Abstract:
Researchers conceptually recommend inquiry-based learning as a necessary means to alleviate the problems of learning but this study has embarked on practical implementation of inquiry-based facilitation and learning in Euclidean Geometry. Inquiry-based learning is student-centred. Therefore, the teaching or monitoring of inquiry-based learning in this study is referred to as inquiry-based facilitation. The null hypothesis discarded in this study explains that there is no difference between inquiry-based facilitation and traditional axiomatic approach in teaching Euclidean Geometry, that is, H0: μinquiry-based facilitation = μtraditional axiomatic approach. This study emphasises a pragmatist view that constructivism is fundamental to realism, that is, inductive inquiry supplements deductive inquiry in teaching and learning. Participants in this study comprise schools in Tshwane North district that served as experimental group and Tshwane West district schools classified as comparison group. The two districts are in the Gauteng Province of South Africa. The total number of students who participated is 166, that is, 97 students in the experimental group and 69 students in the comparison group. Convenient sampling applied and three experimental and three comparison group schools were sampled. Embedded mixed-method methodology was employed. Quantitative and qualitative methodologies are integrated in collecting data; analysis and interpretation of data. Inquiry-based-facilitation occurred in experimental group when the facilitator probed asking students to research, weigh evidence, explore, share discoveries, allow students to display authentic knowledge and skills and guiding students to apply knowledge and skills to solve problems for the classroom and for the world out of the classroom. In response to inquiry-based facilitation, students engaged in cooperative learning, exploration, self-centred and self-regulated learning in order to acquire knowledge and skills. In the comparison group, teaching progressed as usual. Quantitative data revealed that on average, participant that received intervention through inquiry-based facilitation acquired inquiry-based learning skills and improved (M= -7.773, SE= 0.7146) than those who did not receive intervention (M= -0.221, SE = 0.4429). This difference (-7.547), 95% CI (-8.08, 5.69), was significant at t (10.88), p = 0.0001, p<0.05 and represented a large effect size of 0.55. The large effect size emphasises that inquiry-based facilitation contributed significantly towards improvement in inquiry-based learning and that the framework contributed by this study can be considered as a framework of inquiry-based facilitation in Euclidean Geometry. This study has shown that the traditional axiomatic approach promotes rote learning; passive, deductive and algorithmic learning that obstructs application of knowledge in problem-solving. Therefore, this study asserts that the application of Inquiry-based facilitation to implement inquiry-based learning promotes deeper, authentic, non-algorithmic, self-regulated learning that enhances problem-solving skills in Euclidean Geometry.
