The twin purposes of guided inquiry final


Published on

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • I am EXCITED about Guided Inquiry!Since 1987, when Ross Todd taught me at UTS Lindfield, and inspired me about information, information literacy and the idea that there was an information revolution coming, and students were going to need guidance through the sea of information about to wash over us.Since I’ve been in schools – 1987 – I’ve tried to get into the learning of the school, via the research of students, i.e. their assignments.We all know the obstacles in the path of this: Lack of understanding of the role of the TL Lack of a collaborative culture etcWith Guided Inquiry, we have a way to make the TL role in teaching students how to research MAINSTREAM! It allows us to work alongside teachers and students right though the course of their enquiry.As a bonus, and this is the thrust of my presentation, it allows us to easily gather data for Evidence Based Practice.Did I say easily??!
  • GuidedInquiryiscarefullyplanned, closelysupervisedtargetedintervention of aninstructionalteam of schoollibrarians and teachersto guide studentsthroughcurriculumbasedinquiryunitsthatbuilddeepknowledge and deepunderstanding of a curriculumtopic, and gradually lead towardsindependentlearning. (CISSL, 2005) The Information Search ProcessThe Information Search Process lies at the heart of Guided Inquiry.
  • To avoid the transportation of text evident in this cartoon, courtesy of Ross Todd. We are looking for transformation of information in Guided Inquiry.
  • Supported by research - Kuhlthau, from 1985 to present, Todd, Gordon – See the CISSL website at RutgersResearch columns in Scan over the last few years – Todd, Gordon, Schefers, Foley Not an imposed process but describes what people researching do.Feelings, thoughts, actions required at each stage.The top row described the steps a student takes in any research enquiry, i.e. what students do in a Guided Inquiry.Second row: deals with the affective domain: Feelings - The Dip at ExplorationThird row describes the actions students take to research – Interesting in its differentiation of the types of searching appropriate to the stage of the information process – move from RELEVANT TO PERTINENT.The length of time it takes to Formulate either your own question or your own take on information – may be more in open-ended inquiry, but is ALWAYS COMPLEX.
  • The research river is an analogy developed by Di Laycock from Barker and me to tell students about the Information Search Process. Kids at Loreto have found it useful, if a little corny!
  • Levels of searching appropriate to the stage student is at is central to The Research River, and to what we found out in the small scale 2010 action research on Guided Inquiry which I’m presenting today.
  • Students in our research project this year really took on board the language of the Research River.
  • Top column is what students doSecond column are the scaffolds students are provided with, including reflection sheets completed at the beginning, middle and end of the assignment. These are essential to the twin purposes of Guided Inquiry: Seeking feedback from students in order to intervene in their difficulties. Keeping these feedback sheets for later analysis and EBP.Third column is what teachers and teacher librarians do at each stage.Fourth column is for data gathering and beginning of analysis of data using SLIM Toolkit (modified).
  • to the dot points first, then go to the wikiShows the process, unit of work, scaffolding of each schoolShows the findings from each schoolFor example, Santa Sabina.Shows the overarching findings I wroteShows Ross’ findings – which will soon be published.Wiki was very valuable collaborative tool.If you want access, send me an email at our learning journey with the SLIM Toolkit, which was the data gathering mechanism.
  • These were presented to students at Initiation, exploration and at the end of the assignment. These have been adapted in many inquiries at Loreto as the mechanism for feedback between students and teachers. Only sometimes used for data analysis. It is labour intensive!
  • Note that the main purpose was scaffolding students’ enquiry, and helping them when they really needed it based on their feedback.The data analysis was secondary, and small scale. But telling
  • Speak to the slide first, then go to the wikiSide bar contains all the aboveEach student has her own page on which to contribute all parts of the assignment and to get feedback from teacher/tl and each other. Show Faith R:Parts of assignment – leading to good question about Berlin Wall.Only open reflection sheet 4 – this is what I used to analyseNotetaking grids – TL looked at these and gave a process grade.
