Next Article in Journal
The Role of the Abacus and Physical Exercise in the Cognitive Development of Students in Primary Education
Previous Article in Journal
Measuring Reflective Inquiry in Professional Learning Networks: A Conceptual Framework
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Problem-Based Learning Electrochemistry Course for Undergraduate Students to Develop Complex Thinking
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Education Sciences
Volume 15
Issue 3
10.3390/educsci15030334
education-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Inquiry-Based Science Education in High Chemistry: Enhancing Oral and Written Communication Skills Through Authentic and Problem-Based Learning Activities

by
Marta Vilela
1,
Carla Morais
2,* and
João C. Paiva
2,*
1
Agrupamento de Escolas Poeta António Aleixo, 8500-511 Portimão, Portugal
2
CIQUP, IMS, Science Education Unit, Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(3), 334; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030334
Submission received: 7 December 2024 / Revised: 19 February 2025 / Accepted: 3 March 2025 / Published: 8 March 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Problem-Based Learning in Science Education: Achievements, Pitfalls and Ways Forward, 2nd Edition)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Student-centred learning requires a variety of approaches, such as inquiry-based learning and the tackling of authentic and problem-based learning activities, to make the teaching and learning process more meaningful and to encourage students to participate more actively in class. The inquiry approach enables students to investigate solutions to real problems, awakening their need to ask questions, design and conduct research, collect and analyse data, interpret results and present them in a structured way. This study investigates the influence of an inquiry-based science education (IBSE) module on the development of oral and written communication skills among 10th grade students. The study is set in a secondary school context and focuses on a problem-based learning approach centred around gases and dispersions. A total of 111 students participated in this one-group post-assessment qualitative study, where evaluation rubrics were applied to assess students’ written and oral communication, focusing on correctness, clarity and mastery of scientific language. The results showed that the majority of students performed well in both written and oral tasks, demonstrating improved scientific communication skills. This suggests that IBSE, particularly in the context of secondary education, can be an effective approach to fostering students’ abilities to communicate scientific concepts. The study has implications for enhancing pedagogical practices and encourages further research on the long-term effects of IBSE on student learning.

1. Introduction

Inquiry-based science education (IBSE) gained visibility in the 1990s, through the National Science Education Standards, in the United States (National Research Council, 1996). It is now considered a recommended approach for teaching science due to its potential to provide students with basic knowledge and skills and to contribute to greater motivation for learning (Crawford, 2014; Partanen, 2023; Strat et al., 2023).
Several authors (Abd-El-Khalick et al., 2004; Chang et al., 2022; Crawford, 2014; Lederman et al., 2014; Ramnarain, 2014) have stated that IBSE represents a constructivist, active, dynamic and student-centred teaching approach that focuses on students’ solutions to various problems, as well as on finding answers to questions through research. In general, students solve research questions related to the world around them, collect relevant and necessary data to answer these questions, analyse the data and draw appropriate conclusions based on evidence from objective research (Abd-El-Khalick et al., 2004; Crawford, 2014; Lederman et al., 2014; Ramnarain, 2014). Not only does IBSE stimulate students’ interest in science, but it also improves their understanding of scientific concepts and procedures (Chang et al., 2022; Crawford, 2014; Minner et al., 2010; Ramnarain, 2014; Van Uum et al., 2016) and is aligned with the goal of promoting students’ skills in terms of creativity (Morais et al., 2019), critical thinking, problem solving and lifelong learning. In turn, these skills enable students to engage in authentic scientific practices (Boğar, 2019; Crawford & Capps, 2018; Roller et al., 2021; Šmida et al., 2023).
Guidance by a teacher is fundamental so that IBSE contributes to students’ progress, as the teacher can highlight conceptual knowledge and work methods, as well as structure and focus research-based activities. In order to do this, the teacher must, for example, provide scientific content, connect activities to scientific concepts, manage how resources are used and be motivating (Strat et al., 2023). When practiced with proper guidance from the teacher, IBSE is a beneficial approach to learning science, focused on authentic and problem-based learning activities that stimulate discussion and improve oral and written communication using scientific vocabulary (Chinn & Duncan, 2021; de Jong et al., 2023; Strat et al., 2023).

