Why
Inquiry?
A
Historical
and
Philosophical
Commentary
by
Peter
Dow
|
There's
nothing
new
about
learning
science
through
inquiry.
Making
observations,
asking
questions,
and
pursuing
investigations
has
always
been
a
fundamental
human
approach
to
understanding
the
world.
This
essay
traces
the
history
and
philosophy
of
inquiry,
the
controversies-past
and
present--that
have
surrounded
it,
and
its
promise
for
the
future.
Scientific
inquiry
has
its
roots
in
the
inherent
restlessness
of
the
human
mind.
We
humans
have
pursued
our
passion
to
explore
far
beyond
any
other
inhabitant
of
the
planet.
Curiosity
is
the
basic
human
trait
that
has
ensured
both
our
survival
as
a
species
and
our
continuous
cultural
evolution.
In
American
society,
scientific
inquiry
has
been
the
source
of
both
our
technological
superiority
and
our
economic
well-being.
Is
it
surprising,
therefore,
that
we
should
regard
cultivating
the
skills
of
inquiry
as
central
to
the
process
of
schooling?
In
societies
where
inquiry
has
flourished,
so
has
human
progress.
Athens
of
the
fifth
century
B.C.
comes
to
mind.
The
Agora-
the
marketplace
where
freedom-loving
Greeks
gathered
to
discuss
the
issues
of
the
day-
was
a
crucible
of
intellectual
inquiry
led
by
one
of
history,s
most
celebrated
teachers,
Socrates.
An
indefatigable
inquirer,
Socrates
challenged
the
youth
of
the
city
to
think
for
themselves,
to
question
the
wisdom
of
their
elders,
and
to
probe
the
unsolved
mysteries
of
the
natural
world.
For
a
time,
Athens
thrived
on
the
intellectual
ferment
that
ranged
from
the
scientific
and
philosophical
deliberations
of
Plato
and
Aristotle
to
the
literary
and
artistic
achievements
of
Sophocles
and
Phidias.
Yet
Socrates
paid
with
his
life
for
his
endless
probing
and
his
uncompromising
search
for
truth.
In
the
end,
even
sophisticated
Athens
could
not
tolerate
this
unrelenting
passion
for
inquiry.
Few
of
us
can
claim
lives
spent
in
Socratic
dialogue,
but
we
respect
the
work
of
this
master
teacher
who
took
no
pay
because
he
claimed
to
know
nothing,
and
who
challenged
the
young
people
of
Athens
to
learn
how
to
think
for
themselves.
Minds
so
trained,
we
believe,
will
contribute
to
the
improvement
of
society
and
to
the
advancement
of
science.
We
have
inherited
this
passion
for
inquiry
not
only
from
the
ancient
Greeks,
but
equally
from
the
Renaissance
of
Galileo
and
Leonardo,
and
the
Enlightenment
of
Locke
and
Rousseau.
The
skills
of
skeptical
questioning
and
independent
thinking
may
be
essential
goals
of
schooling
The
20th
century
has
raised
new
questions
about
the
power
of
scientific
inquiry.
No
longer
is
it
certain
that
the
capacity
of
the
inquiring
human
mind
to
unlock
the
secrets
of
the
cosmos
is
always
a
net
benefit
to
humanity.
As
we
play
out
our
restless
urge
to
understand
and
control
our
surroundings,
the
power
to
destroy
now
rivals
the
power
to
invent.
Perhaps
now,
more
than
ever
before,
the
ability
of
average
citizens
to
think
for
themselves
may
be
the
best
protection
in
a
world
of
increasing
technological
and
scientific
complexity.
If
so,
the
skills
of
skeptical
questioning
and
independent
thinking
may
be
essential
goals
of
schooling.
On
the
eve
of
World
War
II,
our
most
celebrated
20th-century
educator/
philosopher,
John
Dewey,
made
a
persuasive
case
for
the
importance
of
inquiry-based
teaching
as
a
way
of
preserving
values
in
a
world
threatened
by
totalitarianism.
The
scientific
method,
he
said,
"is
the
only
authentic
means
at
our
command
for
getting
at
the
significance
of
our
everyday
experiences
of
the
world
in
which
we
live"
(1938,
111).
Dewey
believed
that
the
ability
to
reason
scientifically
was
an
essential
skill
for
coping
with
the
complexities
of
modern
life,
and
he
warned
that
failure
to
cultivate
such
skills
risked
"a
return
to
intellectual
and
moral
authoritarianism"
(p.
109).
Today,
we
may
need
the
skills
of
scientific
thinking
more
than
ever,
as
we
cope
with
the
challenges
of
factual
overload
in
our
information
age.
For
Dewey,
inquiry
teaching
involved
allowing
children
to
learn
from
direct
experience
and
cultivate
their
natural
curiosity.
He
believed
that
the
essentials
of
creative
thinking
were
contained
in
the
processes
of
science,
and
that
intellectual
activity
was
much
the
same
whether
in
the
kindergarten
or
the
scientific
laboratory.