  • This was our adaptation of the SLIM Toolkit – checked with Ross. He expects us to adapt SLIM to our needs. Our foremost need was knowing how students were going at each stage of the process, and giving them feedback. Analysis secondary feature.
  • This is not the full SLIM toolkit but one adapted to our first purpose – Helping students enquire and to reflect on their enquiry.
  • This is a conglomerate of all student responses throughout project, showing: Large numbers of facts at all data gathering points; Substantial numbers of explanations, moving to a high point in the essay And a healthy number of conclusions only at the end. Ross’ research in Guided Inquiry has shown that most students stockpile facts, so we are very pleased with our move to explanations and conclusions. Facts, explanations and conclusions were physically counted at the three stages of the assignment:In context of Napoleon:Fact e.g.: Historians have reached a consensus that Napoleon was a competent military leader.Explanation e.g.: During his years as Emperor, Napoleon was predominantly victorious, but this only encouraged his vision of conquering Europe.Conclusion e.g.: Napoleon can be considered an effective leader but it is evident that his true intentions were to satisfy his own ambitions, significantly restricting the extent to which Napoleon can be considered a great leader. Our decision to use the student product – an essay for their final “What do I know about my topic”? was a departure from SLIM. Checked it out with Ross, who said OK!
  • Isabella P – made the biggest number of conclusions, and started making explanations early, with the fewest number of facts at the outset. Her topic was the waxing and waning of support for the Klu Klux Klan over time – and she set out very early looking for patterns in her information.
  • Isabelle made a substantial number of explanations and reasonable number of conclusions. Her topic was Evaluate the differing interpretations highlighted in the historical debate on the trial of Breaker Morant A straight forward topic, which may not have needed so many conclusions.
  • Lexi F: Had a very large number of facts at the outset, some explanations, hardly any conclusions. She gathered all her information in depth at the beginning, and could not be persuaded to look for more, or to go further with synthesising her topic. She needed to gather broad overview information first, to then add to it, using Google and books, then to go very much deeper at the Collection stage. Instead she went deep first, and became immobile. Her essay grade reflects this, as does her process grade.
  • Sophie C’s essay question was Assess the impact of McCarthyism on USA. A fairly difficult topic, much written about. She has a reasonable number of conclusions, and her research process was orderly, curious and well documented.
  • Annabel’s essay was about Martin Luther King’s contribution to the Civil Rights movement. Annabel shows movement from facts to explanations, with some conclusions.
  • Laura’s topic was the impact of Che Guevara, and she started off well, but found the process long and her process fell over towards the end. She did not synthesise information enough, and this impacted on her essay and process.
  • This is just to visually compare the ranges of students in this project and the number of facts, explanations and conclusions made.Top: orange – Isabella P, shows fairly small number of facts, an early move to explanations and the most conclusionsMid: Dark green – Sophie C – shows large number of facts, a good move to explanations, and a middling number of conclusions.Low: Pale green- Laura H – shows large numbers of facts, and lower numbers of explanations and conclusions, reflecting her difficulties with the process of this Guided Inquiry.
  • Read across from left to right!Ask questions (bright green): A few found this difficult, no one said they’d learnt it.Evaluating information (blue): A few said they found that hard, and a few said they’d learnt it.Finding information at the right level(red): A large number found this difficult, and no one said they’d learnt it.Information difficulties (overload, underload and uneven quality) (brick red): Quite a few said they found this difficult, and a substantial number said they’d learnt it.Notetaking (sand): a few said they found it hard, and a few said they’d learnt it.Locating information (green) in learnings: A substantial number said they’d learnt this, but it is clear that they didn’t take in too well searching for information at the right level – exploratory, broad, comprehensive and summary.
  • Create own question (sand): Substantial number expressed difficulties, lower number said they’d learnt this. Synthesise into essay plan(red): Small number had difficulties, larger number said they’d learnt this.Write essay (navy): substantial number expressed difficulties, smaller number said they’d learnt thisFootnotes and bibliography(green): Large number expressed difficulties, even larger number said they’d learnt it.
