Madness in the Method: A Paradox of Inquiry Learning
(2014)- Abstract
- Hakkarainen and Sintonen (2002) praise the descriptive adequacy
of Hintikka's Interrogative Model of Inquiry (imi) to describe children's prac-
tices in an inquiry-based learning context. They further propose to use the imi
as a starting point for developing new pedagogical methods and designing new
didactic tools. We assess this proposal in the light of the formal results that
in the imi characterize interrogative learning strategies. We nd that these
results actually reveal a deep methodological issue for inquiry-based learning,
namely that educators cannot guarantee that learners will successfully acquire
a content, without limiting learner's autonomy, and that a... (More) - Hakkarainen and Sintonen (2002) praise the descriptive adequacy
of Hintikka's Interrogative Model of Inquiry (imi) to describe children's prac-
tices in an inquiry-based learning context. They further propose to use the imi
as a starting point for developing new pedagogical methods and designing new
didactic tools. We assess this proposal in the light of the formal results that
in the imi characterize interrogative learning strategies. We nd that these
results actually reveal a deep methodological issue for inquiry-based learning,
namely that educators cannot guarantee that learners will successfully acquire
a content, without limiting learner's autonomy, and that a trade-o between
success and autonomy is unavoidable. As a by-product of our argument, we
obtain a logical characterization of serendipity. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/3810282
- author
- Genot, Emmanuel LU and Gulz, Agneta LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2014
- type
- Working paper/Preprint
- publication status
- unpublished
- subject
- keywords
- Inquiry Learning Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Interrogative model Abduction
- project
- Knowledge in a Digital World: Trust, Credibility and Relevance on the Web
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- d3b566be-45e6-495e-b9a9-7f643c471a9d (old id 3810282)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-04 13:57:46
- date last changed
- 2018-11-21 21:17:26
@misc{d3b566be-45e6-495e-b9a9-7f643c471a9d,
abstract = {{Hakkarainen and Sintonen (2002) praise the descriptive adequacy<br/><br>
of Hintikka's Interrogative Model of Inquiry (imi) to describe children's prac-<br/><br>
tices in an inquiry-based learning context. They further propose to use the imi<br/><br>
as a starting point for developing new pedagogical methods and designing new<br/><br>
didactic tools. We assess this proposal in the light of the formal results that<br/><br>
in the imi characterize interrogative learning strategies. We nd that these<br/><br>
results actually reveal a deep methodological issue for inquiry-based learning,<br/><br>
namely that educators cannot guarantee that learners will successfully acquire<br/><br>
a content, without limiting learner's autonomy, and that a trade-o between<br/><br>
success and autonomy is unavoidable. As a by-product of our argument, we<br/><br>
obtain a logical characterization of serendipity.}},
author = {{Genot, Emmanuel and Gulz, Agneta}},
keywords = {{Inquiry Learning Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Interrogative model Abduction}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Working Paper}},
title = {{Madness in the Method: A Paradox of Inquiry Learning}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/6247205/3810287.pdf}},
year = {{2014}},
}