Inquiry Cycle

Researchers show teachers enabling learner ownership builds central skills. This prepares learners for our world's rapid changes.

‍

Examples of Inquiry-Based Activities

The Inquiry Cycle can be applied across diverse subjects and age groups. Here are a few examples:

1. Science: Learners investigate the impact of pollution on local environments by collecting data, analysing samples, and proposing solutions.
2. History: Learners research different perspectives on a historical event, such as the colonisation of a country, using primary and secondary sources. They present their findings in a debate or a multimedia presentation.
3. Literature: Learners explore themes in a novel by posing questions about character motivations, social context, and the author's intent. They write analytical essays, participate in group discussions, or create artistic interpretations of the text.
4. Mathematics: Children use real-world scenarios to explore mathematical concepts, such as designing a garden, planning a budget, or analysing statistical data.

‍

Overcoming Challenges in Implementing Inquiry

While the benefits of inquiry-based learning are clear, implementing it effectively can present challenges. These may incl ude:

1. Time constraints: Inquiry projects often require more time than traditional lessons.
2. Curriculum coverage: Educators may feel pressured to cover a large amount of content.
3. Assessment concerns: Assessing inquiry-based learning can be more complex than traditional testing.
4. Learner readiness: Not all learners are immediately comfortable with the autonomy and responsibility required by inquiry-based learning.

To address these challenges, educators can:

1. Carefully plan and scaffold inquiry projects.
2. Integrate inquiry into existing curriculum frameworks.
3. Use a variety of assessment methods, including portfolios, presentations, and self-reflection.
4. Provide ongoing support and guidance to learners.

Furtak et al. (2012) found stronger outcomes for guided science inquiry than for traditional or unguided approaches, but that finding should not be used as a blanket claim against explicit instruction. Urdanivia Alarcon et al. (2023) reached a similar practical conclusion in a 51-study review: inquiry can build scientific reasoning, but teacher training and digital scaffolds shape the quality of the work. Kirschner, Sweller and Clark (2006) warn that novices can be overloaded when guidance is removed too early, while Hmelo-Silver et al. (2007) show that scaffolded inquiry is not minimal guidance. Karpicke (2008) adds a useful check: retrieval practice can sit inside Sorting Out and Making Conclusions so learners test what they know before they present it.

‍

‍

Inquiry Cycle Classroom Implementation

Inquiry cycles work best when learner interest is tied tightly to curriculum intent. Start with prior knowledge, then set a question that is smaller than a topic and larger than a worksheet. In Year 2 geography, a teacher might replace a map labelling task with the question, "Why are some places easier to travel through than others?" Learners ask questions, gather information from maps and photographs, then explain their answer using taught vocabulary.

For UK leaders, the accountability problem is evidencing progress during the messy phases of finding out and sorting out. Under 2026 inspection expectations, this does not need performative worksheets. Better evidence includes dated question maps, short teacher conference notes, retrieval checks, annotated source work, LMS checkpoints, mobile photo logs and a final explanation that shows how thinking has changed. The same logic supports PLCs: teachers can run a data-based inquiry cycle by asking a shared question, testing a change, comparing work samples and adjusting the next cycle.

Time management is a big challenge with inquiry-based learning. SATs and curriculum coverage add pressure. Integrated inquiry blocks that link subjects help. For example, Year 5 learners could explore local Industrial Revolution changes. This tackles history (Anglo-Saxons and Scots), geography (maps), and English (research). Instead of separate lessons, try two-week cycles. Learners spend 90 minutes daily exploring the central question. Mini-lessons teach skills when needed.

Inquiry needs authentic assessment, not just tests. Portfolios help learners show their process with journals and photos. For KS3 science, teachers can use peer assessment; learners evaluate designs. This boosts thinking, says the Assessment Reform Group. Formative assessment like self-assessment improves learning (Assessment Reform Group).

Inquiry needs careful scaffolding so all learners can take part. Tiered questions work well because all learners explore the same topic, but at the right level.

For example, in Year 4 maths, advanced learners investigate Fibonacci sequences. Learners who need support identify simpler patterns (Wiliam, 2011). Training teaching assistants also helps them support thinking partnerships (Black & Wiliam, 1998). This builds communication skills valued across subjects.

Teachers can build inquiry into planned lessons by finding linked concepts. For example, a Year 6 unit can explore legacy through Greek history. Vygotsky (1978) shows why talk matters here: learners build understanding through interaction with peers and adults.

Staff can plan together and find inquiry opportunities within existing schemes. Bruner (1960) argued that important ideas can be revisited at increasing levels of difficulty. Dewey (1938) also supports starting from experience and reflection, so small inquiry cycles are a better entry point than a whole-school rewrite.

‍

Daily Inquiry Implementation Strategies

Inquiry helps learners think critically and solve problems. Teachers guide exploration and boost collaboration (Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari, 2015). This creates a good learning environment (Stripling, 2003; Murdoch, 2015). Use it as a starting point for professional discussion: identify the learner's current need, record evidence from more than one lesson, and agree the next classroom adjustment with the SENCO or family.

Inquiry needs teachers to trust learner-led study. Challenges can happen, but learners engage more deeply. Inquiry, (Kuhlthau, 2004) builds skills learners need. Using the Inquiry Cycle builds confident, curious learners.

‍

‍

AI-Enhanced Inquiry: Tools for Modern Research

Generative AI changes how learners research (DfE, 2024). Teachers use ChatGPT and Claude to help learners investigate. These tools help refine topics into questions using prompts and feedback. Use it as a starting point for professional discussion: identify the learner's current need, record evidence from more than one lesson, and agree the next classroom adjustment with the SENCO or family.

Explicitly teach prompt engineering alongside research methods for success. Year 8 geography teachers could show learners how to refine questions. For example, change "What is climate change?" to a specific prompt. "Generate three research questions about UK coastal climate change impacts" works well. . This builds AI skills and keeps high academic standards.

Learners use AI for research before fieldwork; this creates effective applications. Intelligent systems support struggling learners with targeted help (Clark & Mayer, 2016). Teachers must teach learners to check AI content and verify sources.

Weinberg (2016) found digital skills now include AI use and fact-checking. Teachers need clear rules for learners using AI appropriately. Schools should implement robust fact-checking practices with learners. Teachers should help learners discuss AI insights' connection to their original thought.

‍

‍

AI-Enhanced Inquiry: Adaptive Assessment and Questioning

AI tools let teachers precisely track learning cycles, tweaking question difficulty using data. Adaptive platforms analyse learner answers, offering tailored feedback that reduces teacher workload. This helps manage varied learning needs during inquiry tasks.

