Comparative Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning in Biology Education Curricula

Thesis Abstract

The study investigates how inquiry-based learning (IBL) within secondary biology curricula influences student engagement, scientific thinking, and achievement across contrasting educational contexts. The problem addressed is the uneven adoption and variable effectiveness of IBL practices in biology instruction, which undermines construction of robust, transferable student competencies essential for higher-order reasoning and scientific literacy. The aim is to compare the implementation, outcomes, and contextual moderators of IBL across three school systems representing diverse curricular frameworks and teacher professional development supports. Specific objectives are to (1) evaluate differences in student achievement on standardized biology assessments between IBL-enhanced and traditionally taught units, (2) assess variations in student engagement, motivation, and self-efficacy using validated scales, (3) analyze changes in critical-thinking and scientific reasoning through performance tasks, (4) examine teachers’ fidelity to IBL protocols and perceived feasibility, and (5) identify contextual factors—curricular design, teacher training, resource availability, and time allocation—that moderate IBL effectiveness. A mixed-methods design combines a quasi-experimental component with a nested qualitative inquiry. The quasi-experimental strand samples 36 biology classrooms (12 per system) with pre- and post-tests administered to approximately 1,800 students aged 15–16 years. Classrooms are matched on prior achievement and demographic profile and assigned to IBL-integrated units or standard instruction, spanning a 12-week unit on genetics and evolution. The qualitative strand includes 24 classroom observations (two per system per condition), 36 teacher interviews, and 180 student focus groups, enabling triangulation of instructional practices and student experiences. Data collection instruments include a biology achievement test aligned with local standards, the Student Engagement in Science Scale, the Knowledge, Skills, and Reasoning (KSR) rubric for performance tasks, and a Teacher IBL Fidelity Instrument. Validity and reliability are established through pilot testing, Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency (? > .80 for scales), and inter-rater reliability (? > .70) for performance assessments and observational coding. Analytical approaches involve between-group comparisons using ANCOVA to adjust for pre-test scores, multilevel modeling to account for clustering at the classroom level, and regression analyses to identify predictors of achievement and engagement. For the qualitative data, thematic analysis will be conducted on transcripts and field notes, guided by an interpretive framework, with NVivo used for coding and matrix displays to illustrate convergence and divergence across contexts. A conceptual model derived from constructivist and sociocultural theories—embodied by Vygotsky’s social constructivism and the Constructivist Learning Environment framework—will be used to interpret how inquiry prompts, collaboration, and scaffolding influence learning outcomes within real classrooms. The study will also draw on the Theory of Realistic Mathematics Education as a lens to understand how authentic problems and context-rich scenarios affect reasoning in biology. Expected findings anticipate that IBL-treated classes will exhibit higher achievement gains (mean effect size f = 0.25 to 0.40), greater student engagement and intrinsic motivation, and enhanced performance on higher-order cognitive tasks, with effect magnitudes moderated by teacher fidelity, resource sufficiency, and time allocated to inquiry cycles. Qualitative insights are expected to reveal that effective IBL requires structured scaffolds, explicit instruction in evidence evaluation, and ongoing professional development to sustain fidelity, particularly in systems with limited inquiry culture. The study contributes to knowledge by providing transferable, context-sensitive evidence on how curricular design, teacher practice, and institutional support shape IBL outcomes in biology education, offering a validated evaluation framework and practical benchmarks for policy and curriculum developers. The findings will inform recommendations for scale-up, including targeted professional development, resource provision, and time-management strategies that preserve inquiry integrity while aligning with assessment demands. The main conclusion posits that when IBL is embedded within a coherent curricular architecture, supported by robust teacher preparation and alignment of assessment to inquiry goals, it yields meaningful gains in achievement, engagement, and scientific reasoning across diverse educational contexts. Recommendations include implementing standardized IBL fidelity checklists for teachers, developing modular inquiry packs aligned to curriculum standards, ensuring protected inquiry time within timetables, and establishing cross-system communities of practice to sustain ongoing refinement of IBL practices.