2. Inquiry-Based Learning and Problem-Based Learning Activities

IBSE and PBL are often associated due to their shared emphasis on active learning, though they are sometimes viewed as distinct approaches. In our framework, PBL is seen as an integral part of IBSE, contributing to the broader inquiry-based process which involves students in problem solving and encourages critical thinking. Therefore, while PBL and IBSE have distinct methodological aspects, they can be seen as complementary approaches within the broader context of inquiry-based learning (de Jong et al., 2023; Lederman et al., 2014; Minner et al., 2010).
IBSE enables the development of authentic and problem-based learning activities (Dewi, 2023; Gomes, 2024; Joseph et al., 2022; Leite & Afonso, 2001; Leite et al., 2016; Morgado et al., 2016), starting with a question or problem that emerges from a new situation, which students try to explain based on knowledge they have acquired so far. The problem is usually discussed in groups, which allows students to exchange experiences, opinions and knowledge. Students do not arrive at their knowledge and experience without prior knowledge or without having first had contact with the topic under discussion. It is students’ previous experiences that help them understand new phenomena.
After exchanging experiences, students formulate a hypothesis to solve the problem, which is a crucial stage as it determines the direction of the research. Then, students gather evidence to compare what was predicted with what actually happens. The nature of the problem influences how the information will be collected—observation, experimentation, records, identifying patterns within the data, etc.—which means there is no single or strictly defined path to a solution. If the evidence corroborates the prediction, the original ideas are accepted as valid explanations for the problem. However, if the prediction is not correct, students should not be discouraged, but rather they should formulate new hypotheses, discarding those that have been proven incorrect. By drawing conclusions and evaluating the work they have done, students have the opportunity to integrate new knowledge into their cognitive structure, something that is only possible after genuine understanding, since understanding is something that students cannot receive from others, but rather achieve through the activation of their own cognitive functions (Chin & Chia, 2006; Gholan, 2019; Latifah & Suprihatiningrum, 2024; Macedo et al., 2023; Wood & Levy, 2015; Yew & Goh, 2016).
As shown in Table 1, there are various levels of IBSE, which depend on who is responsible for formulating the problem-question and the procedure and method to be followed, as well as the interpretation of the results, with the aim of solving the problem under study.
In structured inquiry, the teacher presents the problem-question that will guide the inquiry, as well as the processes that will be implemented. In guided inquiry, the teacher presents the problem-question and the students build the process to obtain one or more potential solutions. In open inquiry, students develop their own problem-questions and procedures without knowing what results to expect before the inquiry (Abels, 2015; Anwar, 2020; Baharom et al., 2020; Blanchard et al., 2010; Fay et al., 2007; de Jong et al., 2023; Partanen, 2023; Stender et al., 2018; Vorholzer & von Aufschnaiter, 2019; Wheeler et al., 2017).
In level 0 inquiry, there are confirmation or verification activities (often not even considered inquiry (Bevins & Price, 2016)), in which the teacher provides students with the problem-question to be studied and the data collection methods. The conclusions are not immediately obvious to the students during the activities, but the teacher guides them towards the expected conclusion. The teacher helps to interpret the different data gathered by the students, so that everyone understands the importance of those results (Blanchard et al., 2010).
Open inquiry places high demands on students’ experience. Thus, many teachers feel that students in the early stages of their studies are not prepared for learning through this type of inquiry. As for students, they show more positive attitudes towards guided inquiry and consider it to be the one that best contributes to their learning (Partanen, 2023; Wheeler et al., 2017).
In the classroom, these IBSE type designations may not always be clear. Teachers often need to help students formulate the problem-question, define research procedures, or interpret results. Although the initial intention is to promote student autonomy in these tasks, teachers try to provide a “foundation” as the key to helping students understand and thus improve their learning during these complex tasks. The ideal level of inquiry, and consequent type of IBSE, will vary according to the classroom setting, schooling level, students’ skills, curriculum requirements and the resources available (Blanchard et al., 2010).
Several studies demonstrate the implementation of the IBSE pedagogical approach to teaching chemistry with secondary- and university-level students, who conducted laboratory activities using IBSE. These activities promoted higher levels of student engagement and more opportunities to practice logical thinking and scientific research skills, as well as a better understanding of theoretical and technical concepts (Iwasaki et al., 2023; Morais et al., 2021; Partanen, 2023; Valsecchi et al., 2024). Overall, IBSE pedagogies show a great effect on students’ learning of chemistry, even for tasks that do not have a laboratory component. In addition to helping students understand the content of the curriculum, IBSE pedagogies foster the development of transversal skills, such as cooperation, time management and critical thinking (Treagust et al., 2020), as well as improving conceptual understanding (Kimberlin & Yezierski, 2016). With this pedagogical approach, students more often use metacognitive strategies associated with self-regulated learning, such as giving more correct answers and/or producing more complete scientific explanations and, through the self-assessment of their learning processes and learning outcomes, they improve their cognitive thinking (Kadioglu-Akbulut & Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, 2021). It is also effective for acquiring skills in the scientific process (planning experiments, building data tables, designing and interpreting graphs, determining the variables under study and formulating hypotheses, as well as changing and controlling variables) (Gultepe & Kilic, 2015).
Overall, various studies (Iwasaki et al., 2023; Kimberlin & Yezierski, 2016; Morais et al., 2021; Partanen, 2023; Valsecchi et al., 2024) reinforce the idea that teachers should try to allocate enough time to guided inquiry activities so that students have the opportunity to think for themselves, get involved in creative problem solving and, during the process, make errors that they can identify and correct.

3. Inquiry-Based Learning and Oral and Written Communication Skills

Scientific writing is not limited to simply writing text, but rather involves a complex process that requires high-level cognitive, linguistic and communicative skills (Luy-Montejo, 2019). Several studies have shown that IBSE contributes to the ability to develop scientific writing skills, particularly in terms of the ability to write research abstracts and literature reviews and a greater ability to communicate conclusions in a clear and precise manner. A systematic review of 40 empirical studies, published between 2000 and 2021 (Lin et al., 2023), analysed the pedagogical practices that could help students develop scientific writing skills, associated with the ability to read, write and use texts to represent scientific concepts. The main results of the study were that IBSE could develop students’ scientific thinking and scientific writing skills. When literacy development is framed within the context of IBSE, students not only learn to read and write scientific texts but also learn to conduct practical research based on scientific texts (Pearson et al., 2010; Wildan et al., 2019). Another study (Sampson & Walker, 2012) presents the implementation of a step-by-step IBSE approach that sequentially involved structured inquiry, guided inquiry and open inquiry to improve students’ communication skills and scientific attitudes. The instrument used to measure communication skills involved written, verbal and social communication skills, along with indicators of scientific attitude, including curiosity, open-mindedness, objectivity, honesty in reporting the results, responsibility and mutual respect. The results of this study revealed that classes in which a step-by-step inquiry was implemented scored higher in communication skills and scientific attitudes than those in which expository approaches were implemented. Involving students in inquiry increases their ability to build knowledge and arguments, as well as strengthening their motivation for learning (Wildan et al., 2019). Another study (Sampson & Walker, 2012) analysed how the ability of university students to write scientific text changed over time as they conducted laboratory activities designed based on guided inquiry for argumentation. The reports written during each of the six laboratory activities were used to examine the changes in students’ writing skills over time, showing significant improvements in their ability to write about science, as well as a greater ability to assess the quality of their peers’ writing. Other studies (Jang & Hand, 2017; Lin et al., 2023) have shown that students who were trained according to an argumentation-based inquiry approach performed well in an explanatory writing task. Skills related to argumentation, explanation and reflection have also been identified as important for interpreting and writing scientific text.
Research into students’ reading habits and learning interactions has shown that the fact students read and discuss contextual scientific articles, with a focus on the explanation of research procedures, contributes to the development of students’ inquiry skills in formulating research questions and designing experimental procedures (Tseng et al., 2022).
Based on the above, the following research questions were formulated to guide this work:
  • How does the implementation of an inquiry module influence the development of oral and written communication skills among 10th grade students?
  • What are the specific results in terms of the clarity, correctness and mastery of scientific language following the implementation of an inquiry module?

4. Materials and Methods

This research was designed as a one-group post-assessment qualitative study, focused on understanding phenomena within the context in which they occur and with an emphasis on the description of experiences, perceptions and meanings (Creswell, 2013).
The sample for this study comprised 111 students, with an average age of 15, who, in the 2022/2023 school year, were attending the 10th grade, in a science and technology course at a secondary school in Portimão, in the south of Portugal.
The IBSE module involved students in both literature-based investigations and laboratory research, developing their scientific literacy—i.e., the ability to read, write, reason and use texts to represent scientific concepts. Students develop scientific literacy not only when they read and write scientific texts, but also when they engage in scientific investigations (Pearson et al., 2010).
In this study, students were involved in developing and justifying explanations and presenting and discussing their ideas in class, while the teacher connected prior knowledge to the new concepts being learned. The aim of the IBSE approach was to provide an environment where students performed reasoning tasks, analysed data, made inferences, constructed evidence-based arguments and interpreted scientific texts (Pearson et al., 2010).
This research context, combining literature-based research and laboratory activities, allowed students to experience scientific discovery while engaging in scientific writing (Lin et al., 2023). Both approaches are fundamental to IBSE and complement each other in science education.
In the classroom, IBSE was characterised by the discussion of investigative questions, formulation of hypotheses and critical analysis of information. Students developed skills such as scientific argumentation and problem solving. The opportunity to conduct an experimental activity to study the effect of melting sea ice and glaciers on the average sea level allowed students, in groups, to formulate hypotheses, analyse experimental results and reflect on the relationship between the activity and the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. This experimental activity provided evidence to support the theoretical concepts discussed in class.
The students interacted with the inquiry module developed, as described below.

4.1. The Development and Implementation of the Inquiry Module

The inquiry module developed and implemented within the scope of this work was part of the “Gases and dispersions” subdomain of the subject Physics and Chemistry A, for the 10th grade, and worked on the following essential learning objectives: “Researching the composition of the Earth’s troposphere, identifying polluting gases and their sources, particularly gases that cause greenhouse effects, as well as alternatives for reducing the sources of pollution, and communicating the conclusions” (DGE, 2018, p. 11). In terms of specific objectives, the aim of the module was to propose an inquiry into “The role of different gases in the Earth’s atmosphere”, in order to promote the selection of relevant information; problematize situations regarding the application of science and technology and their impact on society and the environment; provide opportunities to analyse texts according to different points of view; promote the analysis of concepts, facts and situations from disciplinary and interdisciplinary perspectives; and foster the development of oral and written communication skills in students.
The module focused on a guided approach, using the 7Es model (Reis & Marques, 2016) according to the plan shown in Table 2.
To put this into practice, students performed tasks that involved the individual search and selection of relevant information, as well as small-group work to share the knowledge acquired during the individual searches and the processing of the gathered information. The students were organised into groups of 3 or 4 and worked collaboratively to answer the problem-question posed by the teacher: “Gases in the atmosphere: essential or pollutants?”.
This activity took place over seven lessons, totalling 400 min of intervention.
To help students conduct their research, it was suggested that they read textbooks/magazines/manuals made available in the classroom, as well as explore the contents of a list of links provided to them, which allowed them to analyse texts from different points of view.
Students had the opportunity to ask further questions about the context presented, to participate in group discussions and to plan and develop the inquiry.
The opportunity to conduct the experimental activity to study the effect that melting sea ice and glaciers, located on the continents, has on the average sea level allowed the students, in groups, to formulate hypotheses, analyse the experimental results and reflect on the relationship between this activity and the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. The teacher’s discussion with each of the work groups about the activity’s results was intended as an opportunity to give students feedback on the development of their inquiry, to correct any errors and to validate the information that would be included in the written document for presentation to the community.
Formative evaluation was implemented throughout the process, allowing the teacher the possibility to regulate learning, identifying the need to review and/or reinforce certain concepts, and, for the students, the possibility to consolidate the main ideas of the research conducted, as well as to self-reflect on their progress.
After discussing the information covered in the previous phases with the teacher, and aiming to apply the scientific knowledge acquired to new and similar situations, each work group was asked to tackle a different socio-scientific problem related to the environment, such as acid rain, photochemical fog or another problem suggested by the students.
Finally, each group produced a digital and/or paper document in a format chosen by the students to orally present to the class and share with the educational community through an interactive exhibition.
This final interactive exhibition of the work produced was a way to promote active and participatory citizenship among students in the field of sustainable development and environmental education.
To sum up, the tasks proposed to the students created an opportunity for them to read and discuss scientific articles and to experience moments of interaction and learning among peers and with the teacher, as well as opportunities to develop argumentation and explanation skills, fostering their ability to interpret and write scientific texts.