Year 7 learners research renewable energy. An AI system spots misconceptions about solar panels . It asks struggling learners targeted questions, and challenges advanced learners economically . Teachers see learner analytics showing who needs help with data . This keeps learning going.

Research on adaptive questioning suggests it can support learner progress when used alongside teacher judgement. The DfE now suggests schools use these AI tools. This personalises learning and changes assessment, offering proactive help.

Teachers need expertise to understand AI insights and connect with learners. Effective classrooms blend AI precision with teacher intuition (Holmes et al., 2023). Teachers should use AI to inform, not replace, their judgement during inquiry (O'Neil, 2016; Luckin et al., 2018).

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

◆ Structural Learning

Inquiry Cycle

Classroom-readyWhat the theory means in practice

Inquiry Cycle in practice, a classroom-ready briefing you can use this week.

Send me the slides →

Something went wrong — please try again.

✓ On its way. Download the slides now.

Frequently Asked Questions

​

‍

‍

Free Resource Pack

Download this free Inquiry Based Learning Cycle for Teachers for your classroom and staff room. Includes printable posters, desk cards, and CPD materials. Use it as a starting point for professional discussion: identify the learner's current need, record evidence from more than one lesson, and agree the next classroom adjustment with the SENCO or family.

Free Resource Pack

‍

Inquiry Based Learning Cycle for Teachers

4 evidence-informed resources for teachers to understand, plan, and implement inquiry-based learning in their classrooms.

Inquiry Based LearningIBLTeacher CPDLesson PlanningQuestioning TechniquesPedagogyReflectionTeaching StrategiesVisual AidChecklist

Download Now ▼

Download your free bundle

Fill in your details below to get instant access to your resources.

First name

Last name

School email

School name

Your roleSelect your roleClass TeacherSENCoSubject LeadPhase LeadDeputy HeadHeadteacherTeaching AssistantOther

Current school focusSelect focus areaMetacognition and self-regulationLiteracy and readingNumeracy and mathsBehaviour and wellbeingSEND and inclusionAssessment and feedbackCurriculum developmentStaff CPD and trainingOther / not applicable

Quick survey (helps us create better resources)

How confident do you feel designing and facilitating inquiry-based learning experiences?

Not at all confident

Slightly confident

Moderately confident

Very confident

Extremely confident

To what extent is inquiry-based learning encouraged and supported within your school/among your colleagues?

Not at all

Slightly

Moderately

Significantly

Extensively

How frequently do you currently incorporate inquiry-based learning cycles into your teaching practice?

Rarely or never

Occasionally

Sometimes

Frequently

Almost always

Download Free Resource Pack

✅

Your resource pack is ready

Click the button below to download your resources.

Download Resources

Free resource from structural-learning.com · Evidence-based teaching tools

​

The 5E Instructional Model (Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate) gives teachers a clear framework for inquiry-based learning. The model follows a sequence, so teachers can guide learner-driven discovery in a coherent way. Each stage builds on the last, helping learners deepen their understanding and develop critical thinking skills.

The Engage phase aims to capture learners' attention and activate their prior knowledge. Teachers might pose a thought-provoking question, present a puzzling phenomenon, or share a relevant real-world problem. For instance, a history teacher could begin a unit on ancient civilisations by showing an image of an archaeological dig and asking, "What can we learn about a society from its buried artefacts?"

After engagement, the Explore stage encourages learners to investigate the topic through hands-on work. Teachers provide resources and chances for learners to gather data, carry out experiments, or observe phenomena. Learners may work together to test hypotheses or collect information, making early observations before direct teaching of the concepts (Bybee et al., 2006).

In a science lesson on networks, learners might explore different microhabitats in the school grounds. They record observations of plants and animals. They use magnifying glasses and identification charts to document their findings and start to notice patterns and relationships. This active investigation helps learners build their own early understanding.

During the Explain phase, learners share their findings. Teachers then introduce formal concepts and vocabulary. This stage helps clear up misconceptions and strengthen understanding from the exploration. Teachers lead discussion, teach key terms directly, and guide learners to build evidence-based explanations.

Continuing the network example, learners would share what they observed and discuss the organisms found in different microhabitats. The teacher would then introduce terms like "producer," "consumer," "habitat," and "interdependence." This helps learners link their empirical observations, meaning evidence from direct observation, to scientific principles. Learners would then practise using this new vocabulary to describe their findings.

The Elaborate stage challenges learners to apply their newly acquired knowledge in new contexts or to solve more complex problems. This phase extends learning, encouraging deeper understanding and transfer of skills. Teachers provide opportunities for learners to design, create, or investigate further, demonstrating their ability to generalise concepts.

For the network unit, learners might be tasked with designing a sustainable garden for the school, considering the needs of various organisms and the interactions within the planned network. They would research suitable plants and animals, justify their choices, and predict potential challenges. This application solidifies their understanding of ecological principles.

Finally, the Evaluate phase helps teachers and learners check understanding and progress. Assessment can be formative or summative, and may include self-reflection, peer assessment, or traditional evaluations. Teachers observe how learners apply concepts, give feedback, and judge how well the inquiry cycle has worked (Bybee, 2014).

Learners might complete a project where they present their sustainable garden designs, explaining their rationale and demonstrating their understanding of network balance. The teacher would assess their conceptual understanding and problem-solving skills, while learners reflect on their learning and areas for further inquiry. This iterative process reinforces learning and identifies future learning needs.

For social studies teachers, the College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework gives a strong structure for inquiry-based learning. The National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) developed it to guide teaching in civics, economics, geography, and history. Its main part, the Inquiry Arc, offers a full model for designing and using inquiry experiences that prepare learners to take an active role in a democratic society (NCSS, 2013).

The C3 Framework's Inquiry Arc sets out four distinct dimensions that guide learners through a full investigative process. These dimensions are: Developing Questions and Planning Inquiries; Applying Disciplinary Concepts and Tools; Evaluating Sources and Using Evidence; and Communicating Conclusions and Taking Informed Action. This clear sequence helps learners gain content knowledge. It also helps them develop essential critical thinking and civic engagement skills.

The first dimension, Developing Questions and Planning Inquiries, encourages learners to formulate compelling questions that drive their investigation. A teacher might prompt learners with a historical event, such as "The Great Depression," and ask them to generate questions like, "What caused the economic collapse?" or "How did ordinary people survive?" This initial stage helps learners define the scope and direction of their learning.

