knowledge co-construction, building language not only of the field of study, but of the processes of negotiating meaning and inquiry.
3.4. Learners’ awareness of their own dialogical inquiry processes The map of dialogical inquiry is a meta-cognitive tool that can be used to show: a) growing awareness and b) growth in the use of the eight aspects of thinking in the map, from a few to many, and the extent of this growth. Participants’ maps of dialogical inquiry, along with their reflections in the final section of their assignments and interviews with participants are used to address the question of how learners’ develop awareness of their inquiry processes. This section will begin with the statistical analysis of the maps the 17 participants who submitted at least two inquiry maps (see Figure 3.3 for an example) during the course. The mean scores of these selected maps were compared with the class showing a difference ranging between of 0.03 to 0.25. As these differences were small, the scores of these 17 participants were analysed to compare their mean scores of the first map with their scores of the last map. A summary of these scores can be found in Appendix 1. The mean scores of the first and last inquiry maps were analysed with the dependent t-tests. This analysis was conducted to determine whether the observed increases in scores between the first and final inquiry maps were statistically significant (i.e. instead of by chance). A summary of this analysis can be found in Table 3.1. Next, a repeated measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) with a Greenhouse-Geisser correction was conducted for the inquiry domains that were found to have significant increases in the dependent t-tests as show in in Table 3.1. This series of RM-ANOVA was conducted to determine whether the observed increases in scores from the first inquiry map and in the later inquiry maps were statistically significant (i.e. instead of by chance).
Table 3.1: Summary of Dependent t-test of First and Last Inquiry Map Scores, indicating significance
Increases in Scores
t
df
Sig. (2tailed)
Theorizing
Participants were observing more theorizing in their inquiry process during the later part of the course; this would include them wanting to know reasons behind things, using or developing models to explain why, seeking to understand or determine underlying principles, and seeking coherency.
2.35 ± 1.77 points
-5.49
16
0.0000*
Imagining
Participants were engaging in more imaginative activities in their inquiry process during the later part of the course; this would include them speculating and playing around with about ideas, taking risks and breaking rules, being creative and involved in designing, looking for alternatives, exploring new possibilities, and imagining other perspectives or scenarios.
Not significant
-1.59
16
0.1318
Inquiry Domain
Descriptor
36