4.2. Data Collection and Analysis Instruments

Evaluation rubrics were used to assess the oral presentation of the work and the written document for the interactive exhibition. The rubrics were designed mainly to support the evaluation of students’ performances, allowing teachers to be more rigorous in their evaluation. The rubrics had to include a coherent and consistent set of criteria that reflected what it was expected that students would learn and/or be able to do. For each criterion, a very clear set of descriptors, as well as performance levels, had to be defined. In other words, for a given criterion, the indicators or descriptors of performance levels had to reflect fundamental guidelines so that the students can self-regulate their progress in the learning outcomes that they must achieve (Fernandes, 2021).
For this study, the rubrics developed by the researchers were an adaptation of the rubrics presented by (Reis & Marques, 2016, pp. 108, 253–255), according to the assessment criteria of the school where the study was implemented, and were contributed to by the two teachers who collaborated with this research, having created a dynamic of regular meetings to standardise and apply the assessment criteria for the students. These rubrics presented a set of criteria, as well as descriptions for each of these criteria. Thus, the oral presentation evaluation rubric was organised into three categories of criteria, as follows: (a) knowledge—scientific correctness; (b) communication—correctness of speech, clarity and objectivity, presentation of information, ability to arouse interest, audio-visual aid and use of voice; and (c) personal and interpersonal development—cooperation between group members and creativity. Similarly, the evaluation rubric regarding the product for the exhibition was organised into three categories of criteria, as follows: (a) knowledge—scientific correctness; (b) communication—message, interactivity and graphic appearance; and (c) personal and interpersonal development—activism.
In each of the categories, these criteria were organised into four levels of performance: Very Good, Good, Sufficient and Insufficient. Table A1 and Table A2, included in the Appendix A, show the full versions of these rubrics.
In the case of the written document, the assessment was the same for everyone in the group. However, the oral presentation was assessed individually, depending on each student’s performance.

5. Results

The main aim of this study was to analyse how the implementation of an inquiry module could contribute to the development of oral and written communication skills, including clarity, correctness and mastery of scientific language, among 10th grade students.
The analysis of students’ written communication skills was mainly based on the correctness of the scientific text in the written document for the interactive exhibition, which resulted from group work. During the process of preparing the work, we also monitored the written records students created during the process, explaining the most relevant scientific information to be included in the written document, which could take the form of a poster, leaflet, infographic or news item, among others.
The work conducted by the students pertained to pollutant gases and their sources, namely gases that cause greenhouse effects, global warming, acid rain, photochemical fog and ozone depletion, in this last case referring to the role of ozone in the troposphere and stratosphere. To illustrate the students’ responses and reflections throughout the investigation process, we present below selected quotes from their work.
Consequences of acid rain:
“In forests, the pH of the soil and the concentration of metals such as aluminium prevent vegetation from properly absorbing the water and nutrients it needs, this will damage roots, slow growth and make plants weaker and more vulnerable to diseases and pests.”
“The oceans could lose biodiversity and productivity. The decrease in the pH of ocean waters harms phytoplankton, a source of food for different organisms and animals, which can change trophic levels and lead to the extinction of different marine species.”
“Ozone is a highly unstable and very toxic gas, but it is also essential for life on Earth. It is a molecule made up of three oxygen atoms and is very reactive and oxidising. Ozone is also one of the factors responsible for the greenhouse effect and participates in the formation of smog.”
Mechanism of the greenhouse effect:
“Solar radiation passes through the atmosphere and part of it hits the earth’s surface, heating it up. The earth’s heated surface emits infrared radiation. Some of this radiation passes through the atmosphere. Another part is absorbed and retained by gases, which return most of this radiation back to the Earth’s surface, thus contributing to the greenhouse effect.”
“Photochemical smog occurs when highly harmful gases, oxides of nitrogen or nitrogen (NOx), are released. In the presence of light, these elements take part in photochemical reactions that generate other pollutants such as ground-level ozone (O3), nitric acid (HNO3) and other substances that are highly damaging to air quality. Its main appearance is its reddish or brown colour, and its daily peak concentration is usually around 10 a.m. and 12 p.m., when the light level is most intense.”
“Industrial smog is produced by the smoke expelled from industrial chimneys and occurs when they gather in densely populated urban areas, generating an accumulation of toxic gases in the environment. In this case, thermal inversion makes the problem even more serious, as the lack of movement of air masses causes a cloud of ash to remain under the environment.”
For their oral presentations, students mainly used PowerPoint presentations, Prezi, Canva, Google Slides or poster projections. Regarding the exhibition for the community and dissemination on the website, most of the student groups produced a poster or leaflet, such as the examples shown in Figure 1.
Figure 2 shows the results obtained by the students in the written document, prepared for exhibition to the community and dissemination on the website, and resulting from the investigative work proposed in the inquiry module, as well as the oral presentation of this work.
An analysis of the graph in Figure 2 shows that 69 students obtained a “Good” grade and 12 students obtained a “Very Good” grade in the written document for exhibition to the community and dissemination on the school website, which shows a good development of their ability to write scientific text. In these cases, the scientific correctness and graphic appearance of the documents stood out.
Only 10 students showed insufficient development of their ability to write scientific text, specifically, with some inaccuracies in terms of concepts or information, a non-objective message, and many superfluous aspects presented.
Regarding the oral communication of the work, Figure 2 shows that 77 students obtained a “Good” grade and 18 students obtained a “Very Good” grade in their oral presentation to the class. In these cases, the presentation was indicative of an excellent grasp of concepts and information, with the students demonstrating very well-articulated speech, without any grammatical or pronunciation errors, and a correct use of scientific language.
Figure 3 shows, in more detail, the results of the criteria used in the evaluation rubrics for the written document for presentation to the community and for the oral presentation.
Analysing the results in Figure 3 answers research question 2 of this study.
Figure 3 shows that, in terms of knowledge, 53 students gave an oral presentation without any inaccuracies in terms of concepts or information and 38 students gave an oral presentation that showed an excellent mastery of concepts and information. Regarding the written document made to display to the community (poster, pamphlet), 50 students showed an excellent mastery of concepts and information.
In terms of communication, regarding the criterion ‘correctness of speech’, 79 students presented a very well-articulated speech, with no grammatical or pronunciation errors and the correct use of scientific language, and 21 students presented a reasonably well-articulated speech, with no grammatical or pronunciation errors and the correct use of scientific language. As for the clarity of speech, 56 students gave a very well-articulated speech, with no grammatical or pronunciation errors, and showed the correct use of scientific language, and 39 students gave a reasonably well-articulated speech, with no grammatical or pronunciation errors, and showed the correct use of scientific language.
In terms of personal and interpersonal development, in the cooperation sub-criterion, 54 students demonstrated excellent cooperation between the various members of their group and a logical and extremely well-organised presentation.

6. Discussion

The results show that 77 students obtained a “Good” grade and 18 students obtained a “Very Good” grade on their oral presentations, which indicates a proper use of scientific concepts and strong clarity of speech. These results suggest that the inquiry module may have fostered students’ self-confidence in their oral presentation of scientific content, a valuable skill for students’ complete education. However, it is important to note that due to the study’s design, which only involved a single group, we cannot definitively attribute these improvements solely to the IBSE methodology. The lack of a control group limits our ability to draw conclusive comparisons.
The results on the personal and interpersonal development criterion showed that 96 students demonstrated good or very good cooperation and organisation in their group presentations, showing effective communication and cohesion which, according to the literature, are fundamental for collaborative learning (Pearson et al., 2010). This result emphasises the importance of teamwork in science education and suggests that IBSE can contribute to the development of social skills that are crucial in both academic and professional environments. However, we acknowledge that these results are based on subjective assessments and could be influenced by individual group dynamics, which were not controlled for in the study.
The results obtained in this study align with findings in the existing literature, particularly regarding the impact of IBSE on the development of scientific communication skills. As noted by previous studies, inquiry-based literacy activities facilitate both the learning of scientific content and the development of communication skills. One study highlights that “when literacy activities are driven by inquiry, students simultaneously learn how to read and write science texts and to do science” (Pearson et al., 2010, p. 459). Another review supports this, revealing that inquiry-based writing instruction “can meet the goal of developing science writers’ scientific thinking and writing skills by contextualising them in scientific inquiry practices” (Lin et al., 2023, p. 253). Furthermore, research shows that “classes implementing stepwise inquiry had higher scores for communication skills and scientific attitudes than those undertaking expository approaches” (Wildan et al., 2019, p. 407), which resonates with the positive outcomes observed in our study. In particular, there was clarity, correctness and mastery of scientific language among the 10th graders, both in the writing of scientific texts and in oral communication. However, given the design of the study, we acknowledge that it is difficult to definitively conclude that these outcomes could not have been achieved through other methods of training students in writing and oral presentations. While IBSE appears to have contributed positively, we can only speculate on whether similar levels of student performance would be possible without its implementation.
According to some authors (Jang & Hand, 2017; Pearson et al., 2010; Sampson & Walker, 2012; Wildan et al., 2019), the IBSE methodology not only promotes the understanding of scientific text, but also trains students in scientific writing, allowing them to integrate scientific concepts with greater precision and clarity. In this study, most students achieved “Good” or “Very Good” grades in both written text and oral presentations, which indicates an effective development of scientific communication skills. These results suggest that practicing scientific research, associated with IBSE, can stimulate greater autonomy in students when it comes to writing scientific content and orally expressing complex concepts. However, given the one-group design, we cannot rule out the possibility that other pedagogical approaches might yield similar results in terms of scientific communication development. Further studies involving control groups and long-term follow-ups would be beneficial to explore this.