Next, in Applying Disciplinary Concepts and Tools, learners engage with the specific methods and ideas of social studies disciplines. For example, when studying the causes of the Great Depression, learners might apply economic concepts like supply and demand or historical concepts such as cause and effect. Teachers guide learners to use appropriate disciplinary lenses to analyse the topic effectively.

The third dimension, Evaluating Sources and Using Evidence, asks learners to judge information from different sources. They then use it to build an argument. A teacher might give primary sources, such as photographs of soup kitchens or extracts from government reports, alongside secondary historical analyses. Learners learn to check whether sources agree, spot bias, and use evidence to support their developing claims.

Finally, Communicating Conclusions and Taking Informed Action asks learners to explain their findings and think about what they mean. After investigating the Great Depression, learners might present their conclusions in a research paper, a documentary, or a class debate. They could then explore current issues linked to economic inequality or social welfare. From this, they can propose informed actions based on their historical understanding.

The C3 Framework’s Inquiry Arc can turn the social studies classroom into an active learning space. Learners build knowledge by asking questions, investigating, and using evidence to explain their ideas. Teachers guide this work with clear structure, so learners develop academic skills and civic readiness. This moves learning beyond rote memorisation and helps learners think carefully about complex social issues.

By integrating the C3 Framework, teachers provide a clear pathway for learners to navigate complex social studies topics. This structured inquiry approach ensures that learning is purposeful, evidence-based, and directly relevant to preparing learners for their roles as informed citizens. The teacher’s role remains central, guiding learners through each stage of the Inquiry Arc with targeted instruction and feedback.

The inquiry cycle is strengthened by the Community of Inquiry (CoI) Framework. This framework gives teachers a conceptual lens, or way of thinking, for designing and guiding deep learning experiences. It was first developed for online learning, but it also applies well to classrooms that use inquiry-based methods. It argues that meaningful education comes from the interaction of three core elements: social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000).

The first element, social presence, means that participants can show their personal characteristics in the community and present themselves as 'real people'. In an inquiry classroom, learners feel safe to express ideas, ask questions, and share their views openly. Teachers build social presence by setting norms for respectful dialogue and collaborative work. This helps every learner's voice feel valued.

For example, during the 'finding out' stage of an inquiry, a teacher might ask learners, "What are your initial thoughts on why this happened, and what makes you say that?" This encourages learners to articulate their reasoning and listen actively to peers, building a sense of belonging and mutual respect. Learners learn to build on each other's ideas, respectfully challenge assumptions, and negotiate meaning together, moving beyond surface-level interactions.

The second element is cognitive presence. This means how far learners build meaning through ongoing talk and discussion. In this process, they move from a triggering event to exploration, integration, and resolution (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). In an inquiry cycle, this helps learners investigate problems, form hypotheses, gather evidence, and build clear explanations.

A teacher facilitates cognitive presence by posing challenging questions that provoke deeper thinking and encouraging learners to justify their claims with evidence. For instance, after learners have collected data on plant growth, the teacher might ask, "Based on your observations, what conclusions can you draw about the impact of light on plant growth, and what evidence supports your claim?" This prompts learners to move from simply reporting data to analysing it, synthesising information, and developing well-reasoned arguments.

Finally, teaching presence means how the teacher designs, guides, and directs learning so learners reach meaningful outcomes. It has three main functions: designing and organising the inquiry experience, supporting discussion, and giving direct instruction where needed (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). The teacher plays a key role by structuring the inquiry, guiding learners through complex tasks, and stepping in at the right time to support learning.

Consider a teacher introducing a new inquiry topic. They might design a graphic organiser to help learners structure their initial research (design), then circulate to prompt groups with questions like "What patterns are you noticing in your data?" (facilitating discourse). If learners struggle with a specific skill, such as interpreting a graph, the teacher might provide a brief, targeted mini-lesson (direct instruction). Effective teaching presence ensures that both social and cognitive presences are robustly supported, leading to a coherent and productive inquiry experience for all learners.

The philosophical foundations of inquiry-based learning are strongly linked to John Dewey, who is often seen as the philosophical father of this pedagogical approach. Dewey argued for education based on experience and active learner engagement, rather than the passive reception of knowledge (Dewey, 1938). For Dewey, learning is an active process of doing and reflecting. It is not simply about absorbing information.

Central to Dewey's philosophy is the concept of reflective thinking, which he defined as the active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge. This process involves examining the grounds that support a belief and the further conclusions to which it leads (Dewey, 1933). It is through this deliberate mental engagement that individuals transform raw experience into meaningful understanding.

Dewey outlined five distinct phases of reflective thought, which provide a robust framework for structuring an inquiry cycle in the classroom. The first phase is suggestion, where a learner encounters a difficulty, perplexity, or problem that challenges their existing understanding. This initial moment of confusion or curiosity acts as the catalyst for inquiry.

For example, in a Year 5 science lesson, learners might observe a plant in the classroom wilting despite receiving regular watering, leading to an immediate sense of 'something is wrong'. The teacher might prompt, "What do you notice about this plant today?" encouraging learners to articulate their initial observations and feelings of surprise or concern.

The second phase is intellectualisation. This means defining the problem more clearly and precisely. Learners explain what they do not understand, turning a vague puzzle into a specific question or challenge. To do this, they need to observe carefully and analyse the first suggestion.

Following the wilting plant observation, the teacher guides learners to refine their initial 'something is wrong' into a focused inquiry question. Learners might rephrase their confusion into a specific question such as, "Why is the plant wilting if it has enough water?" or "What conditions are causing this plant to decline?"

The third phase involves forming a hypothesis, where learners propose possible solutions or explanations for the defined problem. These are educated guesses or conjectures, drawing upon prior knowledge and initial observations. Teachers encourage a range of ideas at this stage, valuing divergent thinking.

Learners might suggest various hypotheses: "Maybe the plant is getting too much water," "Perhaps it's not getting enough sunlight," "Could the soil be bad and lacking nutrients?" or "Is it a disease?" Each suggestion represents a potential avenue for investigation.

Following this, reasoning means thinking through the hypothesis in more detail. Learners consider the implications and possible consequences of each proposed solution. They work through 'if-then' scenarios and predict what they would expect to see if a particular hypothesis were true. This inner dialogue strengthens their logical connections.

For instance, if a learner hypothesises "too much water," they might reason, "If it's too much water, then the roots might be rotting, and the leaves would turn yellow." If "not enough sunlight," then "the plant would look pale and stretched, reaching for light." This mental testing helps them refine their predictions.

