The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inquiry and groups: student interactions in cooperative inquiry-based science
Abstract
Science education research has recommended cooperative inquiry based science in the primary science context for more than two decades but after more than 20 years, student achievement in science has not substantially improved. This study, through direct observation and analysis, investigated content-related student interactions in an authentic inquiry based primary science class setting. Thirty-one upper primary students were videotaped working in cooperative inquiry based science activities. Cooperative talk and negotiation of the science content was analysed to identify any high-level group interactions. The data show that while all groups have incidences of high-level content-related group interactions, the frequency and duration of these interactions were limited. No specific pattern of preceding events was identified and no episodes of high-level content-related group interactions were immediately preceded by the teacher’s interactions with the groups. This in situ study demonstrated that even without any kind of scaffolding, specific skills in knowing how to implement cooperative inquiry based science, high-level content-related group interactions did occur very briefly. Support for teachers to develop their knowledge and skills in facilitating cooperative inquiry based science learning is warranted to ensure that high-level content-related group interactions and the associated conceptual learning are not left to chance in science classrooms.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“We consider the latter as a downward change since inquiry-oriented teaching is preferred in science education (e.g. Woods-McConney et al. 2016).”
From The change in pre-service primary teachers’ possible selves in relation to science teaching (2022) · cites this paper as Woods-McConney et al. 2016
Citations
Cites
Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small Groups
Cohen, E. G. (1994) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543064001001 · Cited by 2,120
High-level co-regulation in collaborative learning: How does it emerge and how is it sustained?
Volet, S., Summers, M., & Thurman, J. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.03.001 · Cited by 466
Research works printed but not linked: 33
- 10.1007/s11165-007-9054-9 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10972-009-9152-9 · DOI
- 10.1080/00461520.2013.838920 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/09500690802713507 · DOI
- 10.1080/09500690701587028 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x · DOI
- 10.2307/1170744 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s10648-008-9083-6 · DOI · Paper page
- Duschl R. A. D., 2007, Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8
- 10.1007/s11165-014-9418-x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijer.2013.01.001 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10649-011-9367-5 · DOI
- Hadwin A., 2011, Teachers College Record, 113, 240, 10.1177/016146811111300204 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10972-013-9375-7 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0883-0355(99)00036-1 · DOI
- 10.1080/09500693.2014.1000426 · DOI
- Johnson D. W., 1994, Joining together: Group theory and group skills
- 10.1080/03004279.2012.670255 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11409-014-9117-z · DOI
- Lederman N. G., 2013, International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology (IJEMST), 1, 138
- 10.1037/a0037758 · DOI
- 10.1002/sce.21135 · DOI
- 10.1002/tea.20201 · DOI
- 10.1080/09500693.2011.618193 · DOI
- 10.1002/tea.20347 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1023/B:JSTE.0000048330.07586.d6 · DOI
- 10.1002/tea.20345 · DOI
- 10.2307/1170710 · DOI
- 10.1027/1016-9040.10.3.199 · DOI
- 10.1002/tea.3660270205 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10212-010-0026-5 · DOI
- Treagust D. F., 2007, Handbook of research on science education, 373
- Woods-McConney A., 2011, Teaching Science, 57, 20
Cited by
Sorted by citations
van Leeuwen, A., & Janssen, J. (2019) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.001 · Cited by 355
The change in pre-service primary teachers’ possible selves in relation to science teaching
Pellikka, A., Lutovac, S., & Kaasila, R. (2022) · European Journal of Teacher Education · doi:10.1080/02619768.2020.1803270 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Woods-McConney, A., Wosnitza, M., & Sturrock, K. L.
- Affiliations
- RWTH Aachen University (DE)
- Murdoch University (AU)
- Venue
- International Journal of Science Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-03-23
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 842-860
- ISSN
- 0950-0693 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5289
- OpenAlex
- W2345887338
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 10.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Science Education (publishedVersion)
- Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
- RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
- Keywords
- teacher scaffolding, teacher knowledge and skills, conceptual learning, authentic inquiry
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review