7. Conclusions

The aim of this research was to analyse the impact of implementing a research module on the development of 10th grade students’ oral and written communication skills. To this end, two guiding questions were formulated:
  • How does the implementation of a research module influence the development of oral and written communication skills among Year 10 students?
  • What are the specific results in terms of the clarity, correctness and mastery of scientific language following the implementation of a research module?
Regarding the second question, the results show a positive impact on clarity, correctness and mastery of scientific language. It was observed that 100 students obtained a rating of very good or good in the correctness of their oral discourse, showing an adequate use of scientific language. In addition, 96 students presented a clear exposition in their speech, demonstrating effective and well-structured communication.
With regard to the first question, it was found that the activity contributed significantly to students’ involvement in understanding scientific concepts and processes, promoting the positive development of oral and written communication skills. In terms of knowledge, 91 students gave an oral presentation without any conceptual or information inaccuracies, while 98 students demonstrated mastery of the concepts and information in the written document.
In general, the students achieved good results not only in terms of correctness, clarity and mastery of scientific language, but also in their ability to co-operate between group members, highlighting the pedagogical relevance of implementing this research module. However, we must acknowledge the limitations of our study, such as the absence of a control group and the short-term nature of the assessment, which make it difficult to attribute the observed outcomes exclusively to the IBSE approach.
Although the results are promising, we did observe some limitations. A small number of students still struggled to achieve full correctness in the use of scientific language, which indicates that additional interventions may be needed to help these students. In addition, the subjective nature of some assessments, such as the interpersonal development assessment, may have introduced bias into the results. In terms of future research, it would be interesting to explore how the effect of IBSE on oral and written scientific communication skills can be sustained over time and in different educational contexts.
Moreover, we recommend future studies compare IBSE with other teaching methods in controlled settings to provide a clearer understanding of its specific impact.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.V. and C.M.; methodology, M.V. and C.M.; software, M.V.; validation, M.V., C.M. and J.C.P.; formal analysis, M.V. and C.M.; investigation, M.V.; resources, M.V.; data curation, M.V.; writing—original draft preparation, M.V.; writing—review and editing, M.V., C.M. and J.C.P.; visualization, M.V.; supervision, C.M.; project administration, M.V.; funding acquisition, C.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by CIQUP: Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto (Project UIDB/00081/2020) and IMS—Institute of Molecular Sciences, LA/P/0056/2020.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by Direction of the Agrupamento de Escolas Poeta António Aleixo, Portugal.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. Written informed consent has been obtained from the subjects to publish this paper.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the students and teachers, who participated in the study, their willingness to contribute and share insights was greatly appreciated.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Oral presentation evaluation rubric (adapted from Reis & Marques, 2016, pp. 253–255).
Table A1. Oral presentation evaluation rubric (adapted from Reis & Marques, 2016, pp. 253–255).
CriteriaPerformance Levels
Very GoodGoodSufficient Insufficient
KnowledgeScientific correctnessPresentation demonstrating excellent mastery of concepts and informationPresentation without any inaccuracies in terms of concepts or informationPresentation with some inaccuracies in terms of concepts or informationPresentation with several inaccuracies in terms of concepts or information
CommunicationCorrectness of speechVery well-articulated speech with no grammatical or pronunciation errors and correct use of scientific languageReasonably well-articulated speech with no grammatical or pronunciation errors and scientific languageGrammatical errors and difficulties with pronunciation and scientific languageSpeech difficulties and grammatical, pronunciation and scientific language errors
Clarity and objectivenessClear, objective exposition, highlighting the key pointsClear exposition, but with some superfluous aspectsClear exposition, but not very objective; many superfluous aspects presentedUnclear exposition, lacking in objectivity and fundamental aspects
Presentation of informationInformation presented and not readInformation presented but accompanied by reading of some notesMost information is read rather than presentedInformation is read rather than presented
Ability to arouse interestWell-paced, smooth and effective presentation that captures audience’s attention and interest.Presentation with some missteps but effective in capturing audience’s attention and interestPresentation with few missteps and not always effective in capturing audience’s attention and interestPresentation with missteps and that fails to capture audience’s attention or interest
Audio-visual aidUses high-quality audio-visual elements to support or highlight content of presentation (images, diagrams/graphs, videos)Uses quality audio-visual elements but does not explore them properlyUses some audio-visual elements of poor qualityDoes not use any audio-visual elements to support or enhance content of presentation (images, diagrams/graphs, videos)
Use of voiceAudible speech throughout presentation, good articulation of voice with audio-visual aidSpeech audible during most of presentation, with inflexion and expressivenessSpeech with large fluctuations in voice volume, but without expressivityInaudible speech with monotonous voice, lacking inflection and expressiveness
Personal and interpersonal developmentCooperation between group membersExcellent cooperation between various group members; logical and extremely well-organised presentationGood cooperation between most of group. However, one member did not prepare presentation with othersPoor cooperation between various group members. It is clear that some of them did not prepare presentationNo cooperation between various group members; disorganised presentation
CreativityExtremely creative presentation both in terms of methodology and materials usedPresentation with various creative aspects in terms of methodology and materials usedUncreative presentation in terms of methodology and materials usedUncreative presentation in terms of both methodology and materials used
Table A2. The rubric for evaluating the final product for exhibition to the community and dissemination on the school website (adapted Reis & Marques, 2016, p. 108).
Table A2. The rubric for evaluating the final product for exhibition to the community and dissemination on the school website (adapted Reis & Marques, 2016, p. 108).
Criteria Performance Levels
Very GoodGoodSufficientInsufficient
KnowledgeScientific correctnessObject revealing excellent grasp of concepts and informationObject without any incorrect concepts or informationObject with some inaccuracies in terms of concepts or informationObject with several inaccuracies in terms of concepts or information
CommunicationMessageClear, objective message, highlighting key aspectsClear message, but with some superfluous aspectsClear message, but not very objective; many superfluous aspects presentedUnclear, non-objective message, without highlighting key aspects
Interactivity *Object is very interactiveObject is moderately interactiveObject is scarcely interactiveObject is not interactive
Graphic appearanceVery appealing object from a graphic point of viewModerately appealing object from a graphic point of viewScarcely appealing object from a graphic point of viewNot graphically appealing object
Personal and interpersonal developmentActivism **Very explicitModerately explicitScarcely explicitAbsent
* the ability to raise questions, promote individual and collective reflection, promote interaction between visitors, allow visitors to leave their mark (Reis & Marques, 2016). ** the ability of the product to raise awareness in the visitor and motivate them to action (Reis & Marques, 2016).

