The current vision of science education in myriad educational contexts encourages students to learn through the process of science inquiry. Science inquiry has been used to promote conceptual learning and engage learners in an active process of meaning-making and investigation to understand the world around them. The science inquiry process typically involves asking questions and defining problems; constructing explanations and designing solutions; planning and carrying out investigations; analyzing and interpreting data; and engaging in argument from evidence. Despite the importance and provision of new directions and standards about science inquiry, ambiguities in conceptualizations of inquiry still exist. These conceptualizations may serve as barriers to students learning science. In this article, we detail three main concerns related to teachers' conceptualization of science inquiry in the context of a Singapore classroom—concerns that may be similarly faced by teachers elsewhere.

1.
Daphne D.
Minner
, et al, “
Inquiry-based science instruction–What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002
,”
J. Res. Sci. