The call for papers for ECER 2021 highlights the tension between demands on education systems and the everyday practice of different learning settings and institutions. Against this background, the goal of this contribution is to take a closer look on perplexities in inquiry-based learning settings in teacher education.

Perplexities can be described as starting points of learning processes in uncertain situations. Following Andrea English´s translation of Dewey´s pragmatic approach on educational settings, perplexities can result in learning processes structured in two steps: (1) A perplexity triggers confusion or doubt. This can lead to (2) a reflection of the problem generating further options for acting and reacting (English, 2005, p. 57). According to Dewey, perplexities are an evident and unavoidable part of learning.

What does that mean for teacher education? The handling of uncertainty in the classroom must be acknowledged and addressed to prepare student teachers to become experts for learning and teaching. Accepting the certainty of uncertainties does not mean that you cannot be prepared for such situations (cf. Floden & Clark, 1988, p. 1). Strategies to prepare for uncertain situations in teacher education range from building routines to expanding general pedagogical knowledge and skills by different concepts of learning. One of these concepts is inquiry-based learning.

The term ‘inquiry-based learning’ is used inconsistently and in a manifold way, both in German and in English papers. After analyzing different terms, we prefer inquiry-based learning as it is one of the most wide-spread terms in this field. However, there is no general definition (cf. Huber & Reinmann, 2019, p. 105), as there exist different concepts behind the term, although the idea that students carry out research is a central aspect of most definitions. In an OECD-paper about ‘Pedagogical Knowledge and the Changing Nature of the Teaching Profession’, Guerriero (2017, p. 90) defines “using data and engaging in research” as a key area in professional standards worldwide. However, an engagement in research is not part in all programs of teacher education although it is acknowledged that such an approach helps to reflect the challenges and complexities of the teaching profession. Guerriero concludes a demand for more inquiry-based learning in teacher education (cf. 2017, p. 91) to prepare student teachers for future challenges. In Germany, inquiry-based learning is announced by the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural affairs and their ‘Standards for Teacher Education’ (KMK, 2019), signalizing its importance by political legitimation. For that reason, research courses have been implemented in teacher education programmes at most universities in Germany. However, there exist different concepts. At some universities, inquiry-based learning courses are carried out in combination with in-service training, at other universities they are offered separately from such school internships.  

In general, there is not much research about inquiry-based learning in teacher education in German speaking countries. Existing research focuses different aspects: the attitude of students and educators towards the connection between research and teaching, the importance of structure and guidance for inquiry-based learning and the effects of inquiry-based learning on learning results (cf. summary in Huber & Reinmann, 2019, p. 309). In this paper we want to emphasize the student teachers’ experiences with perplexities in inquiry-based learning settings.

Following this approach, our research questions are:

1)     Which perplexities are discussed in group discussions between student teachers in inquiry-based learning courses?

2)     How do the student teachers cope with these perplexities in the context of inquiry based-learning courses?

For answering the research questions, we aim for reconstructing collective orientations of student teachers by carrying out group discussions and analyzing them with the documentary method (Bohnsack, 2014). Data collection: Data are collected via 16 group discussions with student teachers from two German universities (University of Hamburg, University of Bielefeld) who are enrolled in various research courses at Master level. Inquiry-based learning courses in Bielefeld are intertwined with school internship, while the students in Hamburg participate in courses without such a connection. The group discussions will start with an impulse to provoke narrations and descriptions about the student teachers’ ideas about research in general as well as their experiences with inquiry-based learning. A self-dynamic discussion is intended. Accordingly, the researcher only has to interfere to keep the discussion going. This is crucial for the reconstructions as the reciprocal references in a discussion are the key to gain access to the collective meaning of the student teachers (cf. Bohnsack, 2010, p. 106). The group discussions are recorded with audio equipment and transcribed afterwards. Data analysis: By analyzing group discussions with the documentary method, the collective level of experiences with and perspectives on inquiry-based learning can be explored. Documentary method is mainly based on the sociology of knowledge by Mannheim (1982) and therefore works with two different sorts of knowledge: explicit knowledge and practical knowledge. Consequently, the analysis of the data needs two steps: Formulating interpretation: Decoding the topical structure of the transcript: What do the students literally say? This step focuses the explicit knowledge and the propositional thematic contents of the discussion. Reflecting interpretation: Reconstructing the formal organization of the discussions and the way student teachers speak about research and research experiences: How is the content negotiated in the groups? Different modes of interaction can become visible. By reconstructing such modes not only ‘focusing metaphors’ (passages with detailed depiction) become visible but also if and how the participating student teachers share a conjunctive space of experience (cf. Bohnsack, 2014, p. 225). Thus enables to reveal and compare the framework of orientations of different groups dealing with the topic of inquiry-based learning. The data are part of a larger project (ReLieF: Rekonstruktive Längsschnittstudie zu Professionalisierungsprozessen im Kontext Forschenden Lernens: ein Standortvergleich; Reconstructive Longitudinal Study of Professionalization Processes in an Inquiry-Based Learning Context: A Comparison of Two Universities) that is funded by the DFG (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft; German Research Association).

Inquiry-based learning in teacher education is justified by the hope for developing a professional reflection in practice as well as by the hope for initiating another perspective on perplexities in the context of learning. Yet uncertainties that go along with inquiry-based learning itself are often overlooked. Thus we want to focus on the question which role perplexities play when student teachers talk about inquiry-based learning. By doing so, we want to make a contribution in the discourse about the relevance of inquiry-based learning in the initial phase of teacher education. As we collect data in April 2021 from different inquiry-based learning settings we will be able to give a first insight into the results including a comparison of both universities. Perplexities might become evident in terms of tensions between uncertainty and certainty. We suppose that uncertainties and perplexities will differ whether inquiry-based learning is embedded in in-service training phases (University of Bielefeld) or not (University of Hamburg). A reason might be that student teachers in the first setting have to fulfil the norms of the teaching practice as well as the norms of research practice whereas student teachers in the second setting can focus on academic competencies only. Analyzing these group discussions our first results might also show that the student teachers cope with such perplexities in multiple ways. At least, it will be discussed whether inquiry-based experiences can enable learning processes or not, hence: Does (un)certainty spur learning processes of student teachers?

Bohnsack, R. (2010). Documentary Method and Group Discussion. In R. Bohnsack, N. Pfaff & W. Weller (Eds.), Qualitative Analysis and Documentary Method in International Educational Research (pp.99-124). Opladen & Farmington Hills: Barbara Budrich Publishers. Bohnsack, R. (2014). Documentary Method. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis (pp. 217-233). London: SAGE Publishing Ltd. English, A. (2005). Negativity and the New in John Dewey’s Theory of Learning and Democracy, Toward a Renewed Look at Learning Cultures. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 8(1), pp. 28-37. Floden,R. & Clark, C. (1988). Preparing Teachers for Uncertainty. URL: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.567.3012&rep=rep1&type=pdf (26.01.2021). Guerriero, S. (Ed.) (2017). Pedagogical Knowledge and the Changing Nature of the Teaching Profession. Paris: OECD Publishing. Huber, L. & Reinmann, G. (Eds.) (2019). Vom forschungsnahen zum forschenden Lernen an Hochschulen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Mannheim, K. (1982). Structures of Thinking. London: Routledge. Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural affairs (KMK) (2019). Standards für die Lehrerbildung: Bildungswissenschaften: Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz vom 16.12.2004 i. d. F. vom 16.05.2019. URL: https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/veroeffentlichungen_beschluesse/2004/2004_12_16-Standards-Lehrerbildung-Bildungswissenschaften.pdf (26.01.2021).