Inquiry-based learning (IBL) represents the student-centered approach that focuses on encouraging learners to scientifically construct new knowledge. The study aimed to explain science teachers’ and students’ perceptions about applying IBL in a private school in Dubai. Furthermore, to explore the degree to which the science textbook of Grade 8 promotes inquiry instruction. A mixed-method approach was applied where two questionnaires were conducted and an evaluation rubric was used to analyze the textbook to explore the extent to which it supports IBL. The findings revealed that teachers showed progress in applying inquiry instruction and students became more engaged in learning.
Abd-El-KhalickF.BoujaoudeS.DuschlR.LedermanN. G.Mamlok-NaamanR.. . . TuanH. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88, 397-419.
2.
Al-NabqiA. (2010). The degree to which UAE primary science workbooks promote scientific inquiry. Research in Science & Technological Education, 28, 227-247.
3.
AndersonR. D. (1996). Study of curriculum reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
4.
AndersonR. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 1-12.
5.
AtkinsonT.MatusevichM.HuberL. (2009). Making science trade book choices for elementary classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 62, 484-497.
6.
BalımA. G. (2009). The effects of discovery learning on students’ success and inquiry learning skills. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 35, 1-20.
7.
BanchiH.BellR. (2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and Children, 46(2), 26-29.
8.
BeckJ.CzerniakC. M.LumpeA. T. (2000). An exploratory study of teachers’ beliefs regarding the implementation of constructivism in their classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 323-343.
9.
BellJ. (1999). Doing your research project (3rd ed.). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
BishopB.AndersonC. (1990). Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 415-427.
12.
BouJaoudeS. (2002). Balance of scientific literacy themes in science curricula: the case of Lebanon. International Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 139–156.
13.
BryantR. (2006). Assessment results following inquiry and traditional physics laboratory activities. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(7), 56-61.
14.
BuckL. B.BretzS. L.TownsM. H. (2008). Characterizing the level of inquiry in the undergraduate laboratory. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38, 52-58.
15.
CarvalhoC.FreireS.ConboyJ.BaptistaM.FreireA.AzevedoM.OliveiraT. (2011). Student perceptions of secondary science teachers’ practices following curricular change. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 8, 29-41.
16.
ChabalengulaV. M.MumbaF. (2012). Inquiry-based science education: A scenario on Zambia’s high school science curriculum. Science Education International, 23, 307-327.
17.
CreswellJ. (2009). Research Design, Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 3rd ed. California. Sage Publications Inc.
18.
Cronin-JonesL. L. (1991). Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curriculum implementation: Two case studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 235-250.
19.
DeBoerG. E.BybeeR. W. (1995). The goals of science curriculum. In BybeeR. W.McInerneyJ. D. (Eds.), Redesigning the science curriculum: A report on the implications of standards and benchmarks for science education (pp. 71-74). Colorado Springs, CO: Biological Sciences Curriculum Study.
20.
DuranL. B.DuranE. (2004). The 5E Instructional Model: A learning cycle approach for inquiry-based science teaching. The Science Education Review, 3(2), 49-58.
21.
EickC.ReedC. (2002). What makes an inquiry-oriented science teacher? The influence of learning histories on student teacher role identity and practice. Science Education, 86, 401-416.
22.
EltanahyM. (2018). A study in STEM policy implementation in UAE: Science teachers’ readiness to STEM education in the light of their perception. In DavidS. A.AbdulaiA. (Eds.), Education policies in the age of social advancement: Studies from the United Arab Emirates (pp. 129-152). Beau Bassin, Mauritius: Scholars’ Press.
23.
EngerS.YagerR. (2009). Assessing Students Understanding in Science. A Standard Based k-12 Handbook. 2nd ed. California: Corwin Press.
24.
FettersM.CzerniakC.FishL.ShawberryJ. (2002). Confronting, challenging, and changing teacher’s beliefs: Implications from a local systemic change professional development program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 101-130.
25.
ForawiS. (2011). Inquiry instruction and the nature of science: How are they interconnected?Journal of Science Education, 12, 11-14.
