Page 57 - Empowering pre-service teachers through inquiry - Lidewij van Katwijk
P. 57

                                Pre-service teacher inquiry in implemented and attained curriculum
 The aim of Dutch primary teacher education programs is to educate pre-service
teachers to become practitioners who use intentional, systematic methods as learning
strategies to inquire into their own practices (Borko et al., 2007; Cochran-Smith et al.,
2009). Previous research indicates that pre-service teacher inquiry, which is similar to
action research, may be a basis for future professional development (Ponte, Bijaard,
& Ax, 2004); ideally, pre-service teachers should be driven by curiosity and knowledge 3 about educational problems in particular contexts to improve their own educational
practices (Jacobs, Yendol-Hoppey, & Dana, 2015; Van Katwijk et al., 2019a). The aim
of pre-service teacher inquiry in primary teacher education is to educate teachers to
take an inquiry stance and thereby produce inquiring teachers (Cochran-Smith &
Lytle, 2009) who are curious and critical‒that is, teachers whose work is inquiry-based
(Baan et al., 2018; Toom et al., 2010; Uiterwijk-Luijk, Krüger, Zijlstra, & Volman, 2019).
To develop an inquiry stance, or to be able to work inquiry-based, pre-service teachers are assumed to develop five related competencies (Van Katwijk et al., 2019a): (1) basic research knowledge (e.g., methodology); (2) knowledge about current research in the discipline (e.g., Aspfors & Eklund, 2017; Baan et al., 2018; Dana & Yendol-Hoppey, 2014; Jacobs et al., 2015; Munthe & Rogne, 2015; Sachs, 2016); (3) development of (basic) research skills, including analyzing problems related to practice, undertaking literature reviews, collecting and analyzing data, and communicating results (Aspfors & Eklund, 2017; Hökkä & Eteläpelto, 2014; Munthe & Rogne, 2015); (4) ability to apply findings from previous research to practice (Aspfors & Eklund, 2017; Baan et al., 2018; Dana & Yendol-Hoppey, 2014); and (5) development of inquiry habit of mind (e.g., Earl & Katz, 2006).
Regarding the last competency, there are many interpretations of inquiry habit of mind; international literature includes a variety of similar descriptions and terms (e.g., Earl & Katz, 2006; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009; Schön, 1986; Uiterwijk-Luijk et al., 2019). According to Earl and Katz (2006), an inquiry habit of mind is a way of thinking that seeks to gain profound understanding, reserve judgment, tolerate contradictions, have different perspectives, and ask questions. Collaboration with colleagues is essential to developing this habit of mind, framing questions, and understanding collected data (Kroll, 2006). Literature often uses the term “inquiry as stance” interchangeably with inquiry habit of mind (e.g., Jacobs et al., 2015; Uiterwijk- Luijk et al., 2019); however, Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2009) distinguish them, with inquiry as stance referring to a way of looking, acting, and having a habitual, continuous attitude. When teachers take an inquiry stance, they act as reflective practitioners (Schön, 1986), pose questions or “wonderings,” use findings of previous

   55   56   57   58   59