The document discusses using tablets to support inquiry-based science learning in elementary classrooms. It describes two science activities conducted with students where tablets were used at different points in the inquiry process. Tablets allowed students to search for evidence online, document findings, and create multimodal presentations. However, the level of student direction versus teacher direction varied between open-ended and limited inquiry depending on the teacher's approach. Ultimately, the success of tablets in enhancing learning depends more on how the teacher structures the activity than on the technology itself.

1. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Investigating creative inquiries with tablet-cloud systems
in elementary science
Nathalie Hack
Charles Max
Blog: http://dica-lab.org/scipads/
Contact: nathalie.hack@uni.lu

2. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
“Inquiry-based learning is a process where students
- are involved in their learning,
- formulate questions,
- investigate widely
- and then build new understandings, meanings and knowledge.
That knowledge is new to the students and may be used to answer a
question, to develop a solution or to support a position or point of view.
The knowledge is usually presented to others and may result in some sort of
action.” (Alberta, 2004, p. 1)*
*Alberta. Alberta Learning. (2004). Focus on Inquiry. A Teacher’s Guide to Implementing Inquiry-based Learning.
Retrieved from http://education.alberta.ca/media/313361/focusoninquiry.pdf
Inquiry-based science learning

3. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
“General inquiry abilities include:
• posing and refining research questions,
• planning and managing an investigation,
• analyzing and communicating results.
Inquiry activities provide the opportunity to develop and exercise these
general inquiry abilities.” (Edelson, Gordon & Pea, 1999, p. 393)*
*Edelson, D.C., Gordin, D.N., Pea, R.D. (1999). Addressing the Challenges of Inquiry-Based Learning through
Technology and Curriculum Design. Journal of the Learning Sciences 8, 391-450
Inquiry-based science learning

4. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Ask question
Investigate/lookin
g for evidence
Formulate
explanations/creat
e product
Communicate
explanations/pres
ent production
Discuss and
reflect, connect
explanations to
knowledge
Inquiry-based learning

5. Variations
More  Amount of learner self-direction  Less
Open Guided Structured Limited
Essentialfeatures
Finding questions L. poses a question L. selects among
questions or poses
new questions
L. sharpens or clarifies
questions provided by
teacher, materials or
another source
L. engages in questions
provided by teacher,
materials or another
source
Looking for evidence L. determines what
constitutes evidence and
collects it
L. is directed to
collect certain data
L. is given data and
asked to analyse
L. is given data and told
how to analyse
Formulating
explanations
L. formulates explanation
after summarizing
evidence
L. is guided in process
of formulating
explanations from
evidence
L. is given positive ways
to use evidence to
formulate explanations
L. is provided with
evidence and how to
use evidence to
formulate explanations
Connecting
explanations to
knowledge
L. independently
examines other resources
and forms the links to
explanations
L. is directed to areas
and sources of
scientific knowledge
L. is given possible
connections
No connections are
made to scientific
knowledge
Communicating
explanations
L. forms reasonable and
logical argument to
communicate
explanations
L. coached in
development of
communication
L. is provided broad
guidelines to sharpen
communication
L. is given steps and
procedures for
communication
Less  Amount of Direction from teacher or material  More
Inquiry Model*: student and teacher roles
*National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education
Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, D.C.: National Academy
Press.

6. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Overview of science activity 1
Science activity 1: dangers of the electric circuit
- 18 children aged between 10 and 11 years
- Groups of 2 children
- 10 tablets
- Classroom activity realized in 1 day (2 school lessons)
- Goal: find out the dangers of the electric circuit

7. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Discussing
question
provided by
teacher
Giving some hints
for doing
research on the
web
Structured Inquiry:
Learners sharpen
questions provided
by teacher
Finding questions

8. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Looking for evidence
Moving to guided
Inquiry:
Learner is directed
to collect data
Searching
information on
the web
Exploring,
discovering and
documenting

9. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Formulating explanations & create product
Create multimodal
presentations
(Keynote, book,…)
Moving to open
inquiry:
Learner formulates
explanation after
summarizing
evidence
Insert evidence
and observations

10. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Connecting explanations to knowledge
Learner uses
book to develop
knowledge
Learner uses new
knowledge to do
more complicated
experiment
Open Inquiry:
Learner independently
examines other resources
and forms links to
explanations

11. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Variations
More  Amount of learner self-direction  Less
Open Guided Structured Limited
Essentialfeatures
Finding questions L. poses a question L. selects among
questions or poses
new questions
L. sharpens or clarifies
questions provided by
teacher, materials or
another source
L. engages in questions
provided by teacher,
materials or another
source
Looking for evidence L. determines what
constitutes evidence and
collects it
L. is directed to
collect certain data
L. is given data and
asked to analyse
L. is given data and told
how to analyse
Formulating
explanations
L. formulates explanation
after summarizing
evidence
L. is guided in process
of formulating
explanations from
evidence
L. is given positive ways
to use evidence to
formulate explanations
L. is provided with
evidence and how to
use evidence to
formulate explanations
Connecting
explanations to
knowledge
L. independently
examines other resources
and forms the links to
explanations
L. is directed to areas
and sources of
scientific knowledge
L. is given possible
connections
No connections are
made to scientific
knowledge
Communicating
explanations
L. forms reasonable and
logical argument to
communicate
explanations
L. coached in
development of
communication
L. is provided broad
guidelines to sharpen
communication
L. is given steps and
procedures for
communication
Less  Amount of Direction from teacher or material  More
Dynamic inquiry process of science activity 1

12. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Overview of science activity 2
Science activity 2: hedges, leaves and fruits
- 33 children aged between 8 and 10 years
- Groups of 3-4 children
- 10 tablets
- Outdoor and classroom activity realized in 2 days
- Goal: get to know the different bushes and their fruits

13. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Tasks of the groups:
1. Find out the names of the different hedges
2. Take pictures of the different characteristics of
the hedges
3. Bring pieces of the hedges to the classroom
Teacher creates groups of 3
children:
- 1 child must take the iPad
- 1 child must take the book
- 1 child must take the
plastic bag
Limited Inquiry:
Learners engage in
questions provided
by teacher
Day 1: Finding questions

14. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Day 1: Looking for evidence
Moving to guided
Inquiry:
Learner is directed
to collect data
Searching
information in the
science book
Documenting
with tablet
(taking pictures &
notes)

15. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Present collected
data in front of
class (using Apple
TV)
Teacher directs
learner in how
and what to
present
Moving back to limited Inquiry:
Learner is given steps and
procedures for communication
Day 1: Communicating explanations

16. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Variations
More  Amount of learner self-direction  Less
Open Guided Structured Limited
Essentialfeatures
Finding questions L. poses a question L. selects among
questions or poses
new questions
L. sharpens or clarifies
questions provided by
teacher, materials or
another source
L. engages in questions
provided by teacher,
materials or another
source
Looking for evidence L. determines what
constitutes evidence and
collects it
L. is directed to
collect certain data
L. is given data and
asked to analyse
L. is given data and told
how to analyse
Formulating
explanations
L. formulates explanation
after summarizing
evidence
L. is guided in process
of formulating
explanations from
evidence
L. is given positive ways
to use evidence to
formulate explanations
L. is provided with
evidence and how to
use evidence to
formulate explanations
Connecting
explanations to
knowledge
L. independently
examines other resources
and forms the links to
explanations
L. is directed to areas
and sources of
scientific knowledge
L. is given possible
connections
No connections are
made to scientific
knowledge
Communicating
explanations
L. forms reasonable and
logical argument to
communicate
explanations
L. coached in
development of
communication
L. is provided broad
guidelines to sharpen
communication
L. is given steps and
procedures for
communication
Less  Amount of Direction from teacher or material  More
Dynamic inquiry process of science activity 2 (day 1)

17. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Research questions:
1. What is the name of the hedge?
2. What is the name of the fruit of the hedge?
3. Is the hedge/fruit poisonous or not?
4. Purpose of use of the hedge (for tee, jam,…?)
Teacher gives clear research
questions
Limited Inquiry:
Learners engage in
questions provided
by teacher
Day 2: Finding questions

18. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Day 2: Looking for evidence
Limited Inquiry:
Learner is given data
and told how to
analyse
Teacher provided
pictures to
analyse
Teacher gives precise
orders how to analyse
(look up information in
book, copy text,…)

19. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Day 2: Formulating explanations & create product
Provided material:
science book, tablet
with given pictures,
Keynote application
Limited inquiry:
Learners are provided
with evidence and told
how to use evidence to
formulate explanations
Create a Keynote
presentation by
following strict
orders

20. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Variations
More  Amount of learner self-direction  Less
Open Guided Structured Limited
Essentialfeatures
Finding questions L. poses a question L. selects among
questions or poses
new questions
L. sharpens or clarifies
questions provided by
teacher, materials or
another source
L. engages in questions
provided by teacher,
materials or another
source
Looking for evidence L. determines what
constitutes evidence and
collects it
L. is directed to
collect certain data
L. is given data and
asked to analyse
L. is given data and told
how to analyse
Formulating
explanations
L. formulates explanation
after summarizing
evidence
L. is guided in process
of formulating
explanations from
evidence
L. is given positive ways
to use evidence to
formulate explanations
L. is provided with
evidence and how to
use evidence to
formulate explanations
Connecting
explanations to
knowledge
L. independently
examines other resources
and forms the links to
explanations
L. is directed to areas
and sources of
scientific knowledge
L. is given possible
connections
No connections are
made to scientific
knowledge
Communicating
explanations
L. forms reasonable and
logical argument to
communicate
explanations
L. coached in
development of
communication
L. is provided broad
guidelines to sharpen
communication
L. is given steps and
procedures for
communication
Less  Amount of Direction from teacher or material  More
Dynamic inquiry process of the science activity 2 (day 2)

21. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Ask question
Investigate/lookin
g for evidence
Formulate
explanations/creat
e product
Communicate
explanations/pres
ent production
Discuss and
reflect, connect
explanations to
knowledge
Inquiry-based learning

22. Ask question
Enables access to a
large amount of
various resources
Enhances documentation
and representation
richness and supports the
creation of multimodal
presentations
Enables immediate
presentations (Apple
TV) and sharing (cloud)
of productions
Supports self-
reflection (e.g.
recordings) and co-
construction of
knowledge
SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Ask question
Investigate/lookin
g for evidence
Formulate
explanations/creat
e product
Communicate
explanations/pres
ent production
Discuss and
reflect, connect
explanations to
knowledge
Inquiry-based learning with tablets

23. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Conclusion
The tablet gives opportunities to:
- enhance inquiry-based learning
- create more open inquiry learning processes with high level of
learner’s self-direction
But:
- the tablet does not change the teacher’s approach of learning
- the teacher’s approach shapes the activity, not the the tool
- the success of using tablets in school strongly depends on the
teacher’s attitude, motivation and technological background

24. SnT – Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust
University of Luxembourg
Thank you for your attention!
Nathalie Hack
Charles Max
More info:
Blog: http://dica-lab.org/scipads/
Contact: nathalie.hack@uni.lu