Finally, the fifth phase is testing, which involves putting the hypothesis into practice through observation, experimentation, or further research to confirm or disconfirm it. This practical application allows learners to gather evidence and evaluate the validity of their initial ideas. The results then feed back into the cycle, potentially leading to new suggestions.

To test their hypotheses, learners might design an experiment: watering one plant less, moving another to a sunnier spot, repotting a third with fresh soil, and researching common plant diseases. They then meticulously observe and record changes over time, determining which hypothesis is best supported by the evidence collected.

These five phases of reflective thought provide a robust and systematic framework for structuring inquiry-based learning in the classroom. By guiding learners through these stages, teachers cultivate not just knowledge acquisition, but also

The inquiry cycle is a strong teaching approach for standards-based science education. It aligns especially well with the Current Science Standards (NGSS). These standards move the focus away from rote memorisation of facts and towards deeper understanding of scientific concepts and the processes scientists use. Through authentic scientific investigation, learners learn how scientific knowledge is built and applied.

The NGSS framework is built upon three interconnected dimensions: Disciplinary Core Ideas (DCIs), Crosscutting Concepts (CCCs), and crucially, the Scientific and Engineering Practices (SEPs). The SEPs describe the behaviours scientists and engineers use in their work, moving beyond simply "doing a lab" to truly thinking and acting like a scientist. An effective inquiry cycle provides the ideal structure for learners to practise these essential skills.

Within an inquiry cycle, learners naturally use several SEPs. For example, the first "Tuning In" or "Asking Questions" stage links directly to Asking Questions and Defining Problems. Learners create testable questions about phenomena, such as "What factors affect how quickly a sugar cube dissolves?" This shifts them from receiving information to actively finding areas to investigate.

As learners move into the "Finding Out" or "Investigating" stage, they use Planning and Carrying Out Investigations and Analysing and Interpreting Data. They plan experiments, collect observations, and organise their findings, perhaps in a table or graph. Later, in "Sorting Out" or "Making Conclusions", they practise Constructing Explanations and Designing Solutions. They use the evidence they have collected to answer their first questions.

Consider a Year 5 science class investigating plant growth. The teacher initiates the inquiry by asking, "What do plants need to grow well?" Learners then propose various factors like light, water, or soil type, leading them to design experiments to test their hypotheses. One group might set up identical bean plants, varying only the amount of light exposure, meticulously recording plant height and leaf count over two weeks. This activity requires them to develop models, plan investigations, collect and analyse data, and finally construct an evidence-based explanation for optimal plant growth.

The inquiry cycle also helps learners with Engaging in Argument from Evidence and Obtaining, Evaluating, and Communicating Information. Learners share findings with peers, defend their conclusions with data, and critique others' methods. Teachers need to guide these discussions carefully, so learners use evidence rather than opinion. This support improves outcomes in inquiry-based science (Furtak et al., 2012) and helps learners build scientific literacy alongside subject knowledge.

The Inquiry Design Model (IDM) offers a structured approach for teachers to plan inquiry-based learning experiences that are manageable yet substantial. This model helps teachers design focused inquiries that extend beyond a single lesson but do not encompass an entire unit of study. It provides a clear framework for developing tasks that guide learners through a process of investigation and understanding, ensuring a balance between teacher guidance and learner autonomy.

At the heart of the Inquiry Design Model are compelling questions. These are open-ended, intellectually stimulating questions that drive the entire inquiry, requiring learners to synthesise information and construct an argument rather than simply recall facts (Swan, Lee, & Grant, 2015). For example, instead of "What caused the Industrial Revolution?", a compelling question might be "Did the Industrial Revolution improve or worsen human well-being?".

To address the compelling question, the Inquiry Design Model breaks it down into several supporting questions. These questions are factual, conceptual, or procedural, providing the necessary scaffolding for learners to build their understanding. Each supporting question guides learners to specific content and skills needed to tackle the broader inquiry, acting as stepping stones for deeper learning.

The culmination of an IDM inquiry is the summative performance task. This task requires learners to demonstrate their understanding by constructing an argument or explanation in response to the compelling question, drawing upon the evidence gathered through the supporting questions. The performance task often involves creating a product, such as an essay, presentation, or debate, which allows learners to express their conclusions and justify their reasoning.

Consider a Year 9 geography class exploring the compelling question: "To what extent should cities prioritise green spaces over housing development?". Supporting questions might include: "What are the environmental and social benefits of urban green spaces?", "What are the challenges of providing affordable housing in urban areas?", and "How do different cities around the world balance these priorities?". The summative performance task could involve learners designing a proposal for a local urban development project, justifying their decisions regarding green space allocation versus housing, supported by geographical data and case studies.

The Inquiry Design Model helps teachers structure inquiries that are "bigger than a lesson, smaller than a unit", providing a clear scope and sequence for learning. This focused approach prevents learners from feeling overwhelmed by overly broad topics while still allowing for deep investigation. It ensures that inquiry-based learning is purposeful and leads to tangible outcomes, aligning with the principles of guided inquiry (Furtak et al., 2012). Teachers can effectively manage the inquiry process, providing targeted support as learners navigate complex ideas and develop their arguments.

The inquiry cycle fits well with constructivist learning theories, especially those set out by Jean Piaget & Cognitive Development. Piaget argued that children do not simply receive information. Instead, they build knowledge by directly interacting with their environment (Piaget, 1936).

Central to Piaget's theory is the concept of schemas, which are mental structures or frameworks that individuals use to organise and interpret information. As learners engage in inquiry, they continuously use these existing schemas to make sense of new experiences and observations. This active process of meaning-making is central for deep learning.

One key cognitive mechanism in this process is assimilation. This is when learners fit new information into their existing schemas without changing them. For example, a Year 4 learner studying rocks might see granite and place it in their schema for "hard, speckled rocks." Their teacher might notice them linking it to other rocks they have studied, which confirms their current understanding.

Conversely, accommodation occurs when new information cannot be fitted into existing schemas, prompting the learner to modify or create new schemas. If the same learner then encounters pumice, a lightweight, porous rock that floats, their existing "hard, speckled rocks" schema proves inadequate. They must accommodate this new information by adjusting their understanding of rocks, perhaps creating a new sub-schema for "volcanic rocks" or "porous rocks," thus expanding their cognitive framework.

The inquiry cycle supports both assimilation and accommodation by giving learners new situations and problems. These challenges test what learners already understand. As learners ask questions, investigate, and reflect, they meet information that either strengthens their existing knowledge or makes them rethink their conceptualisations. This active process drives genuine cognitive development.