  • Reflects the dip at Exploration, as well as another dip (Loreto’s own!) at the end, creating the product. Shows how Loreto students have taken on the language of the research river.
  • There were two classes doing this Guided Inquiry, and data analysis was only done on one of them. It’s demanding!
  • The point of all this?Helping students doing that task.But, taking these findings, small as they are, and not professional, to the school.Jo Bleby and I will present on this to the staff Term 4.There are clear implications of student need from this, in searching particularly, in synthesising information, in getting practice in reflection on their own research process.
  • Student enquiry! First birdTL analysis! Second bird.
  • GI has particularly been applied to gifted education, though not exclusively. Teams of teachers investigating Maker and Schiever models for gifted education came to the conclusion that open inquiry using ISP contained ALL the idea modifications to content, process and product recommended.Cathy believes it is the framing and reframing of questions after immersion in information that is critical to GI.
  • To conclude: Yes I’m excited about GI! It really works! Students are glad to finally be helped with the complex process of research; and to know their problems are experienced by everyoneIt really works! To seek feedback to provide them with tailored help as they need it, on what they are finding hard.It really works! To accompany them down the research river, and out of their “vague and nebulous beginnings” (to really mix up the metaphor!) And it is nifty to have the twin purposes of Guided Inquiry – Two birds with one stone – helping students and gathering data of direct use to students and teachers in our schools.
  • The twin purposes of guided inquiry final

    1. 1. Guidingstudentinquiry and evidence-basedpractice<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />The twin purposes of Guided Inquiry<br />
    2. 2. Late addendum<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Anyone who attended my presentation at IASL, and expressed interest in seeing the Guided Inquiry researchers wiki, please go to this address:<br /> And request access. An email will come to me and I’ll give you access.<br />Sorry, the list of emails got lost between Brisbane and Sydney!<br />
    3. 3. Purpose of presentation<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />To show how Guided Inquiry can be used to facilitate student enquiry, as well as providing data for evidence-based practice.<br />Two ways:<br />Overview of 2008 NSW Association of Independent Schools Project, led by Dr. Ross J. Todd<br />A 2010 Guided Inquiry carried out at Loreto Kirribilli, Sydney, Australia. <br />Along the way, the practicality of wiki as the organising tool will be shown. <br />
    4. 4. Essence of Guided Inquiry<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Definition<br />Why is it necessary?<br />Information Search Process<br />Research River analogy.<br />How it works<br />Types of assignments: open or close-ended<br />
    5. 5. Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Why is it necessary? The learning process? <br />
    6. 6. Why is it necessary? “Bird” units<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Background from teacher<br />Textbook work<br />Worksheet: Go find out about...<br />Locate information<br />Copy and paste<br />Report.<br />Loertscher, David V, Koechlin, Carol, and Zwaan, Sandi, 2005. Ban those bird units: 15 models for teaching and learning in technology rich environments. Salt Lake City, UT, Hi Willow Research and Publishing.<br />
    7. 7. Stages of the Information Search Process<br />© Information Search Process is copyrighted by Dr. C. Kuhlthau.<br />
    8. 8. The Research River<br /><ul><li>Starting a research task, you are at the beginning of a journey.
    9. 9. This is a journey that you’ll repeat many times in your life at school and work.