26.
GermannP. J.AramR.BurkeG. (1996). Identifying patterns and relationships among the responses of seventh grade students to the science process skills of designing experiments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 79-99.
27.
GhufronM. A.ErmawatiS. (2018). The strengths and weaknesses of cooperative learning and problem-based learning in EFL writing class: Teachers and students’ perspectives. International Journal of Instruction, 11, 657-672.
28.
GreeneJ. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
29.
HandB.AlvermannD.GeeJ.GuzzettiB.NorrisS.PhillipsL.. . . YoreL. D. (2003). Message from the “Island group”: What is literacy in science literacy?Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 607-615.
30.
JohnsonR. B.OnwuegbuzieA. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33, 239-271.
31.
JonesM. T.EickC. J. (2007). Implementing inquiry kit curriculum: Obstacles, adaptations, and practical knowledge development in two middle school science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 91, 492-513.
32.
KemberD. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics’ conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7, 255-275.
33.
KeselmanA. (2003). Supporting inquiry learning by promoting normative understanding of multivariable causality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 898-921.
34.
KeysC. W.KennedyV. (1999). Understanding inquiry science teaching in context: A case study of an elementary teacher. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10, 315-333.
35.
KuhlthauC.ManiotesL.CaspariA. (2015). Guided inquiry: Learning in the 21st century (2nd ed.). Santa Bara, CA: ABC-CLIO. Available from http://www.abc-clio.com
36.
KulmG.RosemanJ.TreistmanM. (1999). A benchmarks-based approach to textbook evaluation. Science Books and Films, 35, 147-153.
37.
LevittK. (2000). From hands-on to inquiry: Changing teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices through systematic reform. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
LodicoM.SpauldingD.VoegtleK. (2010). Methods in educational research (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
40.
LordT.OrkwiszewskiT. (2006). Moving from didactic to inquiry-based instruction in a science laboratory. American Biology Teacher, 68, 342-345.
41.
Loucks-HorsleyS. (1998). The role of teaching and learning in systemic reform: A focus on professional development. Science Educator, 7, 1-6.
42.
MarxR. W.BlumenfeldP. C.KrajcikJ. S.FishmanB.SolowayE.GeierR. (2004). Inquiry-based science in the middle grades: Assessment of learning in urban systemic reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1063-1080.
43.
Ministry of Education. (2001). National science curriculum framework. UAE: Ministry of Education.
44.
National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
45.
National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
46.
NezvalovaD. (2008). Constructivism in science teacher education. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 9, 81-88.
47.
NuangchalernP.ThammasenaB. (2009). Cognitive development, analytical thinking and learning satisfaction of second grade students learned through inquiry-based learning. Asian Social Science, 5, 82-87.
48.
ShulmanL. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
49.
SlavinR. (2012). Educational Psycology: Theory and Practice. 10th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
50.
SmithB. D.JacobsD. C. (2003). TextRev: A window into how general and organic chemistry students use textbook resources. Journal of Chemical Education, 80, 99-102.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55.
WallaceC. S.KangN.-H. (2004). An investigation of experienced secondary science teachers’ beliefs about inquiry: An examination of competing belief sets. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 936-960.
56.
WangY. (2011). Inquiry-based science instruction and performance literacy for students who are deaf or hard of hearing. American Annals of the Deaf, 156, 239-254.
57.
WeeB.ShepardsonD.FastJ.HarborJ. (2007). Teaching and learning about inquiry: Insights and challenges in professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 63-91.
58.
WolfS. J.FraserJ. (2008). Learning environment, attitudes and achievement among middle-school science students using inquiry-based laboratory activities. Research in Science Education, 38, 321-341.
59.
YagerR. E.AckayH. (2010). The advantages of an inquiry approach for science instruction in middle grades. School Science and Mathematics, 110, 5-12.
60.
YoreL.HandB.GoldmanS.HildebrandG.OsborneJ.Ti-eagustD. (2004). New directions in language and science education research. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 347-352.
