework for inquiry is established individually, IMO, only then will the culture dictate a different, deeper group experience.

At least this is what I see working with the schools that use Project Foundry.

Permalink Reply by Kevin H. on February 5, 2010 at 4:46pm

Hi Suzie
I think there is a lot of value of peer input from the start, but it is clear that it must be modeled and used as scaffolding before we can expect real meaningful inquiry among a group of students (or maybe that is me, as a sixth grade teacher, talking). The shift is that learning comes from the student inquiry as much as from teacher direction, and the hope is that discovery has real lasting meaning for the student.
Kevin Hodgson
(one of the editors and writers of the book)

Permalink Reply by George Mayo on February 9, 2010 at 3:43pm

Hello,

In my experience as a middle school teacher, I think small groups of 3 or 4 students works best for project-based learning. Middle school students are very social, and enjoy the opportunity to work together on independent projects. It's also helpful for them to work in small groups so they can bounce ideas off of one another.

They can also push their projects much farther when they work in small groups. One of the cool things about PBL is that it gives students the chance to create something interesting: A final product that represents what they've learned. When students work in small groups they can create more ambitious and interesting final projects.

Permalink Reply by Sue Boudreau on February 26, 2010 at 3:44pm

I agree about the intensely social nature of middle school George mentions. How to harness that for thinking rather than chatting about the upcoming school dance?

The culture of the class room is key I think. That it's okay and actually playful to make mistakes. And some kind of scaffolding for group work. We use co-operative roles of leader, reporter, materials manager and time keeper.

Do students come up with good questions and good ideas for hypotheses that way? Yes, sometimes. Depends on the mix in each group. Depends on the relevance of the question I ask to their lives. And it depends on me being both enthusiastic but not overwhelming - no fair me giving them ideas (because I have lots :-).

For most lab and project work, I don't allow more than TWO because of the logistics of getting together out of school, and because I really want all to be actively involved, no coasting. Pairs makes for WAY more project topics per class for me to manage, but that's easier for me than dealing with dysfunctional groups AND allows easier ways for students to work together outside of school.

Permalink Reply by Danette Grossnickle on February 26, 2010 at 8:30pm

Good question!

Yes, I think that two heads are better than one, especially at the older level like junior high. Plus, older students usually like the opportunity to change the routine a little.
I've tried an advertising unit to promote writing. I had the class work in a variety of preliminary projects before the final challenge. They struggled at first, until they realized how each part we were discussing was related to the whole. As soon as they realized the connection, they began to take on the challenge with a new outlook. This was not just some other assignment , but really a great way to express themselves and to have fun exploring advertising. This project was one semester. It was a challenge to me too, because it was something that I made up- based off of a few pages in their English textbook- to promote their writing. They had fun working together, and yes, I think their writing did improve.
I like to change up my units a little each year, this was very memorable. I think that collaboration made it better.

Permalink Reply by Sue Boudreau on February 26, 2010 at 8:52pm

Danette, the part about changing up units a little each year is so important - keeps ME interested and if the teacher ain't happy, ain't nobody happy! Sue

RSS

Welcome to
Classroom 2.0

Sign Up
or Sign In