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., BouJaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H. L. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Abels, S. (2015). Scaffolding inquiry-based science and chemistry education in inclusive classrooms. New Developments in Science Education Research, 5, 77–96. [Google Scholar]
  3. Anwar, Y. A. S. (2020). The multilevel inquiry approach to achieving meaningful learning in biochemistry course. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 48(1), 28–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Baharom, M., Atan, N., Rosli, M., Yusof, S., & Abd Hamid, M. (2020). Integration of science learning Apps based on Inquiry Based Science Education (IBSE) in enhancing Students Science Process Skills (SPS). International Association of Online Engineering. Available online: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/217832/ (accessed on 28 June 2024).
  5. Bevins, S., & Price, G. (2016). Reconceptualising inquiry in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 38(1), 17–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., Osborne, J. W., Sampson, V. D., Annetta, L. A., & Granger, E. M. (2010). Is inquiry possible in light of accountability?: A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction. Science Education, 94(4), 577–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Boğar, Y. (2019). Literature review on inquiry-based learning in science education. Uluslararası Bilim Ve Eğitim Dergisi, 1(2), 91–118. [Google Scholar]
  8. Chang, P. S., Lee, S. H., & Wen, M. L. (2022). Developing an inquiry-based laboratory curriculum to engage students in planning investigations and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 44(18), 2659–2684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Chin, C., & Chia, L. G. (2006). Problem-based learning: Using ill-structured problems in biology project work. Science Education, 90(1), 44–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Chinn, C. A., & Duncan, R. G. (2021). Inquiry and learning. In R. G. Duncan, & C. A. Chinn (Eds.), International handbook of inquiry and learning (pp. 1–14). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. [Google Scholar]
  11. Crawford, B. A. (2014). From inquiry to scientific practices in the science classroom. In N. G. Lederman, & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education, volume II (pp. 515–541). Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  12. Crawford, B. A., & Capps, D. K. (2018). Teacher cognition of engaging children in scientific practices. In Y. J. Dori, Z. R. Mevarech, & D. R. Baker (Eds.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education (Vol. 24). Innovations in Science Education and Technology. Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar]
  14. de Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Chinn, C. A., Fischer, F., Gobert, J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Koedinger, K. R., Krajcik, J. S., Kyza, E. A., Linn, M. C., Pedaste, M., Scheiter, K., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2023). Let’s talk evidence–The case for combining inquiry-based and direct instruction. Educational Research Review, 39, 100536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Dewi, U. M. (2023). Application of the collaboration of problem-based learning and inquiry learning models with macromedia flash on students’ learning outcomes and learning activities. Co-Catalyst: Journal of Science Education Research and Theories, 1(1), 31–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. DGE, Direção Geral de Educação. (2018). Aprendizagens essenciais de física e química A, 10.º ano ensino secundário. Direção Geral de Educação, Ministério da Educação e Ciência. Available online: https://www.dge.mec.pt/aprendizagens-essenciais-ensino-secundario (accessed on 27 September 2024).
  17. Fay, M. E., Grove, N. P., Towns, M. H., & Bretz, S. L. (2007). A rubric to characterize inquiry in the undergraduate chemistry laboratory. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(2), 212–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Fernandes, D. (2021). Rubricas de Avaliação; Folha de apoio à formação—Projeto de Monitorização, Acompanhamento e Investigação em Avaliação Pedagógica (MAIA). Ministério da Educação/Direção-Geral da Educação.
  19. Gholan, A. P. (2019). Inquiry-based learning: Student teachers’ challenges and perceptions. Journal of Inquiry & Action in Education, 10(2), 6. [Google Scholar]
  20. Gomes, C. M. (2024). Metodologias ativas na educação: As vantagens de aplicação do método PBL. Revista Ibero-Americana de Humanidades, Ciências e Educação, 10(8), 2509–2516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Gultepe, N., & Kilic, Z. (2015). Effect of scientific argumentation on the development of scientific process skills in the context of teaching chemistry. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(1), 111–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Iwasaki, S., Kodani, S., Zushi, Y., Hotta, M., Hara, M., Tatsuoka, T., & Koga, N. (2023). Dissolution of calcium hydroxide in water: A guided inquiry in university and high school chemistry laboratories. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(6), 2402–2410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Jang, J. Y., & Hand, B. (2017). Examining the value of a scaffolded critique framework to promote argumentative and explanatory writings within an argument-based inquiry approach. Research in Science Education, 47, 1213–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Joseph, V., Sheikh, I., & Rajani, S. (2022). Inquiry based learning method of teaching in education: A literature review. Webology, 19(3), 799–813. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362155405 (accessed on 11 October 2024).
  25. Kadioglu-Akbulut, C., & Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E. (2021). Implementation of self-regulatory instruction to promote students’ achievement and learning strategies in the high school chemistry classroom. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 22(1), 12–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kimberlin, S., & Yezierski, E. (2016). Effectiveness of inquiry-based lessons using particulate level models to develop high school students’ understanding of conceptual stoichiometry. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(6), 1002–1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Latifah, U. N., & Suprihatiningrum, J. (2024). The effect of inquiry-based learning on students’ critical thinking ability and activeness in reaction rate material. Lectura: Jurnal Pendidikan, 15(1), 95–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners’ understandings about scientific inquiry—The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Leite, L., & Afonso, A. (2001). Aprendizagem baseada na resolução de problemas. Características, organização e supervisão. Boletín das Ciencias, 48, 253–260. [Google Scholar]
  30. Leite, L., Dourado, L., & Morgado, S. (2016). Science education through problem-based learning: Areview of research focused on students. Problem-Based Learning, 8, 125–147. [Google Scholar]
  31. Lin, V., Barrett, N. E., Liu, G. Z., & Chen, H. H. J. (2023). A systematic review on inquiry-based writing instruction in tertiary settings. Written Communication, 40(1), 238–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Luy-Montejo, C. (2019). El Aprendizaje Basado en Problemas (ABP) en el desarrollo de la inteligencia emocional de estudiantes universitarios. Propósitos y Representaciones, 7(2), 353–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Macedo, E., Teixeira, E., Carvalho, A., & Araújo, H. C. (2023). Explorando a renovação da pedagogia: Problem based learning como espaço de cidadania educacional jovem. Educação e Pesquisa, 49, e269782. Available online: https://www.scielo.br/j/ep/a/5QH6g5qTQnJKf5CyjqG4jnb/?lang=pt (accessed on 14 November 2024).
  34. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction—What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Morais, C., Araújo, J. L., & Saúde, I. (2019). Awakening to chemistry through storytelling and practical activities: Middle school students interacting with pre-school children. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 20, 302–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Morais, C., Ferreira, A. J., & Araújo, J. L. (2021). Qualitative polymer analysis lab through inquiry-based. Educación Química, 32(1), 85–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Morgado, S., Leite, L., Dourado, L., Fernandes, C., & Silva, E. (2016). Ensino orientado para a aprendizagem baseada na resolução de problemas e ensino tradicional: Um estudo centrado em “Transformação de matéria e de energia”. Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências (Belo Horizonte), 18(2), 73–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. The National Academies Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Partanen, L. J. (2023). A guided inquiry learning design for a large-scale chemical thermodynamics laboratory module. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(1), 118–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Pearson, P. D., Moje, E., & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in the service of the other. Science, 328, 459–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Ramnarain, U. D. (2014). Teachers’ perceptions of inquiry-based learning in urban, suburban, township and rural high schools: The context-specificity of science curriculum implementation in South Africa. Teaching and Teacher Education, 38, 65–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Reis, P., & Marques, A. R. (2016). A investigação e inovação responsáveis em sala de aula. Módulos de ensino IRRESISTIBLE. Instituto de Educação da Universidade de Lisboa. [Google Scholar]
