Another direction of research is to apply the framework proposed in this paper to the investigation of existing highly engaging learning practices, such as peer instruction and inquiry-based pedagogy.
The four treatment conditions were as follows: 1) inquiry instruction with homogeneous collaborative groups, 2) inquiry instruction with heterogeneous collaborative groups, 3) didactic instruction with homogeneous collaborative groups, and 4) didactic instruction with heterogeneous collaborative groups (see Table 1).
These results are not surprising because research shows that inquiry instruction improves reasoning abilities over didactic instruction in college introductory biology classes (Lawson and Johnson [2002], Jensen and Lawson [2011]).
Figure 5 Dandelion Outreach Program student instructions for inquiry-based activity.
In this study, we attempt to resolve inconsistencies in the literature over the most effective composition of collaborative learning groups within inquiry instruction as well as within traditional didactic instruction.
This and many other studies have found inquiry instruction to be superior to traditional lecture-style teaching in the development of scientific reasoning ability and, more specifically, in its application to higher-level biological conceptual understanding.
Research has shown that inquiry instruction, using the learning cycle, is an effective constructivist teaching method leading to greater conceptual understanding and scientific reasoning gains over a traditional lecture format (e.g., Heiss et al., 1950; Renner et al., 1973; Howard and Miskowski, 2005; Spiro and Knisely, 2008; Minner et al., 2009; Rissing and Cogan, 2009).
His research interests include inquiry-based instruction and action research.
No such instruction to the inquiry was ever made public.
Clearly planned inquiry instruction has been effective in large-scale studies (Blanchard et al. 2007).
