Attitudes of Science Teachers Towards Inquiry-Based Methods

Published Paper PDF: View PDF

DOI: https://doi.org/10.63345/ijre.v14.i11.4

Dr Reeta Mishra

IILM University

Knowledge Park II, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201306

Abstract
This study explores the attitudes of secondary-level science teachers toward inquiry‑based teaching methods, aiming to understand their perceptions, beliefs, and readiness to implement such pedagogies in classroom settings. Inquiry‑based methods emphasize student‑centered exploration, critical thinking, and active engagement with scientific phenomena. Despite the documented benefits of inquiry learning for deep conceptual understanding and scientific literacy, widespread adoption remains limited, often due to teacher‑related factors. A cross‑sectional survey design was employed, gathering quantitative data from 350 science teachers across urban and rural schools. The instrument—a 30‑item Likert‑scale questionnaire—assessed dimensions including perceived efficacy, self‑efficacy, resource availability, and perceived barriers. Data analysis incorporated descriptive statistics, factor analysis, and inferential tests (t‑tests, ANOVA) to examine demographic differences.

Results reveal generally positive attitudes, with high scores on beliefs about the value of inquiry for student engagement and learning outcomes. However, moderate self‑efficacy scores and concerns about constraints—such as limited time, large class sizes, and lack of materials—indicate areas for professional development. Significant differences emerged by teaching experience and school context, with early‑career teachers reporting greater enthusiasm but lower confidence, and rural teachers citing more resource‑related barriers. The study concludes with recommendations for targeted training programs, institutional support mechanisms, and collaborative communities of practice to bolster teacher confidence and capacity. Implications for policy and future research directions are discussed.

Keywords
Inquiry‑based learning; science teachers; teacher attitudes; self‑efficacy; professional development; pedagogical innovation

References

Akerson, V. L., Hanson, D. L., & Cullen, T. A. (2007). Nature of science and scientific inquiry as contexts for the learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387–1414. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600971063
Bandura, A. (1997). Self‑efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31(1), 21–32. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.31.1.j434w3k405j34216
Bybee, R. W. (2006). Scientific inquiry and science teaching. In Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 1067–1085). Springer.
Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613–642. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20155
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.
Ertmer, P. A., & Simons, K. D. (2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K–12 teachers. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 40–54. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1005
Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi‑experimental studies of inquiry‑based science teaching: A meta‑analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300–329. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 831–879). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Luft, J. A., & Hewson, P. W. (2014). Research on teacher professional development programs in science. In Handbook of Research on Science Education (Vol. II, pp. 889–909). Routledge.
Mansour, N. (2009). Science teachers’ beliefs and practices: Issues, implications, and research agenda. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(1), 25–48.
Markic, S., & Eilks, I. (2009). Experiments in context‑based chemistry teaching: The effect of teacher guidance on students’ understanding of chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 31(5), 621–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801918280
Mouza, C., Karchmer‑Klein, R., Sweetser, A., & Nandakumar, A. (2015). Learning with iPads: Identifying the role of technology in science teaching. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9518-7
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000032199
Palmer, D. H. (2006). A motivational view of constructivist‑informed teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1499–1521. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600702451
Pajares, M. F. (1997). Current directions in self‑efficacy research. In M. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 1–49). JAI Press.
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., … Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry‑based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
Tsai, C. C., & Chuang, S. C. (2013). Collaborative scientific argumentation in online learning environments. International Journal of Science Education, 35(13), 2193–2219. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.749439
von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of multi‑level learning about argumentation. Instructional Science, 36(5–6), 607–644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9052-x