Scientific Inquiry (SI) is one of the overarching goals for science education all over the world (Abd-El-Khalick et al., 2004). An understanding of SI is fundamental to scientific literacy, and involves combining content knowledge, process skills and an understanding of the processes and methods scientists use to generate new knowledge (Lederman et al., 2014). This study focuses on the last mentioned, which is described as learning about scientific inquiry (Hodson, 1996), currently often disused in terms of learning about scientific practices (Osborne, 2014). However, this learning goal is often obscured due to the conflation between SI as a pedagogical strategy and as a content matter (Gyllenpalm & Wickman, 2011; Lunde, et al., 2015). Both teaching and research have generally focused on SI as either a pedagogical strategy to learn science, or on students´ abilities to conduct scientific investigations. One reason for this is the tacit assumption that students automatically learn about scientific inquiry simply by doing inquiry. Yet, this assumption has since long been challenged by a large body of research which demonstrates the need for explicit instruction about scientific inquiry as content knowledge (Lederman et al., 2019). Another problem has been the lack of valid instruments for meaningful assessment of students’ understanding about SI (Lederman et al., 2014). We address these issues by using the VASI-questionnaire (Views About Scientific Inquiry) developed for this purpose and present findings from Sweden in primary-, middle- and secondary school. The data is a subset of a larger international project (see e.g. Lederman et. al., 2019) but we focus the analysis on the progression of students’ knowledge over time in a cross-sectional study design. 

In Sweden the science curriculum is specified for the school years 1-3, 4-6, 7-9 and 10-12, and divided into the subjects physics, chemistry and biology from year 1 . Students begin learning about scientific inquiry in all science subjects already from the first year. A progression in students´ knowledge is then expected as the central content related to SI successively becomes more advanced in later school years (The Swedish National Agency for Education, 2022). Despite this focus on learning about SI in the curriculum, explicit teaching about SI seems to be rare in Sweden. Yet, practical activities where students are engaged in some form of scientific inquiry has a long tradition, although these are often used as a pedagogical strategy for other educational goals (Högström et al., 2012, Lunde et al., 2015). 

The purpose of this study is to contribute to an increased understanding of students’ views of SI and how this can develop over time in order to better understand how this important topic can be addressed by teachers, curriculum developers, national test designers and text book authors. In particular, the study examines the following question:

What are students’ views about scientific inquiry in Sweden in primary-, middle   and upper secondary school? 

To assess students’ views of SI Lederman et al. (2014; 2019; 2022) have developed the VASI-E (primary school) and VASI (middle- and secondary school) questionaries. Both instruments are based on aspects of SI about which there is general agreement on, and that are both possible and relevant for school children to learn These are: (1) Scientific investigations all begin with a question and do not necessarily test a hypothesis. (2) There is no single set or sequence of steps followed in all investigations (i.e., there is no single scientific method). (3) All scientists performing the same procedures may not get the same results. (4) Inquiry procedures can influence results. (5) Research conclusions must be consistent with the data collected. (6) Inquiry procedures are guided by the question asked. (7) Scientific data are not the same as scientific evidence. (8) Explanations are developed from a combination of collected data and what is already known. The VASI-E excludes items 3, 4 and 7 and with some simplifications of the remaining five. The aspects are contextualized in the instrument with age-appropriate examples. Data consists of 481 questionaries and 65 interviews. The VASI-E was used at the end of the 3rd grade (N=110) and the beginning of the 4th grade (N=100) in seven primary schools respectively. The VASI was used at the beginning of 7th grade (N=126) at the end of 12th grade (N=145) in five schools respectively. Coding was initiated by reaching consensus for a sample of five questionnaires in each grade level. Each student was given a code of: No Answer, Naïve, Mixed or Informed for every aspect of scientific inquiry. The coding was holistic, meaning that each questionnaire was taken as a whole and if a student expressed an understanding of an aspect of SI on an item not intended to test this particular aspect this was taken into account. In addition, 49 students in grades 3-4, and 16 students in grades 7 and 12 were interviewed to ensure that the coding of the instruments was accurate, and to obtain a deepened qualitative understanding of the students’ views about SI. During the interview students were given a copy of their own questionnaire as a primer to elaborate on their understanding of the questions and scientific inquiry in general.

