A scoping review of the effects of a technology-integrated, inquiry-based approach on primary pupils’ learning in science

Romarzila Omar

QR Code Link :
Type :	Article
Subject :	L Education (General)
ISBN :	0263-5143
Main Author :	Romarzila Omar
Title :	A scoping review of the effects of a technology-integrated, inquiry-based approach on primary pupils’ learning in science
Hits :	49

Place of Production :	Tanjung Malim
Publisher :	Fakulti Pembangunan Manusia
Year of Publication :	2024
Notes :	Research in Science and Technological Education
Corporate Name :	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
HTTP Link :	Click to view web link
PDF Full Text :	You have no permission to view this item.

Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

Background: Since the turn of the 21st century, research on an inquiry-based approach in science education has increasingly been geared towards the integration of technology, primarily focused on secondary and tertiary education. Thus far, no study has reviewed research on a technology-integrated, inquiry-based approach in the specific context of primary science education. Purpose & Method: This scoping review has two primary aims: to investigate the characteristics of the technological interventions used in previous research that employed an inquiry-based approach in science education and to examine the effects of this integrated approach on primary pupils’ learning in science. Fifteen articles from science education journals based on Scimago Journal Rank in the first quartile of 2020 and the Scopus database of the years 2017 to 2021 were extracted and reviewed using narrative and thematic analysis. Findings: The review navigates research that has focused on the development of inquiry-based technological tools, the assimilation of the tools with scientific knowledge, and the type of technological intervention used. The technological tools employed were either self-developed or already available on the market. They took one of two forms: a learning management system or a games/simulation. Furthermore, most of the research integrated science contents into their technological tools. In terms of the effects of the technology-integrated, inquiry-based approach, most of the studies demonstrated positive impacts on primary pupils’ learning in science, including pupils’ improved conceptual understanding, scientific and thinking skills, views towards science, levels of motivation and interest, and collaborative skills. Conclusions: Based on this review, it is suggested that science teachers should integrate technology into an inquiry-based approach, as research has shown that this approach positively impacts pupils’ learning in science. Future empirical studies should also be carried out to examine the processes needed to integrate technology into an inquiry-based approach, rather than focusing on the effects alone. © 2022 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

References

Arksey, H., and L. O’Malley. 2005. “Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice 8 (1): 19–32. doi:10.1080/1364557032000119616.

Armstrong, R., B. J. Hall, J. Doyle, and E. Waters. 2011. ““Scoping the Scope” of a Cochrane Review.” Journal of Public Health 33 (1): 147–150. doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdr015.

Babakr, Z. H., P. Mohamedamin, and K. Kakamad. 2019. “Piaget’s Cognitive Developmental Theory: Critical Review.” Education Quarterly Reviews 2 (3): 517–524. doi:10.31014/aior.1993.02.03.84.

Banchi, H., and R. Bell. 2008. “The Many Levels of Inquiry.” Science and Children 46 (2): 27–29.Bell, R., L. Smetana, and I. Binns. 2005. “Simplifying Inquiry Instruction.” The Science Teacher 72 (7): 30–33.

Bevins, S., and G. Price. 2016. “Reconceptualising Inquiry in Science Education.” International Journal of Science Education 38 (1): 17–29. doi:10.1080/09500693.2015.1124300.

Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

Bybee, R. 2018. “The BSCS 5E Instructional Model: Personal Reflections and Contemporary Implications”. Science and Children 15–18.

Bybee, R., J. Taylor, A. Gardner, P. Van Scotter, J. Carlson Powell, A. Westbrook, and N. Landes (2006). “The BSCS 5E Instructional Models: Origin and Effectiveness”.

Cairns, D., M. Dickson, and M. McMinn. 2021. ““Feeling like a Scientist”: Factors Affecting Students’ Selections of Technology Tools in the Science Classroom.” Journal of Science Education and Technology 30 (6): 766–776. doi:10.1007/s10956-021-09917-0.

Falloon, G. 2017. “Mobile Devices and Apps as Scaffolds to Science Learning in the Primary Classroom.” Journal of Science Education and Technology 26 (6): 613–628. doi:10.1007/s10956- 017-9702-4.

Florida State University. (2021). Habitat Tracker: Learning about scientific inquiry through digital journaling in wildlife centre. https://its.fsu.edu/sites/g/files/imported/storage/original/applica tion/87f586ac3292f3e3d630df2e75fc39b4.pdf .

Franzosi, R. 1998. “Narrative Analysis - or Why (And How) Sociologists Should Be Interested in Narrative.” Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1): 517–554. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.517.

Gerhátová, Ž., P. Perichta, M. Drienovský, and M. Palcut. 2021. “Temperature measurement—inquiry- based Learning Activities for Third Graders.” Education Sciences 11 (9): 506. doi:10.3390/ educsci11090506.

Herring, M. C., M. J. Koehler, and P. Mishra. 2016. Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for Educators. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315771328.

Hodges, G. W., K. Flanagan, J. Lee, A. Cohen, S. Krishnan, and C. Ward. 2020. “A quasi-experimental Study Comparing Learning Gains Associated with Serious Educational Gameplay and hands-on Science in Elementary Classrooms.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 57 (9): 1460–1489. doi:10.1002/tea.21661.

Hong, J. C., M. Y. Hwang, K. H. Tai, and C. R. Tsai. 2017. “An Exploration of Students’ Science Learning Interest Related to Their Cognitive Anxiety, Cognitive Load, self-confidence and Learning Progress Using inquiry-based Learning with an iPad.” Research in Science Education 47 (6): 1193–1212. doi:10.1007/s11165-016-9541-y.

Jimoyiannis, A. 2010. “Designing and Implementing an Integrated Technological Pedagogical Science Knowledge Framework for Science Teachers Professional Development.” Computers & Education 55 (3): 1259–1269. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.022.

Khalaf, B. K., and Z. B. M. Zin. 2018. “Traditional and inquiry-based Learning Pedagogy: A Systematic Critical Review.” International Journal of Instruction 11 (4): 545–564. doi:10.12973/iji.2018.11434a.

Kılıç, M. E., M. Y. Kılıç, and D. Akan. 2021. “Motivation in the Classroom.” Participatory Educational Research 8 (2): 31–56. doi:10.17275/per.21.28.8.2.

Kilty, T. J., and A. C. Burrows. 2020. “Systematic Review of Outdoor Science Learning Activities with the Integration of Mobile Devices.” International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning 12 (2): 33–56. doi:10.4018/IJMBL.2020040103.

Konicek-Moran, R., and P. Keeley. 2015. Teaching for Conceptual Understanding in Science. Virginia: National Science Teachers Association Press. doi:10.2505/9781938946103.

Kraus, S., M. Breier, and S. Dasí-Rodríguez. 2020. “The Art of Crafting a Systematic Literature Review in Entrepreneurship Research.” International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal 16 (3): 1023–1042. doi:10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4.

This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials.
You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research.

Back to search page