Teachers can guide inquiry by planning provocations that create cognitive disequilibrium, or a useful moment of uncertainty. This encourages learners to move beyond simple assimilation and towards more complex accommodation. When teachers understand Piaget's view of how learners make meaning, they can better support learners as they build strong and flexible knowledge through inquiry.

Lev Vygotsky's sociocultural theory argues that learning is social and shaped by culture and interaction (Vygotsky, 1978). He argued that higher mental functions first develop through social interaction. Individuals then internalise them, meaning they make these ways of thinking their own. In an inquiry cycle, learners build understanding through dialogue and collaboration with peers and teachers.

This view fits with social constructivism, where learners do not simply receive knowledge. Instead, they build it through shared experiences and communication. When learners take part in inquiry, they discuss meaning, challenge ideas, and build shared understanding. This joint building of knowledge is central to Vygotsky's view of cognitive development.

A core concept within Vygots

To truly make thinking visible within an inquiry cycle, teachers can integrate specific routines developed by Harvard Project Zero. These Visible Thinking Routines are short, repeatable patterns of thinking that help learners explore ideas, make connections, and articulate their understanding (Ritchhart, Church, & Morrison, 2011). By consistently employing these routines, educators can scaffold complex cognitive processes and provide concrete structures for learners to engage deeply with content.

For instance, during the "tuning in" or "finding out" stages of inquiry, the See, Think, Wonder routine encourages careful observation and questioning. A teacher might present an intriguing image, artefact, or short video clip related to the inquiry topic and ask learners: "What do you see? What do you think about what you see? What does it make you wonder?" This prompts initial observations, interpretations, and the generation of genuine questions, laying the groundwork for investigation.

As learners progress into "finding out" and "sorting out" information, routines like Think, Pair, Share or Chalk Talk facilitate collaborative processing. With Think, Pair, Share, learners individually consider a question, discuss their thoughts with a partner, and then share with the larger group. This structured interaction allows learners to rehearse their ideas, clarify their thinking, and build on others' perspectives before presenting to the whole class.

The Connect, Extend, Challenge routine is particularly effective for the "sorting out" and "going further" stages, promoting deeper reflection and metacognition. After engaging with new information or a complex text, learners are asked: "How do the ideas and information connect to what you already know? What new ideas or understandings extend your thinking? What questions or difficulties still challenge your understanding?" This helps learners integrate new knowledge, identify areas of growth, and pinpoint remaining confusions.

Another effective routine for reflection and demonstrating conceptual change is I Used to Think... Now I Think.... At the conclusion of an inquiry unit, a teacher might ask learners to complete these statements regarding a core concept. For example, after an inquiry into climate change, a learner might write: "I used to think climate change was just about polar bears, but now I think it's about complex global systems affecting everyone." This routine makes learning progress explicit and encourages learners to articulate their evolving understanding.

When teachers use these Visible Thinking Routines often, classroom culture changes. The focus moves from recalling facts to building meaning. Teachers help learners form habits of mind for lifelong inquiry. Learners move beyond surface engagement and begin deeper intellectual exploration.

Teachers need to understand the spectrum of inquiry when using an inquiry cycle. It helps them hand over responsibility to learners in stages. This spectrum, often referred to as The Four Levels of Inquiry (Confirmation, Structured, Guided, Open), gives teachers a way to match tasks to learners' readiness and prior knowledge. If teachers move too quickly to less structured inquiry, learners can become frustrated or learn only at surface level (Furtak et al., 2012).

The most foundational level is Confirmation Inquiry. Here, the teacher provides the question, the method, and the expected outcome, asking learners to verify a known principle. For example, a science teacher might instruct learners: "Follow these steps to confirm that plants need light for photosynthesis," providing a detailed procedure and anticipating specific results. Learners practise following instructions, collecting data, and observing phenomena to affirm established scientific facts.

Next is Structured Inquiry, where the teacher poses the question and outlines the investigative procedure, but learners determine the outcome based on their findings. A history teacher might ask: "Using these primary sources, how did the living conditions of factory workers change during the Industrial Revolution?" Learners analyse the provided documents to draw their own conclusions, developing skills in evidence interpretation within a defined framework.

In Guided Inquiry, the teacher provides only the overarching question, and learners are responsible for designing their own investigation methods and determining the outcome. For instance, a geography teacher could ask: "How does local urban development impact river networks?" Learners would then plan their own data collection methods, such as water sampling or observation protocols, to investigate the question and present their findings. This level requires learners to apply problem-solving skills and make methodological choices.

The most advanced level is Open Inquiry, where learners formulate their own questions, design their own methods, and determine their own outcomes. This approach is highly learner-driven and demands significant prior knowledge, research skills, and independence. A design and technology teacher might simply present a problem: "Our school canteen generates a lot of food waste; how can we reduce it?" Learners would then identify specific questions, plan experiments or surveys, and propose solutions based on their independent investigations.

Teachers should choose the level of inquiry that fits their learners. As learners build skills, teachers can slowly give them more independence. Clear guidance and enough scaffolding at the start of an inquiry cycle help to prevent aimless exploration and support deeper learning (Murdoch, 2015). Over time, this step-by-step move through the levels of inquiry builds learners' ability to think and investigate on their own.

Kath Murdoch's Inquiry Cycle gives teachers a clear framework for student-led inquiry. It guides them through six distinct but connected phases (Murdoch, 2015). The cycle keeps inquiry purposeful and scaffolded, which prevents aimless exploration and supports better learning outcomes. By moving through these stages in order, teachers can build deep understanding and critical thinking in their learners.

The cycle begins with Tuning In, where teachers provoke curiosity and activate learners' prior knowledge about a topic. For instance, a Year 5 teacher might display a collection of unusual artefacts and ask, "What do you think these are for, and where do they come from?" This initial engagement helps learners connect to the learning and formulate their own questions.

Next is Finding Out, the investigation phase. Here, learners gather information and explore their questions. Teachers provide varied resources, such as texts, videos, or chances to observe and experiment. Learners might research different types of ancient civilisations and record key facts about their daily lives and beliefs.

The Sorting Out phase requires learners to organise, analyse, and make sense of the information they have collected. Teachers guide learners to identify patterns, categorise data, and challenge assumptions. A Year 8 class studying environmental issues might use a graphic organiser to compare the causes and effects of different types of pollution, identifying common themes and unique impacts.

Following this, Going Further encourages learners to extend their understanding by pursuing new questions that emerged during the previous phases. Learners might choose a specific aspect of their research to investigate in more depth or consider alternative perspectives. This phase promotes intellectual independence and deeper specialisation.

