Over nine years, a professional development program engaged teachers in inquiry as both a pedagogical tool and for professional learning. This study presents two exemplar teachers from the program who enacted consistently strong student inquiries while also exhibiting consistently strong appropriation of teacher inquiry. Results reveal a relationship between strong teacher and student inquiries that was limited, non-linear, and highly sensitive to context. The exemplars reveal that teacher inquiry strengthened the intended outcomes for student inquiry by cultivating particular qualities and understandings among the teachers. Implications for professional development and future research are discussed.
AbramiP. C.BernardR. M.BorokhovskiE.WaddingtonD. I.WadeC. A.PerssonT. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275–314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
2.
BonnstetterR. J. (1998). Inquiry: Learning from the past with an eye on the future. The Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education.
3.
BovedaM.AnnammaS. A. (2023). Beyond making a statement: An intersectional framing of the power and possibilities of positioning. Educational Researcher, 52(5), 306–314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x231167149
ClaytonC. D.KilbaneJ. (2016). Learning in tandem: Professional development for teachers and students as inquirers. Professional Development in Education, 42(3), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.997397
6.
ClaytonC. D.KilbaneJ. F. (2020). Inquiry in tandem: Student and teacher learning in secondary schools. Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
7.
Cochran-SmithM.CarneyM. C.KeefeE. S.BurtonS.ChangW. C.FernandezM. B.MillerA. F.SanchezJ. G.BakerM. (2018). Reclaiming accountability in teacher education. Teachers College Press.
8.
Cochran-SmithM.LytleS. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press.
9.
CreswellJ. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among 5 approaches. Sage.
10.
DanaN. F.Yendol-HoppeyD. (2020). The reflective educator’s guide to classroom research: Learning to teach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry. Corwin Press.
11.
Darling-HammondL.WeiR. C.AndreeA.RichardsonN.OrphanosS. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and Abroad. Stanford University, Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
12.
DeweyJ. (1910). How we think. Prometheus Books.
13.
DeweyJ. (1916/1966). Democracy and education. The Free Press.
14.
DeweyJ. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan Publishing.
15.
EarlL. M.KatzS. (2002). Leading schools in a data-rich world. In LeithwoodK.HallingerP.FurmanG. C.RileyK.MacBeathJ.GronnP.MulfordB. (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 1003–1022). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0375-9_34
16.
GirodG. R. (2002). Connecting teaching and learning: A handbook for teacher educators on teacher work sample methodology. Carnegie Corporation of New York.
17.
GlaserB.StraussA. (1967). Grounded theory: The discovery of grounded theory. Sociology: The Journal of the British Sociological Association, 12, 27–49.
18.
GreenleafC.LitmanC.MarpleS. (2018). The impact of inquiry-based professional development on teachers’ capacity to integrate literacy instruction in secondary subject areas. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71, 226–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.01.006
19.
GrossmanP. L.SmagorinskyP.ValenciaS. (1999). Appropriating tools for teaching English: A theoretical framework for research on learning to teach. American Journal of Education, 108(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1086/444230
KilbaneJ.ClaytonC. D. (2023). Conceptualising inquiry outcomes: A taxonomy to characterise the work of teacher inquirers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 29(3), 276–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2023.2172395
22.
LevyB. L.ThomasE. E.DragoK.RexL. A. (2013). Examining studies of inquiry-based learning in three fields of education: Sparking generative conversation. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(5), 387–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113496430
23.
McDonaldS.SongerN. B. (2008). Enacting classroom inquiry: Theorizing teachers' conceptions of science teaching. Science Education, 92(6), 973–993. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20293
24.
OliverM.AvramidesK.ClarkW.HunterJ.LuckinR.HansenC.WassonB. (2018). Sharing teacher knowledge at scale: Teacher inquiry, learning design and the representation of teachers’ practice. Teacher Development, 22(4), 587–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2017.1381642
25.
PocalanaG.RobuttiO.LiljedahlP. (2023). Inquiry activities are not for everyone: Teachers’ beliefs and professional development. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 54(8), 1557–1580. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739x.2023.2176795
26.
RothK. J.WilsonC. D.TaylorJ. A.StuhlsatzM. A.HvidstenC. (2019). Comparing the effects of analysis-of-practice and content-based professional development on teacher and student outcomes in science. American Educational Research Journal, 56(4), 1217–1253. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218814759
27.
Saunders-StewartK. S.GylesP. D.ShoreB. M. (2012). Student outcomes in inquiry instruction: A literature-derived inventory. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202x11429860
28.
SergisS.SampsonD. G. (2017). Teaching and learning analytics to support teacher inquiry: A systematic literature review. In Peña-AyalaA. (Ed.), Learning analytics: Fundaments, applications, and trends: A view of the current state of the art (pp. 25–63). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52977-6_2
