Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Esperienze e pratiche

Vol. 8 No. 2 (2023): Instructional innovation and transformative processes in STEAM

Inquiry Based Learning in practice to enhance an Immunological Biotechnologies laboratory experience

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/exioa2-2023oa16825
Submitted
novembre 21, 2023
Published
2023-12-13

Abstract

This paper aims to describe a teaching redesign experience that took place through the introduction of the Inquiry Based Learning methodology within the course of Immunological Biotechnology included in the program of the Master’s Degree in Industrial Biotechnologies at the University of Padua. The decision to introduce this approach starts from the need to maximise and support students during the learning experience, to sustain the development of specific skills related to real-world laboratory research environments, making them more aware of the design and practical steps of the laboratory itself. The new design (and its implementation) has both enhanced student learning and improved satisfaction with the teaching. The feedback from the students also allowed us to acquire important information to work further on teaching and create more authentic and effective experiences, through a teaching and learning approach based on investigation.

References

  1. Alfieri, L., Brooks, P.J., Aldrich, N.J., Tenenbaum, H.R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?. J Educ Psychol, 103(1), 1-18.
  2. Archer-Kuhn, B., Wiedeman, D., & Chalifoux, J. (2020). Student engagement and deep learning in higher education: Reflections on inquiry-based learning on our group study program course in the UK. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 24(2), 107-122.
  3. Banchi, H., & Bell, R. (2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and children, 46(2), 26.
  4. Bybee, R., & Landes, N. M. (1990). Science for life and living: An elementary school science program from Biological Sciences Improvement Study (BSCS). The American Biology Teacher, 52(2), 92-98.
  5. Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Harvard University Press.
  6. De Jong, T., & Van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of educational research, 68(2), 179-201.
  7. Demaria, M., Barry, A., & Murphy, K. (2019). Using inquiry-based learning to enhance immunology laboratory skills. Frontiers in immunology, 10, 2510.
  8. Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. D.C. Heath.
  9. Duran, L. B., & Duran, E. (2004). The 5E instructional model: A learning cycle approach for inquiry-based science teaching. Science Education Review, 3(2), 49-58.
  10. Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by Doing: A Guide to Teaching and Learning Methods. Further Education Unit.
  11. Healey, M., & Roberts, J., Ed. (2004). Engaging students in active learning: case studies in geography, environment and related disciplines. University of Gloucestershire, Geography Discipline Network and School of Environment.
  12. Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics’ conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction 7, 255-275.
  13. Keselman, A. (2003). Supporting inquiry learning by promoting normative understanding of multivariable causality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 898-921. doi: 10.1002/tea.10115.
  14. Lehtinen, A., & Viiri, J. (2017). Guidance provided by teacher and simulation for inquiry-based learning: A case study. Journal of science education and technology, 26(2), 193-206.
  15. Lents, N.H., Cifuentes, O.E. & Carpi A. (2010). Teaching the Process of Molecular Phylogeny and Systematics: A Multi-Part Inquiry-Based Exercise. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9, 513-523.
  16. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press.
  17. Parappilly, M.B., Siddiqui, S., Zadnikb, M.G., Shapter, J. & Schmidt, L. (2013). An Inquiry-Based Approach to Laboratory Experiences: Investigating Students’ Ways of Active Learning. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 21(5), 42-53.
  18. Pedaste, M., & Sarapuu, T. (2006). Developing an effective support system for inquiry learning in a Web-based environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(1), 47-62.
  19. Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Leijen, Ä., & Sarapuu, S. (2012). Improving students’ inquiry skills through reflection and self-regulation scaffolds. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 9, 81-95.
  20. 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.
  21. Spronken-Smith, R. (2012). Experiencing the process of knowledge creation: The nature and use of inquiry-based learning in higher education. In International Colloquium on Practices for Academic Inquiry. University of Otago (pp. 1-17).
  22. Thaiposri, P., & Wannapiroon, P. (2015). Enhancing students’ critical thinking skills through teaching and learning by inquiry-based learning activities using social network and cloud computing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 2137-2144.
  23. Uno, G. (1999). Handbook on teaching undergraduate science courses: A survival training manual. Thomson Custom Publishing.
  24. Wiseman, E., Carroll, D.J. Fowler, S.R. & Guisbert, E. (2020) Iteration in an Inquiry-Based Undergraduate Laboratory Strengthens Student Engagement and Incorporation of Scientific Skills. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 20 (2), 99-112.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...