Organizing
learning
in
this
way,
he
argued,
would
enable
teachers
and
students
to
integrate
knowledge
across
the
disciplines
through
the
cultivation
of
disciplined
habits
of
mind,
and
allow
learning
to
unfold
in
a
way
that
respected
the
intellectual
growth
and
age-specific
concerns
of
the
child.
Although
Dewey
died
without
witnessing
the
information
explosion
of
our
own
time,
he
saw
the
need
for
cultivating
the
skills
of
lifelong,
self-directed
learning.
More
recent
educational
theorists
such
as
Jean
Piaget
and
Jerome
Bruner
have
added
the
weight
of
cognitive
research
to
Dewey's
philosophical
propositions.
Bruner
and
Kenney's
Studies
in
Cognitive
Growth
(1966)
contains
a
celebrated
paper
by
George
Miller,
entitled
"The
Magic
Number
Seven,
Plus
or
Minus
Two,"
wherein
Miller
argues
that
the
human
mind
can
only
hold
approximately
seven
discrete
bits
of
information
at
one
time.
Based
on
this
finding,
Bruner
later
argued
for
"filling
those
seven
slots
of
memory
with
gold."
By
this
he
meant
helping
students
grasp
the
deep
conceptual
structure
that
underlies
the
disciplines,
rather
than
memorizing
unconnected
facts.
Biologist
E.
O.
Wilson
has
recently
made
a
similar
point
in
Consilience
(1998),
in
which
he
proposes
replacing
discipline-based
instruction
with
a
return
to
the
unification
of
knowledge
exemplified
by
the
Enlightenment.
How
can
we
best
accomplish
this,
in
Wilson's
view?
By
implementing
(as
Dewey
argued)
a
learning
process
that
focuses
on
examining
the
world
by
direct
experience.
This
approach
derives
knowledge
from
prolonged
observation
and
experimentation,
and
from
the
exploration
of
fundamental
questions.
How
do
organisms
eat,
avoid
being
eaten,
and
survive
to
reproduce?
How
do
they
ensure
their
survival
and
the
survival
of
their
offspring-thereby
avoiding
extinction
in
a
world
governed
by
the
laws
of
natural
selection?
And
what
is
the
place
of
human
beings
in
this
world
of
biological
imperatives?
In
an
inquiry-driven
classroom,
is
there
still
a
role
for
didactic
instruction?
This,
too,
is
a
question
to
explore.
Clearly,
teaching
by
telling
is
the
most
efficient
way
to
get
across
important
facts,
concepts,
and
ways
of
thinking
about
things.
Yet
recent
cognitive
research
would
suggest
that
much
of
what
we
"learn"
in
such
contexts
has
a
relatively
short
half-life
in
memory.
How
can
we
ensure
that
what
lasts
in
learning
is
the
"gold"
that
Bruner
proposes?
Unfortunately,
pedagogy
is
not
an
exact
science.
Yet
the
science
teaching
reforms
of
the
past
40
years
have
provided
growing
evidence
that
instruction
designed
around
the
careful
examination
of
real
phenomena,
and
the
pursuit
of
significant
questions
formulated
by
both
teachers
and
students,
have
delivered
results
in
emotional
engagement,
memory
retention,
and
cognitive
understanding
that
challenge
the
results
of
didactic
teaching.
This
is
good
news:
if
true,
it
could
liberate
schooling
from
the
intellectual
authoritarianism
that
Dewey
feared.
If
Socrates
were
alive
today,
and
could
visit
an
American
school,
there
is
much
that
would
mystify
him.
He
would
be
hard-pressed,
for
instance,
to
follow
the
discussion
in
an
advanced-placement
high
school
chemistry
or
physics
class.
Yet
despite
the
level
of
knowledge
displayed,
he
would
probably
be
as
critical
of
intellectual
arrogance
today
as
he
was
in
his
own
time.
And
he
would
still
argue
that
the
essence
of
good
teaching
lies
in
framing
the
right
questions,
regardless
of
the
sophistication
of
the
subject
matter.
Perhaps
he
would
be
happiest
visiting
a
modern-day
elementary
school,
or
even
a
kindergarten,
where
learning
involves
firsthand
investigation
of
the
mysteries
of
the
natural
world,
where
the
rules
of
social
behavior
are
assimilated
on
the
playground,
and
where
teachers
encourage
their
students
to
pursue
their
own
questions
and
figure
things
out
for
themselves.
Is
this
not
the
Socratic
method?
And
has
it
not
been
through
most
of
human
history
long
before
the
development
of
civilization-the
primary
way
to
learn?
References
Bruner,
J.S.,
and
Kenney,
M.J.
(1966).
Studies
in
cognitive
growth.
New
York:
Wiley.
Dewey,
J.
(1938).
Experience
and
education.
New
York:
Macmillan.
Wilson,
E.O.
(1998).
Consilience:
The
unity
of
knowledge.
New
York:
Knopf.
|
|