In Making Conclusions, learners synthesise their findings and articulate their learning, drawing evidence-based conclusions. They reflect on their initial questions and formulate answers, often through presentations, written reports, or debates. A learner might present their findings on the most effective renewable energy sources, justifying their choice with data.

Finally, Taking Action involves learners applying their learning in a meaningful way, often by sharing their knowledge or making a difference. This could involve creating a public awareness campaign, designing a solution to a problem, or teaching others. A Year 6 class might write and perform a play about historical events, demonstrating their understanding to a younger audience.

Formative Assessment Classroom Techniques (FACTs) help teachers keep checking learner understanding and progress during the inquiry cycle. They give real-time feedback, so teachers can adjust instruction quickly and check that learners are building accurate knowledge and skills. Instead of waiting for summative assessments, FACTs build assessment into learning itself. This makes learner thinking visible.

During the "finding out" and "sorting out" stages of inquiry, FACTs are particularly valuable. For instance, a "traffic light" reflection asks learners to indicate their understanding of a concept using red, amber, or green signals, providing a quick visual overview of class comprehension. Similarly, a KWHL chart (What I Know, What I Want to Know, How I will find out, What I Learned) helps learners organise their thoughts and track their learning, while simultaneously offering the teacher insight into their prior knowledge and emerging questions.

The wider method of using Formative Assessment Classroom Techniques goes beyond these specific tools. It means gathering evidence of learning, making sense of that evidence, and then using it to support learner progress (Black & Wiliam, 1998). Teachers might use mini-whiteboards for quick answers, think-pair-share activities to express ideas, or concept mapping to show links in understanding.

Consider a Year 8 history class investigating the causes of World War I. After learners have conducted initial research, the teacher might use an exit ticket as a FACT. Learners are asked to write down three potential causes and one question they still have. Reviewing these tickets, the teacher identifies common misconceptions about alliances and decides to begin the next lesson with a targeted discussion to clarify these points, rather than moving on prematurely.

Effective use of Formative Assessment Classroom Techniques helps teachers give timely, specific feedback. This feedback guides learners' investigations and helps them refine their understanding. It also builds metacognitive skills, as learners reflect on their learning and spot where they need more support or clarity. This ongoing feedback loop is vital for deep learning in an inquiry-based classroom.

Essential Questions are the overarching, open-ended inquiries that drive an entire unit or extended period of investigation. These questions are designed to provoke deep thought, connect to enduring understandings, and have no single, simple answer (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). They serve as the intellectual compass for the inquiry, encouraging learners to explore complex ideas and make connections across different concepts.

An effective Essential Question should make learners think, invite debate, and link beyond the current topic. For instance, in a history unit on revolutions, an Essential Question might be: "What justifies a revolution?" This question asks learners to think about ethical, social, and political issues, not just memorise dates and names. It supports interest and critical thinking throughout the inquiry cycle.

Supporting Questions are more focused, factual, and specific inquiries. They help learners investigate different facets of the Essential Question. These questions act as stepping stones by breaking the wider inquiry into manageable research tasks. They guide learners to gather the necessary information and build the foundational understanding needed to address the larger, more complex Essential Question.

For the Essential Question "What justifies a revolution?", Supporting Questions might include: "What were the economic conditions leading to the French Revolution?", "How did Enlightenment ideas influence revolutionary thought?", or "What role did social inequality play in the American Revolution?" These questions direct learners to specific sources and pieces of evidence. As learners answer these narrower questions, they build the knowledge base needed to formulate a comprehensive response to the Essential Question.

Essential and Supporting Questions work together to give inquiry-based learning a strong structure. Essential Questions keep the big picture and the intellectual challenge in view. Supporting Questions give learners clear routes for investigation and knowledge building. Teachers help learners see how each supporting answer adds to their growing understanding of the essential question, creating a coherent and purposeful learning experience.

Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is a specific teaching approach within inquiry-based learning. All inquiry involves investigation, but PBL starts with a complex, real, and ill-structured problem. Learners work together to define the problem, identify what they need to learn, and propose solutions (Barrows, 1996).

Unlike general inquiry, which might begin with a question or an observation, PBL presents learners with a real-world scenario that lacks a clear solution. The learning of content knowledge becomes a direct consequence of the need to solve the presented problem. This approach ensures that knowledge acquisition is purposeful and immediately applicable to a tangible challenge.

Consider a Year 9 science class presented with the problem: "Our local river's fish population is declining rapidly; what is causing this, and how can we mitigate it?" Learners must research water quality, pollution sources, networks, and potential interventions. They might conduct experiments, interview local experts, and ultimately present a detailed action plan to the local council.

In this context, the problem itself drives the entire learning process, dictating which scientific concepts, research skills, and collaborative strategies learners must acquire. The problem is not merely an application task at the end of a unit; it is the central organiser for all learning. This contrasts with open inquiry, where learners might explore a topic without a specific, predefined problem to solve.

Growth portfolios, often referred to as documentation, are an effective tool within the inquiry cycle. They move beyond simple collection to become a carefully chosen record of learner learning and metacognition. Learners actively select and organise evidence that shows their progress, understanding, and skill development during an inquiry. This process encourages learners to take ownership of their learning and makes their thinking visible and tangible.

To use growth portfolios well, guide learners to collect a wide range of evidence. This might include initial brainstorms, research notes, drafts of written work, photographs of experiments or models, peer feedback, and revised solutions. For instance, in a history inquiry about local heritage, learners could record their initial questions, interview transcripts, annotated primary sources, and early drafts of their historical narrative. This shows how their understanding has changed over time.

A critical component of effective documentation is the integration of regular reflection. Learners should regularly articulate their learning, identify challenges encountered, explain how they addressed misconceptions, and describe new insights gained (Wiliam, 2011). Provide prompts such as, "What was the most challenging part of this investigation and how did you overcome it?" or "How has your understanding of this topic changed since you started?"

This reflective practice turns the portfolio into a live record of growth, not just a fixed archive of finished work. The teacher models effective reflection, gives clear criteria for choosing evidence, and offers constructive feedback on the depth of learner thinking shown in growth portfolios. In this way, documentation supports and extends the inquiry process.

Metacognition means learners' awareness and understanding of how they think. During an inquiry cycle, learners check their understanding, plan their investigations, and judge how well their strategies are working (Dunlosky et al., 2013). These skills help learners become more independent and effective.

To deepen metacognitive skill development, teachers should explicitly teach strategies for self-assessment. For instance, after an investigation phase, ask learners to reflect not just on what they learned, but how they learned it. A teacher might prompt, "What was your plan for finding information, and did it work? What would you do differently next time?"

