Poster presented at the International Union of Physiological Societies' Quadrennial Conference 2013 (Birmingham, UK). Abstract: Calls for reform in science education (1) and physiology education in particular (5), have long argued for an emphasis on the development of key scientific thinking skills to prepare students for the complex, novel problems they will face in the 21st Century workplace. In Australia, these skills have been formalised as a set of national academic standards for scientific thinking (4). Inquiry-based curricula have been shown to facilitate the development of key scientific thinking skills such as experimental design and data interpretation (6). Currently, there is a lack of empirical evidence detailing what students actually do in inquiry-based classes and which aspects of the curricula implementation shape their actions and learning. We have developed a vertically-integrated set of inquiry-based practical curricula for large cohorts (500-900 students) of first and second year physiology students (2). Our findings over three semesters (3, 7) demonstrate that this curricula design facilitates the development of students’ skills in scientific thinking and communication. Video recordings of a 22 students participating in inquiry classes were analysed to determine how students engage with the curricula and discuss their scientific ideas. Students also annotated these videos of themselves to highlight instances of scientific thinking, and described the development of their critical thinking skills in relation to the Australian national academic standards for scientific thinking (4) in interviews. The majority of the scientific thinking events occured during development of the hypotheses and experimental plans, and during analysis and interpretation of the experimental data. In contrast, students rarely demonstrated scientific thinking during the execution of the experiments and collection of the data – an omission that several students lamented in interviews when they later realised inconsistencies in the data that might have been addressed with more timely critical evaluation of the data. References 1. Bybee RW, and Fuchs B. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 43: 349-352, 2006. 2. Farrand K, Kibedi J, Colthorpe K, Good J, and Lluka L. Third National Attributes Graduate Project Symposia. Griffith University, Queensland, Australia: 2009. 3. Farrand-Zimbardi K, Colthorpe K, Good J, and Lluka L. International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) annual conference. Liverpool, UK: 2010. 4. Jones S, Yates B, and Kelder J. Learning and Teaching Academic Standards (LTAS) Project Final Report for the Second-Intake Discipline Groups, 2011. 5. Michael J. Advances in Physiology Education 30: 159-167, 2006. 6. Myers MJ, and Burgess AB. Advances in Physiology Education 27: 26-33, 2003. 7. Zimbardi K, Bugarcic A, Colthorpe K, Good JP, and Lluka LJ. Advances in Physiology Education 2013; 37 (4): 303-15.

1. IUPS Conference July 2013
Background
Over the last 30 years there has been a wide-
spread implementation of inquiry based classes
in science education (2), and in tertiary
physiology curricula in particular (10)
Inquiry based classes improve student learning
of content (7, 9) and important scientific thinking
skills such as experimental design and data
interpretation (11).
However, a multitude of obstacles face
instructors aiming to implement inquiry-based
practical curricula (12) where poor
implementation (8), and both too much and too
little guidance (6) have negative effects on
student learning.
It is important to understand which specific
aspects of inquiry-based curricula engage
students in effectively developing scientific
thinking skills, and when and why the
development of these skills goes awry.
Developing students’ advanced scientific thinking skills
through effective inquiry-based physiology practical classes
Kirsten Zimbardiab, Kay Colthorpea, Judit Kibedia, Phil Longb
aEducational Research Unit, School of Biomedical Science, Faculty of Science,
bCentre for Educational Innovation and Technology
The University of Queensland, Australia
Contact: k.zimbardi@uq.edu.au
Vertically-integrated, inquiry-based practicals
We have developed a vertically-integrated set of inquiry-based practical curricula for large cohorts (500-900
students) of first and second year physiology students (3) which facilitate the development of students’ skills
in scientific thinking (4, 13).
References
1. Bailin S. Science and Education 11: 361–375, 2002.
2. Dunbar K, and Fugelsang J. The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning 2005, p. 705-725.
3. Farrand K, Kibedi J, Colthorpe K, Good J, and Lluka L. Third National Attributes Graduate Project Symposia. Griffith University, Queensland, Australia: 2009.
4. Farrand-Zimbardi K, Colthorpe K, Good J, and Lluka L. : International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL). Liverpool, UK: 2010.
5. Jones S, Yates B, and Kelder J. Australian Learning and Teaching Council, 2011.
6. Kirschner PA, Sweller J, and Clark RE. Educational Psychologist 41: 75-86, 2006.
7. Kolkhorst FW, Mason CL, DiPasquale DM, Patterson P, and Buono MJ. Advances in Physiology Education 25: 45-50, 2001.
8. Kuhn D. Education for Thinking, 2005, p. 218.
9. Luckie DB, Maleszewski JJ, Loznak SD, and Krha M. Advances in Physiology Education 28: 199-209, 2004.
10. Michael J. Advances in Physiology Education 30: 159-167, 2006.
11. Myers MJ, and Burgess AB. Advances in Physiology Education 27: 26-33, 2003.
12. Silverthorn DU, Thorn PM, and Svinicki MD. Advances in Physiology Education 30: 204-214, 2006.
13. Zimbardi K, Bugarcic A, Colthorpe K, Good JP, and Lluka LJ. Advances in Physiology Education under review.
School of Biomedical Sciences
EDUCATION RESEARCH UNIT
Students have annotated their own videos
highlighting their scientific reasoning
(http://dev.ceit.uq.edu.au/vcop2/course/inquiring-minds)
This work was supported by a University of
Queensland Teaching & Learning Fellowship
Implications
Video evidence revealed key factors that
impact on the degree of scientific rigour
students employ when making their
decisions.
Students must be required to:
1. demonstrate feasibility of their
experimental proposals with pilot
data and primary literature,
2. critically compare experimental
contexts and specific data values
when interpreting their experimental
findings.
Quality of reasoning
Guessing,
intuition
Prior knowledge
Lectures, course
materials,
textbook
Own experimental
evidence
Experimental
evidence from
scientific literature
Cell & Molecular Physiology
Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6
Module 1 Module 2
Pilot experiment +
proposal
Data analysis Experiment
Pilot experiment +
proposal
Report writing feedback Experiment
Systems Physiology
Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6
Skill building Skill building + proposal Oral proposals Experiment Experiment Data analysis
Video recordings of students engaged in 2nd year inquiry in classes were annotated by
the students using the Australian national academic standards for scientific thinking (5).
Using the theoretical framework for critical thinking developed by Bailin (1), analysis of
videos revelaed that students used a large range evidence bases when reasoning,
with varying degrees of scientific rigour.
Am I developing my critical thinking skills?
Students used, and developed, their critical scientific thinking skills when they needed to make scientific
decisions about which hypothesis to test and how, and how to analyse and interpret experimental data.
IUPS Conference, Birmingham July 2013