  43. Roller, R. M., Sumantakul, S., Tran, M., Van Wyk, A., Zinna, J., Donelson, D. A., Finnegan, S. G., Foley, G., Frechette, O. R., Gaetgens, J., Jiang, J., Rinaolo, K. C., Cole, R. S., Lieberman, M., Remcho, V. T., & Frederick, K. A. (2021). Inquiry-based laboratories using paper microfluidic devices. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(6), 1946–1953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sampson, V., & Walker, J. P. (2012). Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help undergraduate students write to learn by learning to write in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 34(10), 1443–1485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Stender, A., Schwichow, M., Zimmerman, C., & Härtig, H. (2018). Making inquiry-based science learning visible: The influence of CVS and cognitive skills on content knowledge learning in guided inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 40(15), 1812–1831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Strat, T. T. S., Henriksen, E. K., & Jegstad, K. M. (2023). Inquiry-based science education in science teacher education: A systematic review. Studies in Science Education, 60(2), 191–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Šmida, D., Čipková, E., & Fuchs, M. (2023). Developing the test of inquiry skills: Measuring the level of inquiry skills among pupils in Slovakia. International Journal of Science Education, 46(1), 73–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Treagust, D. F., Qureshi, S. S., Vishnumolakala, V. R., Ojeil, J., Mocerino, M., & Southam, D. C. (2020). Process-oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) as a culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) in Qatar: A perspective from grade 10 chemistry classes. Research in Science Education, 50(3), 813−831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Tseng, Y. J., Hong, Z. R., & Lin, H. S. (2022). Advancing students’ scientific inquiry performance in chemistry through reading and evaluative reflection. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 23(3), 616–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Valsecchi, W. M., Delfino, J. M., Santos, J., & Faraj, S. E. (2024). A problem-based learning activity for enhancing inquiry skills and facilitating conceptual change in a biological chemistry course. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 25(2), 438–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Van Uum, M. S., Verhoeff, R. P., & Peeters, M. (2016). Inquiry-based science education: Towards a pedagogical framework for primary school teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 450–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Vorholzer, A., & von Aufschnaiter, C. (2019). Guidance in inquiry-based instruction–an attempt to disentangle a manifold construct. International Journal of Science Education, 41(11), 1562–1577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Wheeler, L. B., Clark, C. P., & Grisham, C. M. (2017). Transforming a traditional laboratory to an inquiry-based course: Importance of training tas when redesigning a curriculum. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(8), 1019−1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Wildan, W., Hakim, A., Siahaan, J., & Anwar, Y. A. S. (2019). A stepwise inquiry approach to improving communication skills and scientific attitudes on a biochemistry course. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 407–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wood, J., & Levy, P. (2015). There are more answers than questions: A literature review of questioning and inquiry-based learning. Available online: https://bpb-eu-w2.wpmucdn.com/blogs.lincoln.ac.uk/dist/f/1939/files/2015/07/JW-and-PL-Questioning-and-IBL-Literature-Review-final-July-20151.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2024).
  56. Yew, E. H. J., & Goh, K. (2016). Problem-based learning: An overview of its process and impact on learning. Health Professions Education, 2(2), 75–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Education 15 00334 g001aEducation 15 00334 g001b
Figure 1. Examples of work done by the students to be exhibited to the community and posted on the school website, resulting from the investigative work proposed in the inquiry module: (a) poster on the greenhouse effect; (b) leaflet on acid rain.
Figure 1. Examples of work done by the students to be exhibited to the community and posted on the school website, resulting from the investigative work proposed in the inquiry module: (a) poster on the greenhouse effect; (b) leaflet on acid rain.
Education 15 00334 g001aEducation 15 00334 g001b
Education 15 00334 g002
Figure 2. The overall grades obtained by the students in the written document and in the oral presentation.
Figure 2. The overall grades obtained by the students in the written document and in the oral presentation.
Education 15 00334 g002
Education 15 00334 g003
Figure 3. The grades, by category of criteria, obtained by the students for the written document and for the oral presentation.
Figure 3. The grades, by category of criteria, obtained by the students for the written document and for the oral presentation.
Education 15 00334 g003
Table 1. Levels of IBSE (Blanchard et al., 2010, p. 581).
Table 1. Levels of IBSE (Blanchard et al., 2010, p. 581).
LevelTypeProblem-QuestionProcedure MethodInterpretation of Results/Solution
0ConfirmationGiven by the teacherGiven by the teacherGiven by the teacher
1StructuredGiven by the teacherGiven by the teacherOpen to the student
2GuidedGiven by the teacherOpen to the studentOpen to the student
3OpenOpen to the studentOpen to the studentOpen to the student
Table 2. The structural plan of the inquiry module.
Table 2. The structural plan of the inquiry module.
PhaseLessonActivity
Engagement1Three questions to stimulate students’ interest and involvement in the topic and identify previous conceptions.
Viewing a video to familiarise students with the topics under study.
Exploration Explanation2, 3 and 4The search for and selection of information on the composition of the Earth’s troposphere and carbon dioxide, CO2, concluding that it is an essential and/or polluting gas.
Conducting an experimental activity to study the effect that the melting of sea ice and glaciers located on the continents has on the average sea level.
Sharing and discussion with the teacher.
Elaboration Exchange Empowerment5 and 6The search for and selection of information to construct the products that will comprise the final exhibition about a different socio-scientific problem related to the environment.
Creating the written document for the interactive exhibition, aiming to share it with the educational community.
Evaluation4 and 7Present throughout the implementation of the module.
The assessment of the oral presentation of the work—self- and hetero-assessment—and the assessment of the final product for the exhibition.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Vilela, M.; Morais, C.; Paiva, J.C. Inquiry-Based Science Education in High Chemistry: Enhancing Oral and Written Communication Skills Through Authentic and Problem-Based Learning Activities. Educ. Sci. 2025, 15, 334. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030334

AMA Style

Vilela M, Morais C, Paiva JC. Inquiry-Based Science Education in High Chemistry: Enhancing Oral and Written Communication Skills Through Authentic and Problem-Based Learning Activities. Education Sciences. 2025; 15(3):334. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030334

Chicago/Turabian Style

Vilela, Marta, Carla Morais, and João C. Paiva. 2025. "Inquiry-Based Science Education in High Chemistry: Enhancing Oral and Written Communication Skills Through Authentic and Problem-Based Learning Activities" Education Sciences 15, no. 3: 334. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030334

APA Style

Vilela, M., Morais, C., & Paiva, J. C. (2025). Inquiry-Based Science Education in High Chemistry: Enhancing Oral and Written Communication Skills Through Authentic and Problem-Based Learning Activities. Education Sciences, 15(3), 334. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030334

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop