Despite the Australian Curriculum’s push towards the acquisition of twenty-first century learning skills, and modern teachers who strive to adopt innovative approaches and pedagogical practices, there is a dichotomous relationship between what teachers and students often want out of school, and what politicians see as essential. The notion of getting ‘back to basics’ in terms of grammar and spelling, and a need for ‘direct instruction’ have become political slogans that seemingly contradict the General Capabilities of the Australian Curriculum and the learning environments needed to create capable, adaptable twenty-first century learners. Education continues to become increasingly politicised, with enormous amounts of money put towards testing and assessing areas of need, yet this does little to increase test scores and certainly fails to deliver well-rounded individuals who are equipped to thrive in a modern, technologically-driven world. The phrase ‘teaching to the test’ is generally looked down on, yet this is the reality for teachers struggling to prepare students for HSC exams at the end of an extremely overcrowded curriculum, or who are facing the additional pressure that published league tables have brought to the profession.
With that in mind, is it any wonder that many teachers choose not to go down the path of inquiry learning, choosing instead to stay with the familiar, the comfortable, the tried and tested classroom environment where they control the learning?
It’s unsurprising, but it’s misguided. Inquiry learning is not separate from accountability; in fact, they can and should be intrinsically linked. There needs to be accountability built into the process, with students carefully guided as they think deeply and critically, form connections and links between information, apply it into new contexts and create something that embodies the learning that has taken place. This process should involve deep, rigorous thinking, and teach students skills in addition to those solely focused on academics: initiative, time management, making judgements and evaluations, reflecting, and developing their own personal voice. These are all skills that will stand them in very good stead for future academic study; and thus, inquiry learning should not detract from the learning taking place, or slow its pace, but may actually speed it up in other ways, as students are engaged and develop independent thinking and learning skills (Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari, 2012, p.1).
However, teachers need to get on board. A passionate and proactive Teacher-Librarian should be working with teachers and collaborating with them in order to develop and deliver rigorous and engaging inquiry units. Teachers may need encouragement, or to be enlightened as to what is possible, as they struggle through the onslaught of full-period teaching days and find it difficult to consider new ways of doing things. As with all new things, it takes time to prepare. Working collaboratively with another teacher involves meetings, which temporarily increase an already untenable workload, this can impact on the ability to commence new collaborative inquiry units (Sheerman & FitzGerald, 2019, p.4). Additionally, trying something new always poses a risk, and classroom teachers may be embarrassed about their teaching, or knowledge in certain areas (ibid, p.4). Some teachers may also find it difficult to team-teach and share their classroom space with the Teacher-Librarian as it involves relinquishing some of the control and autonomy they have had, and accepting new ideas and ways of doing things.
But surely, the end goal must be worth it.
References
Kuhlthau, Carol C., Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. (2012). Guided Inquiry design: a framework for in your school. Libraries Unlimited.
Sheerman, A. & FitzGerald, L. (2019). A reflection on Guided Inquiry, Scan, 38(4).
Spencer, J. (2017, December 6). What is inquiry-based learning? [Video file]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlwkerwaV2E