Comparative Effectiveness of Inquiry-Based Learning in Biology Classes Across Schools

Thesis Abstract

The study addresses persistent disparities in student engagement and achievement in biology education by examining how inquiry-based learning (IBL) experiences influence learning outcomes across diverse school contexts. It investigates whether IBL enhances scientific reasoning, conceptual understanding, and motivation differently across institutional settings, and identifies contextual factors that mediate or moderate these effects. The aim is to determine the comparative effectiveness of IBL implementations in biology classrooms across multiple schools and to delineate mechanisms by which school-level variables shape student outcomes. Specific objectives include (1) to compare changes in biology achievement and core scientific reasoning skills between students exposed to IBL and those receiving traditional instruction; (2) to examine how teacher implementation fidelity, classroom discourse quality, and access to laboratory resources mediate the relationship between IBL and student outcomes; (3) to explore student attitudes toward biology and self-efficacy in experimental design as secondary outcomes; (4) to identify school-level factors (socioeconomic composition, teacher experience, and available lab infrastructure) associated with differential IBL effectiveness; and (5) to develop a contextualized model of IBL effectiveness across school typologies. The study adopts a quasi-experimental, cross-sectional comparative design with a mixed-methods component, guided by Vygotsky’s socio-constructivist theory and the Theory of Scientific Reasoning Development. The population comprises biology classes in 24 secondary schools within a metropolitan region, with a purposive sampling of 12 schools implementing IBL and 12 matched schools employing conventional pedagogy. A total of 480 students (20 per classroom across 24 classrooms) will be sampled, ensuring representation across grade levels, genders, and prior achievement bands. Data collection will include standardized biology achievement tests (pre- and post-instruction), concept inventories assessing understanding of key biological concepts, and validated instruments measuring scientific reasoning, motivation, and self-efficacy. Instructors will complete a fidelity checklist and provide qualitative field notes to capture implementation quality. Laboratory and classroom resources will be audited to quantify environmental support. The primary quantitative analysis will employ a multilevel linear regression to estimate the effect of IBL on post-test achievement and reasoning scores, controlling for pre-test scores and nested data structure (students within classes within schools). Mediation analyses will examine fidelity of implementation, discourse quality, and resource availability as pathways linking IBL to outcomes. A multilevel model will assess cross-school variation and identify school-level moderators such as resource intensity and teacher professional development. The qualitative component will involve thematic analysis of teacher interviews, classroom observations, and student focus groups to extract contextual factors, perceived barriers, and enablers of IBL effectiveness. Triangulation will integrate quantitative and qualitative findings to generate a comprehensive understanding of how school context shapes IBL impact. Anticipated findings include statistically significant improvements in achievement and scientific reasoning for IBL students relative to peers, with larger effects in schools exhibiting high fidelity, rich discourse-rich classrooms, and robust laboratory infrastructure. The study expects to reveal nuanced interactions whereby resource-rich schools maximize IBL benefits, while resource-constrained settings require targeted teacher PD and scalable IBL strategies. The contribution to knowledge lies in providing empirical, context-sensitive evidence on the cross-school effectiveness of IBL in biology, clarifying the roles of implementation quality and environmental support, and offering a validated, contextually informed model of IBL efficacy. Implications include recommendations for scalable professional development, resource allocation priorities, and policy guidance to promote equitable adoption of IBL. The conclusion anticipates that while IBL can enhance biology learning across diverse schools, its effectiveness is contingent upon fidelity of implementation, classroom discourse, and access to manipulatives and laboratory facilities; therefore, a combination of targeted teacher training, structured IBL curricula, and investment in laboratory infrastructure is essential for consistent cross-school improvements. Policy and practice recommendations emphasize standardized IBL frameworks with accompanying fidelity monitoring, context-aware adaptation guidelines, and ongoing professional development to sustain gains across varied educational contexts.