    10. 10. It’s not a simple journey, and may be likened to the progress a river makes from its source to the sea.</li></li></ul><li>The research river: Initiation<br />Research can be likened to a river’s progress. At its source, the river’s flow is weak and undirected.<br />In the Initiation stage of an assignment you may feel lost and uncertain as to the path you might take.<br />
    11. 11. The research river: Selection<br />This is a peaceful and happy part of the research river.<br />You browse some shallows and get surface information on a few topics to help you choose the one you like.<br />Use preliminary searching: Broad, not deep - Encyclopedias<br /><br />
    12. 12. The research river: Exploration<br />As water is added to the river, it  carves a channel for itself and soon forms a series of rapids.<br />You’ve chosen your area of interest, but as you seek information, you find there’s quite a lot of it!<br />Use Exploratory searching.Wide, not deep! Topic overviews in online databases, books, Google.<br />You are trying establish the scope of the topic.<br />
    13. 13. The research river: Exploration<br />You may even plunge headfirst over a waterfall - unsure of what lies below it – <br />THE DIP!<br />At this stage of the research process it is completely normal to fall into the dip – to feel overloaded, and confused!<br />It is definitely here where you should seek teacher/librarian help!<br />Contained, directed searching is necessary to come out of the Dreaded Dip!<br />
    14. 14. The research river: Formulation<br />It is only after you’ve researched widely, navigated the flood of information that you feel strong and confident.<br />In the process, some of the water is left behind, as you work through the process of formulating your enquiry question.<br />After this sifting process, you are streaming ahead to the sea. You feel confident and focused now.<br />
    15. 15. The research river: Collection<br />The flow of the river has been controlled.<br />You are now in charge of the information <br />You are sorting it, controlling it, shaping it to answer your question.<br />Use Comprehensive Searching: Pertinent not just relevant – Questia/ Online databases.<br />Use and adjust notetaking grids.<br />Keep quotes for your essay.<br />Keep bibliographic details. <br />
    16. 16. The research river: Presentation<br />Finally, as you approach your destination, you may be faced with choices (What exactly is the shape of my essay? How can I shape all my information into an argument?)Which way will your research river flow to the sea? <br />Summary searching: Go back and check you’ve covered all angles. <br />Do I really have to do a bibliography? Footnotes? In-text citation?<br />
    17. 17. The Research river: Assessment<br />You’ve conquered the raging Information River! You have reached the calm sea, peaceful and happy with yourself. <br />Or maybe there’s a little hole back in that old dam you might need to fix next time…<br /><ul><li></li></ul>Thanks for the River analogy, Di Laycock, Barker College!<br />
    18. 18. How it works - A typical Guided Inquiry unit: Open ended<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    19. 19. Types of assignments:<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Open-ended, where students develop their own enquiry question.<br />Less open-ended, where students do not create their own enquiry question. <br />Elements of Guided Inquiry scaffolding can be included, e.g. teaching searching appropriate to stage of enquiry - Overview, exploratory, comprehensive, summary. <br />Notetaking /bibliographic grids<br />Synthesis of information. <br />
    20. 20. Overview of 2008 AIS/CEC Guided Inquiry project<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Twin purpose: Gather data, and guide student inquiry.<br />Project wiki<br />12 schools, 8 History, 1 Science, 1 English, 2 primary<br />35 teachers, 18 teacher librarians and 935 students<br />Set in Information Search Process<br />Used planned and unplanned interventions<br />Had area of inquiry allowing students to develop own questions<br />Gathered and analysed data using SLIM Toolkit at Initiation, Collection and Assessment<br />
    21. 21. The wiki for the 2008 AIS Guided Inquiry project <br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    22. 22. Each school had its own wiki page<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    23. 23. Questions in the SLIM Toolkit reflection sheets<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Write the title that best describes your research project at this time.<br />Take some time to think about your research topic. Now write down what you know about this topic. <br />What interests you about this topic?<br />How much do you know about this topic? Check () one box that best matches how much you know. Nothing, Not much, Some, Quite a bit and A great deal <br />Write down what you think is EASY about researching your topic.<br />Write down what you think is DIFFICULT about researching your topic.<br />Write down how you are FEELING now about your project. Check () only the boxes that apply to you. Confident, Disappointed, Relieved, Frustrated, Confused, Optimistic, Uncertain, Satisfied, Anxious or Other. <br />The third reflection sheet also included students’ reflections on what they had learnt. <br />