In grades 3-4 only two aspects have over 50% informed answers. These are 5 Conclusions consistent with data (75%) and 8 Explanations based on data and prior knowledge (55%). Both aspects were assessed by questions involving dinosaurs – a topic familiar to many students, which might have contributed here. The aspect with the most naïve (40%) but also least informed answers (16%) is aspect 2 No single scientific method. The interviews indicate that many students describe all types of scientific investigations as experiments. In 7th grade students do not achieve 50% informed answers in any aspect. The most informed are 1 Starts with a question (29,4%), 5 Conclusions must be consistent with data collected (28,6%) and 6 Procedures are guided by the question asked (27,8%). Students in the 12th have more informed views than in 7th grade but the difference is not radical. Only two aspects in the 12th have at least 50% informed answers: aspects 3 Same procedures may not yield same results (58%) and 6 Procedures are guided by the question asked (51%). In both grades 7 and 12 the most naïve answers are in 7 Data and evidence are not the same with 55,6% and 41% respectively. This is interesting as both “evidence” and “data” have overlapping and ambiguous connotations in Swedish unless care is taken to be specific. Simultaneously, grade 12 also have more naïve answers than grade 7 on five of eight aspects. Care must be taken when comparing primary school, and middle and upper secondary school given the difference in instruments, and how these were coded relative to students’ age. However, a preliminary conclusion is that students’ views about scientific inquiry is far from satisfactory relative to the ambitions laid out in curricular documents and current understanding of this topic in science education research.

Abd-El-Khalick, F., BouJaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88 (3), 397–419. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10118. Gyllenpalm, J., & Wickman, P.-O. (2011). ‘‘Experiments’’ and the inquiry emphasis conflation in science teacher education. Science Education, 95(5), 908–926. Hodson, D. (1996) Laboratory work as scientific method: three decades of confusion and distortion, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28:2, 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027980280201. Högström, P., Ottander, C., & Benckert, S. (2012). Laborativt arbete i grunskolans senare år: Lärares perspektiv [Laboratory work in secondary school: Teachers perspectives]. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 6(1), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.332 Lederman, J.S., Bartels., S., Jimenez, J., Lederman, N.G., Acosta, K., Adbo, K., ... Zhu, Q. (2022). An international assessment of elementary students’ views about scientific inquiry: A study made possible with development of the views about scientific inquiry- elementary (VASI-E) assessment. Paper under review submited to Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Lederman, J., Lederman, N., Bartels, S., Jimenez, J., Akubo, M., Aly, S., Bao, C., Blanquet, E., Blonder, R., BolognaSoares de Andrade, M., Buntting, C., Cakir, M., EL-Deghaidy, H., ElZorkani, A., Enshan, L., Gaigher, E., Guo,S., Hakanen, A., Hamed Al-Lal, S., …Zhou, Q. (2019). An international collaborative investigation of beginningseventh grade students’understandings of scientific inquiry: Establishing a baseline. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching. Published online. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21512. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21125. Lunde, T., Rundgren, C.-J., & Chang Rundgren, S. N. (2015). När läroplan och tradition möts— hur högstadielärare bemöter yttre förväntningar på undersökande arbete i naturämnesundervisningen [How lower secondary science teachers meet external expectations on inquiry-based science teaching]. NorDiNa (Nordic Studies in Science Education), 11(1), 88–101. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.783. Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching scientific practices: meeting the challenge of change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9384-1 The Swedish National Agency for Education (2022). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2022 [Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and the leisure-time centre 2022]. https://www.skolverket.se/undervisning/grundskolan/laroplan-och-kursplaner-for-grundskolan/kursplaner-for-grundskolan.