This continuous assessment of thought processes helps learners identify effective learning strategies and adjust ineffective ones. When a learner says, "I realised my initial search terms were too broad, so I narrowed them down," they are demonstrating strong metacognitive awareness. This self-reflection moves beyond surface-level recall to a deeper understanding of their own learning.

‍

The Specific Phases of the Inquiry Cycle

The inquiry cycle is not a linear process but a recursive journey through distinct phases, each designed to build upon the last and deepen learner understanding. Use it as a starting point for professional discussion: identify the learner's current need, record evidence from more than one lesson, and agree the next classroom adjustment with the SENCO or family.

Teachers guide learners through each stage of the cycle. Learners move from initial curiosity to practical application and reflection, within a learning experience that is structured but still flexible.

‍

Tuning In

This initial phase aims to capture learners' interest and connect new learning to their existing understanding. Teachers might present a compelling image, a puzzling scenario, or a thought-provoking question to spark curiosity.

For example, a science teacher might show a video of a natural phenomenon and ask, "What do you notice? What questions does this raise for you?" This activates prior knowledge and establishes a purpose for inquiry.

‍

Finding Out

In this inquiry phase, learners gather information and explore their first questions. Teachers provide suitable resources, teach simple research methods, and guide learners as they collect data.

Learners might conduct experiments, read diverse texts, interview experts, or observe phenomena. Effective teacher guidance at this stage is central to prevent unguided discovery, which can be less effective than structured inquiry (Furtak et al., 2012).

‍

Sorting Out

Once information is collected, learners move to making sense of their findings. This phase involves analysing data, identifying patterns, and synthesising information to construct meaning.

Teachers guide discussion and encourage learners to use graphic organisers or concept maps. They also prompt learners to form explanations or develop theories. Learners might then produce a summary report, a diagram showing connections, or a presentation explaining their conclusions.

‍

Going Further

The final phase encourages learners to apply their new understanding, take action, and reflect on their learning. This deepens comprehension and allows learners to see the real-world relevance of their inquiry.

Learners could design a solution to a problem, create a public awareness campaign, or teach their findings to a younger class. Reflection involves considering what they learned, how they learned it, and what new questions arose.

‍

Scaffolding Inquiry for Neurodivergent Learners

Inquiry-based learning can bring strong benefits. Yet its open-ended nature can be hard for neurodivergent learners, including those with ADHD, Autism, or Dyslexia. Teachers need to scaffold the inquiry cycle, which means giving carefully planned support. This helps reduce cognitive overload, manage sensory input, and give all learners clear structures.

When teachers understand the demands of each inquiry stage, they can give more targeted support. This helps neurodivergent learners engage meaningfully with the process. It also helps them develop critical thinking and reach deep understanding without being overwhelmed by ambiguity or unstructured tasks.

‍

Addressing Cognitive Load and Executive Function

Neurodivergent learners often benefit from explicit instruction and reduced cognitive load, especially when faced with novel or complex tasks (Sweller, 1988). During the 'tuning in' or 'finding out' stages of inquiry, provide curated resources rather than an open internet search, and pre-teach key vocabulary.

Support executive functions, such as planning and organisation, by breaking a big inquiry question into smaller steps. Graphic organisers can help learners plan their research and bring ideas together. This makes the 'sorting out' stage easier to manage (Dunlosky et al., 2013).

For example, in a Year 5 science inquiry on networks, a teacher might provide a graphic organiser with specific prompts like "What living things are in this habitat?", "What non-living things are present?", and "How do they interact?". This structure helps learners with ADHD organise their thoughts and maintain focus during investigation, preventing them from becoming lost in broad research.

Similarly, when a Year 9 learner with Dyslexia researches historical sources for an Industrial Revolution project, give them a writing scaffold. Include sentence starters and clear sections for evidence and analysis. This reduces the mental load of reading information and writing answers at the same time, so they can focus on the history.

‍

Supporting Sensory and Social Needs

Collaborative inquiry can place high sensory and social demands on learners with Autism. Teachers should think about the learning space and how groups work together. They can offer individual work or structured pair work, with clear roles and expectations.

During 'going further' stages, learners may present their work or discuss it in groups. Give them chances to rehearse or use other formats, such as pre-recorded audio or visual posters. Create quiet zones or offer noise-cancelling headphones to reduce sensory distractions during focused research time.

For instance, during a Year 3 inquiry into local community services, a learner with Autism might struggle with the spontaneity of a whole-class brainstorm. Instead, the teacher could provide a visual checklist of service types and ask them to draw or write about one service they know, offering a predictable and less overwhelming way to contribute.

In a Year 11 English inquiry exploring different interpretations of a text, group discussions can be challenging for learners with social communication difficulties. The teacher could assign specific roles (e.g., 'note-taker', 'questioner', 'summariser') and provide sentence stems for contributing to the discussion, ensuring all learners have a clear way to participate and feel heard.

‍

The Neuroscience of "The Dip"; Managing Cognitive Load

When learners move from highly structured, teacher-guided inquiry to more independent, open-ended investigation, they often feel confused and frustrated. Their motivation may also fall. This expected challenge is often called "The Dip". It marks a major cognitive and emotional hurdle.

This dip is mainly caused by a sudden rise in cognitive load, especially intrinsic and extraneous load, as learners deal with more independence (Sweller, 1988). Guided inquiry uses clear frameworks and support to manage these cognitive demands. Open inquiry removes much of this structure. As a result, learners must manage many variables and complex problem-solving steps at the same time.

‍

Understanding Working Memory Limitations

Working memory has limited capacity. This means learners can only process a small amount of information at one time. If they must generate questions, design experiments, select appropriate resources, analyse data, and synthesise findings all at once, their working memory can become overloaded.

This overload stops learners from processing new information well. It can also lead to feeling stuck, frustrated, or disengaged. Teachers need to recognise these limits so they can design effective scaffolding. This support helps learners move through "The Dip" instead of becoming overwhelmed.

‍

Strategies for Mitigating Cognitive Overload

Teachers need clear strategies to manage cognitive load as learners move towards open inquiry. This helps learners become more independent without facing too much struggle. A gradual release of responsibility is key, moving from explicit modelling to guided practice and then independent application.

For instance, a Year 4 science teacher introducing an investigation into plant growth might initially provide a partially completed planning sheet with headings like "Question:", "Variables to change:", and "Equipment:". Learners fill in the blanks, focusing on specific elements of the design.

In later inquiries, the teacher might give only the headings and ask learners to add their own details. Over time, learners can then plan a full investigation by themselves. This step-by-step reduction in support prevents sudden cognitive jumps.

‍

Explicitly Teaching Metacognitive Skills

Another vital strategy is to teach metacognitive skills clearly. These skills help learners plan, monitor, and evaluate their own thinking and learning processes. Learners need to know how to break down complex tasks, identify the steps they need, and check their own progress.

A Year 9 history teacher, for example, might model how to use a generic "source analysis framework" when evaluating historical interpretations. She would verbalise her thought process: "First, I identify the author and purpose; then, I consider the context; next, I look for potential bias."

Learners then practise this routine with guided examples. After that, they use it independently with new sources. This explicit instruction gives them the mental tools to manage open inquiry. It also reduces extraneous cognitive load by making the problem-solving process clear.

‍

Responsive Formative Assessment and Feedback

Regular formative assessment and targeted feedback are critical for identifying and addressing learner struggles during "The Dip" (Wiliam, 2011). Teachers can observe learners as they work, ask probing questions, and provide just-in-time support or re-scaffold specific aspects of the inquiry.

Effective feedback helps learners understand what they are doing well, where they need to improve, and how to close that gap (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). This responsive approach ensures that learners receive the precise support needed to overcome cognitive hurdles and continue their inquiry effectively.

‍

Generative AI as a "Co-Inquirer": Prompt Engineering

Generative AI can extend the inquiry cycle beyond traditional research methods. Rather than using AI only to save teachers time, educators can teach learners to use it as a "co-inquirer," or a critical partner in building knowledge. This approach helps learners ask more careful questions and analyse ideas, instead of just retrieving information. Learners also learn precise prompt engineering, so they can guide AI, deepen their understanding, and critically evaluate AI-generated content.

Prompt engineering means writing clear, specific instructions to guide an AI's output. It asks learners to think metacognitively, meaning they think about what information they need and how to ask for it. This process mirrors scientific inquiry, where early hypotheses are refined when new evidence appears (Wiliam, 2011). Learners build a careful understanding of how people generate and interpret information.

‍

Guiding Inquiry with AI Prompts

During the "Tuning In" or "Finding Out" stages, learners can use AI to broaden their initial understanding of a topic. For a Year 6 history project on Ancient Egypt, a learner might prompt, "Act as an archaeologist from 1920. What are the three most exciting discoveries you've made about daily life in Ancient Egypt, and why?" This encourages AI to adopt a persona and provide contextually rich information, prompting further questions.

Following the initial AI response, the learner refines their prompt: "Based on the archaeologist's discoveries, what specific questions should I ask to understand how ordinary Egyptians lived, focusing on their food and housing?" The AI then generates targeted questions, helping the learner structure their subsequent research. This iterative dialogue refines the inquiry focus and models effective research strategies.

In secondary science, learners investigating climate change might ask AI to summarise complex scientific papers or find counter-arguments. A Year 10 learner could prompt, "Summarise the main arguments of the IPCC's latest report on ocean acidification in simple terms, then list three potential economic impacts for coastal communities." This helps learners make complex information easier to use. It also helps them consider multiple perspectives.

The learner then critically evaluates the AI's summary, comparing it with other sources. They might follow up with, "Now, act as a fishing industry representative. What are your main concerns about ocean acidification, and what solutions do you propose?" This prompts the AI to generate a specific viewpoint, which learners can then analyse for bias and validity, developing critical thinking skills (Dunlosky et al., 2013).

As learners move to the "Going Further" stage, AI can assist in structuring their findings or refining arguments. A learner preparing a presentation could ask, "Provide feedback on this paragraph explaining the causes of World War I, focusing on clarity, conciseness, and the strength of the evidence presented." This provides immediate, specific feedback, allowing learners to revise their work before submission (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).

‍

The Teacher's Role in Prompt Engineering

The teacher's role shifts from content provider to facilitator of critical AI engagement. You guide learners in developing sophisticated prompts, evaluating AI outputs for accuracy and bias, and understanding AI's limitations. This ensures that AI serves as a tool for deeper inquiry, not a substitute for critical thought. Teaching prompt engineering becomes a fundamental skill for navigating the digital information context.

‍

Tactile Inquiry: Physical Meaning-Making with Concrete Materials

‍

Cognitive Foundations of Tactile Learning

Using physical materials gives learners a strong base for understanding abstract concepts, especially in primary school. Cognitive science shows the value of moving from concrete experiences to more abstract representations. Bruner described this as enactive, iconic, and symbolic modes of representation (Bruner, 1966). The Concrete-Pictorial-Abstract (CPA) progression follows the same order: hands-on experiences, visual aids, and then abstract symbols.

When learners handle and move objects, they build mental models based on real, tangible things. This supports deeper conceptual understanding. Active engagement also helps new knowledge stick, so learners can use and remember it during the inquiry process.

‍

Manipulatives in Mathematical Inquiry

Concrete manipulatives, such as Dienes blocks, Numicon, and Montessori materials, are useful tools for mathematical inquiry. They help learners explore number, shape, and measurement through hands-on work. Learners build ideas through direct interaction, rather than by passively receiving information.

For example, during an inquiry into place value, a Year 2 teacher might ask, "How many different ways can we represent the number 134 using Dienes blocks?" Learners then physically arrange hundreds, tens, and unit blocks, discovering that 1 hundred, 3 tens, and 4 units is one way, but also 13 tens and 4 units is another. This hands-on investigation helps them construct a robust understanding of number composition and decomposition.

‍

Physical Representation in Humanities and Science

Tactile inquiry is useful beyond mathematics. It gives learners strong ways to explore ideas in humanities and science. For example, role-play and tableau help learners act out historical events or social structures. This can build empathy and understanding.

In a Year 5 history inquiry about the Roman Empire, learners could create a tableau showing a scene in the Roman Forum. They might position themselves as different characters; a senator, a merchant, a slave. This helps them explore social hierarchies and daily life, and understand the period's complexities. In science, building models of networks or simple machines can also help learners investigate relationships and functions through physical creation.

‍

Anchoring Abstract Concepts in Inquiry Stages

Physical artefacts serve to anchor abstract concepts across all stages of the inquiry cycle. During the 'tuning in' or 'provocation' stage, learners might explore a collection of artefacts to spark curiosity and generate questions.

In the 'finding out' or 'investigation' phase, learners use manipulatives or role-play to gather information and test hypotheses. Later, during 'sorting out' or 'synthesis', they can arrange physical objects or create a tableau to show their findings. This makes their abstract conclusions concrete and easy to share. This ongoing physical engagement keeps learning grounded and meaningful.