    24. 24. Findings and difficulties<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Findings are to be published by Dr. Todd soon, in School Libraries Worldwide. See wiki also.<br />Difficulties in each school were the same:<br />Formulating question<br />Finding the right information for the stage of the enquiry<br />Taking notes<br />Synthesising information<br />Acknowledging sources<br />Interest dip at Formulation in line with Kuhlthau’s process. <br />
    25. 25. 2010 Loreto Kirribilli Year 11 Modern Historical Investigation <br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Twin purposes: <br />Use Guided Inquiry methods to scaffold and carry out historical investigation, using a wiki.<br />Gather and analyse data using a modified SLIM Toolkit<br />Reflection sheets were both for students’ use and for data. <br />The TWIN PURPOSES! <br />
    26. 26. Guiding student enquiry: First purpose<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />The wiki for this project was:<br />The organiser<br />The means of communication between teacher and students/ teacher librarian and students/ students and students. <br />Personal learning space, and rich evidence of growth in understanding and record of student process. <br />
    27. 27. Year 11 Modern History wiki<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    28. 28. Faith R’s wiki page: Berlin Wall<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    29. 29. Gather and analyse data: Second purpose<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Goals of case study.<br />tomeasurechanges in knowledge as studentspassthroughthestages of theInformationSearchProcess, i.e. byobservinghowoftentheymake factual statements, explanationsorconclusions. <br />tofindoutwhatstudentsfinddifficultwhenresearching and to compare thiswithexpressedlearnings at theend of theproject.<br />togatherreflectionsontheInformationSearchProcess.<br />
    30. 30. Research questions (SLIM adaptation)<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />What do youknowaboutyourtopic?<br />Haveyouany particular difficultiesrelatingtoyourtopic?<br />WhathaveyoulearntfromthisGuidedInquiry?<br />Describe yourfeelings are youprogressedthroughthestages of theInformationSearchprocess – Initiation, Selection, Formulation/Exploration, Collection and Presentation.<br />
    31. 31. 1. What do you know about your topic?<br />At Initiation, Formulation and from student essays, the number of facts, explanations and conclusions were counted.<br />
    32. 32. Facts, explanations and conclusions: Top range<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    33. 33. Facts, explanations, conclusions: Top range<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    34. 34. Facts, explanations, conclusions: Mid range<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    35. 35. Facts, explanations, conclusions: Mid-range<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    36. 36. Facts, explanations, conclusions: Lower range<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    37. 37. Facts, explanations, conclusions: Lower range<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    38. 38. Comparison of range<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Isabella P: Top range<br />Sophie C: Mid range<br />Laura H: Lower range<br />
    39. 39. Implications for Loreto of Question 1 – What do you know about your topic?<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />WedemonstrateTodd’s “integrativeapproach - wherestudentsmanipulatefacts…by…buildingexplanations, synthesisingfacts… tobuildpositional, predictiveconclusionstatements”. <br />Students and teachersshouldbeproud of themovetowarddeepknowledgedisplayedbymoststudents in thisproject.<br />Weneedtoemphasiseongoingsynthesis of informationtoworktowardsestablishingpatterns, (explanations, conclusions) earlierin thejourneytounderstanding a topic, speciallywithlowerrangestudents.<br />Weneedtoemphasisepreliminary, exploratory, comprehensive and summarysearchingconcepts more. <br />
    40. 40. Question 2 and 3: CombinedWhat difficulties are you having/What have you learnt? <br />
    41. 41. Question 2 and 3: CombinedWhat difficulties are you having/What have you learnt? <br />
    42. 42. Implications for Loreto of Questions 2/3 – Difficulties/learnings<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Locatingtherightinformationforthelevel of researchtheywere at was a crucial obstacle, whichappearstobenotovercome. <br />Studentsneed more workonhowtosearch in anappropriatewayfortheInformationSearchstagethey are up to, usingthesearchingconcepts of:<br />Preliminary - encyclopedias<br />Exploratory – books and Google<br />Comprehensive – online databases<br />Summary - prior topresentation. (Kuhlthau)<br />Scopefor more workoncreatingquestions, as studentsfoundthishard. <br />
    43. 43. Question 4: Describe feelings during Information Search process<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    44. 44. Implications for Loreto of Question 4: Experiences of the Information Search Process<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Value of knowingitis normal tofeeloverloaded and confused at Formulation – wherestudents are eithercreatingtheirownquestion in an open-endedGuidedInquiry, or in a more closedenquiry, formulatingtheirown “take” ontheinformation.<br />Thatitispossibletoseekhelpwhen in overload!<br />Seconddip in theinformationprocess – whentheyhavetosynthesiseall, and createthe final product. <br />
    45. 45. “I thinkusingtheresearchriverprocess (althoughslightlycorny) isveryuseful as itallowsustoproperly plan ourresearchprocesses and makesurewedon’tleaveourwork up untilthelast minute.” Lauren G<br />“ I thinkthisisone of thefirstassignmentswhereall I hadto do thenightbeforeitwasduewasreadthrough and editanyweakerparts of my essay and ensurethatitallmadesense and waswrittenwell (as well as thefootnoting and bibliographyetc) Forthis I am veryproud of myself.” Lauren G<br />“Once I finishedthisprocess, I feltanimmenserelief and accomplishment, as I hadput a greateffortintotheresearch and writing of thisessay. I particularlylikedthenotetakingtablesthatweweresuggestedto use as theyassisted me in taking more concise notes from my sources as well as thebibliographicdetails.”Isabella P.<br />Anecdotally, from Ms Bleby’s class....<br />
    46. 46. Anecdotally from Ms Jory’s class..<br />“I have.. developedananalyticalvoiceneededfor my historicalarguments I am ..gladthatourprocesses are beingmarked as I feelitmotivated me toresearch and reflect more thoroughlythan I havebefore. I foundthenotetakinggridforced me intosummarisingtheinformation in a visual way so I knew I wasnotplagiarising. Whenitcametoincorporatingsuchargumentsinto my ownessay, itmadeiteasiertodistinguishthat I waswriting my ownpoints. HistoryStudy Centre and Questia I will use in otherassignments. I wasreallyproud of my workbecauseitwasthemosteffort I haveeverputintotheresearchstage of a project and I feltthatitwasjustified in theend.” Amelia B.<br />“I havebecomeaware of more accurate and relevantinformationsitessuch as Questia and otherschoolsubscriptions.” Maddie G.<br />
    47. 47. “Thenotetakinggridmadethe actual writing of theessay a lotlessstressfulbecause I knew I hadalltheinformation I needed.” Michaela M<br /> <br />“I havealsolearnthowtoproperly use citations in my essay and establish a accuratereferencelist. Thiswillbehelpfulto use in otherassignmentstoavoidplagiarism.” Georgia V<br /> <br />“Thenotetakinggridswere a veryuseful and organisedwayto record and summariseinformation. Italsogot my bibliographicprocessout of theway, so whenitcame time tocreate my bibliography, itwashalf done for me already. Thesegridsreallykept my informationorganised and succinct, and gave me a clearview of where I wasgoing and whatelse I neededto complete.” Annabelle W.<br />Anecdotally from Gabi’s class..<br />
    48. 48. Concluding statement - Loreto Kirribilli<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Combinedwith wiki, GuidedInquiryisveryuseful in open-endedresearchtasks, e.g.SeniorGeography Project, Year 11 Modern and AncientHistoricalInvestigations. <br />In more regular assignments, wherethequestionisgiven, and thescope of theresearchis similar foreachstudents, itisclearthatthere are benefits in:<br />teachingstudentshowtosearch at thevarioussteps in theirinformationprocess. <br />givingstudents more experience in developingtheirownquestions.<br />givingstudentspractice in dealingwithinformationoverload, underload and unevenquality, and <br />workingonanongoingbasisfromthebeginning of a tasktoforcesynthesis of informationtoenablestudentstomakeexplanations and conclusions<br />
    49. 49. Guided Inquiry: Two birds with one stone!<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />Permission to use sought Sept 2010.<br />
    50. 50. How GI is going at Sydney AIS schools since 2008<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    51. 51. GI Progress – Sydney schools<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    52. 52. Queenwood Libguides<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    53. 53. GI Progress: Sydney schools<br />Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />
    54. 54. Lee FitzGerald, Loreto Kirribilli, Sept. 2010<br />