An Overview of Learning Cycles in Science Inquiry-based Instruction

C. Nicol, Emmanuel Gakuba, Gonzague Habinshuti
{"title":"An Overview of Learning Cycles in Science Inquiry-based Instruction","authors":"C. Nicol, Emmanuel Gakuba, Gonzague Habinshuti","doi":"10.4314/AJESMS.V16I2.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While a plethora of researchers have acknowledged the importance of learning cycles as a model of instruction in a constructivist supported enquiry science education, the rising number of learning cycle models however raises compelling questions about validity, hence the need for a comprehensive overview and analysis of the comparative strengths and weaknesses of these models. This paper examined among the very many, four major learning cycles; 3E, 5E, 7E and 9E, on the scales of knowledge construction, to provide adequate information for decision making regarding their preference and use. While the 3E provides the very basic framework for expansion, it missed addressing the learners’ initial dialogic engagement with teachers as well as summative evaluation of learning. Critical analysis informed the conclusion that there are three main goals common to the learning cycles under review namely; the development of conceptual understanding, process skills and critical thinking. A well-planned and implemented 5E model generally meets the inquiry-based constructivist learning goals, although it is silent on transfer of knowledge outside of the classroom. This transfer of knowledge, provided for in the 7E, is the major meaningful difference between 5E and 7E. The three new phases introduced in the 9E, Echo, Emend and E-search, were assessed to be redundant. After a thorough needs assessment of the phases of the learning cycles under review, a six-phase learning cycle is proposed comprising Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, Evaluate and Extend.","PeriodicalId":210929,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/AJESMS.V16I2.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While a plethora of researchers have acknowledged the importance of learning cycles as a model of instruction in a constructivist supported enquiry science education, the rising number of learning cycle models however raises compelling questions about validity, hence the need for a comprehensive overview and analysis of the comparative strengths and weaknesses of these models. This paper examined among the very many, four major learning cycles; 3E, 5E, 7E and 9E, on the scales of knowledge construction, to provide adequate information for decision making regarding their preference and use. While the 3E provides the very basic framework for expansion, it missed addressing the learners’ initial dialogic engagement with teachers as well as summative evaluation of learning. Critical analysis informed the conclusion that there are three main goals common to the learning cycles under review namely; the development of conceptual understanding, process skills and critical thinking. A well-planned and implemented 5E model generally meets the inquiry-based constructivist learning goals, although it is silent on transfer of knowledge outside of the classroom. This transfer of knowledge, provided for in the 7E, is the major meaningful difference between 5E and 7E. The three new phases introduced in the 9E, Echo, Emend and E-search, were assessed to be redundant. After a thorough needs assessment of the phases of the learning cycles under review, a six-phase learning cycle is proposed comprising Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, Evaluate and Extend.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
科学探究教学中学习周期的概述
虽然大量的研究人员已经认识到学习周期作为建构主义支持的探究科学教育的教学模式的重要性,但越来越多的学习周期模型提出了关于有效性的令人信服的问题,因此需要对这些模型的比较优势和劣势进行全面的概述和分析。本文研究了四种主要的学习周期;3E、5E、7E和9E在知识构建的尺度上,为决策提供关于其偏好和使用的充分信息。虽然3E为扩展提供了非常基本的框架,但它忽略了学习者与教师的初始对话参与以及学习的总结性评估。批判性分析得出的结论是,所审查的学习周期共有三个主要目标,即;概念理解,过程技能和批判性思维的发展。一个精心策划和实施的5E模式通常满足基于探究的建构主义学习目标,尽管它对课堂外的知识转移缄口不言。7E中提供的这种知识转移是5E和7E之间主要的有意义的区别。9E中引入的三个新阶段,即回声、修订和电子检索,被认为是多余的。在对所审查的学习周期的各个阶段进行彻底的需求评估之后,提出了六个阶段的学习周期,包括参与、探索、解释、阐述、评估和扩展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The interplay between Teachers’ Efficacy, Effectiveness, Attitudes and Students' Academic Achievement in Biology The pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of nursery school teachers in teaching and learning of geometry: A review of literature Teacher Trainees’ Experiences and Challenges in Project Work at Colleges of Education in Ghana: The Case of a College in Southern Ghana Students' alternative conceptions in quantum mechanics: The case of one-dimensional potential quantum tunneling Access, successful completion and learning achievement of female undergraduate students studying mathematics at the University of Education, Winneba
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1