Methodological? Or Dialectical?: Reflections of Scientific Inquiry in Biology Textbooks

Abstract

Given the importance of cultivating scientific literate societies, the integration of scientific inquiry into school curriculum is key to contemporary science education. It is apparent that textbooks have been an accessible source of science information for teachers and students since the growth of public K-12 schooling worldwide. Textbooks are crucial for understanding the basis of science curriculum, since many science teachers design their courses according to textbook content. This study aimed to determine whether the activities (both experiments and student activities) in Turkish biology textbooks reflect contemporary inquiry-based approaches. To this end, the sample of the study was composed of four biology textbooks approved by the Turkish Ministry of National Education (MoNE) for grades 9–12. Analysis of these textbooks was conducted using the Inquiry-Based Tasks Analysis Inventory (ITAI). The overall findings indicate that activities in textbooks were mostly compatible with the established curriculum, but they were insufficiently designed to prepare students to do inquiry or to understand what scientific inquiry is. Results demonstrated that these textbooks’ most considered ITAI dimension was Construction of Understandings about Scientific Concepts, while the least frequently explored dimension was Understandings about Scientific Inquiry. Additionally, in the Expected skills dimension, observing and inferring were the most frequently used skills.

Appendix 1. Coding Example of an Activity

Above activity (Activity 12, MNE 9th-grade biology textbook, page 50) was translated from Turkish to English by the researcher in order to exemplify the coding process. The coding for each dimension is as follows;

CUASC: As an objective of the lesson (+), biology curriculum states that “Students should conduct experiments to associate nutrients with carbohydrates, fats, proteins and vitamins.” This experiment meets this aim as it is organized to determine the amount of glucose in different foods and, also meets the core idea (+) of the curriculum on this topic which is: “Students understand the importance of fat, carbohydrates, protein, vitamins and minerals for life, and establish their relationship with healthy nutrition”.

ES: Students are expected to observe (+) the changes in Benedict’s solution prepared with different type of foods. They should use glucose as a control variable (+). At the end of the activity, in analysis part, students should interpret data (+) to answer the question 2 and also should make inferences (+) through answering questions 1 and 3. As seen, this is a cookbook style activity (defining operationally −) which does not require students to communicate (−), classify (−), measure (−), predict (−), formulate hypotheses (−), formulate models (−) or let them ask their own questions (−).

UASI: Activity 12, does not give messages that all scientific research begins with a question (−). Further, there is not any questions to answer in the beginning or in the process, which indicates that student questions do not guide the procedure (−). Activity starts with directives which all students required to follow indicating that there is no opportunity to understand multiple methods (−) in science. In other words, there is a strict process to follow and a definitive result to reach. Therefore, it is obvious that there is no influence of students (scientists −) or procedures (−) on results. Although students are expected to draw conclusions based on their observations (conclusion consistent with data collected +) the activity does not allow students distinguish evidence from data (−). Lastly, the activity requires students to use their prior knowledge + (e.g., why they need to use heat) to produce an explanation as well as their observations.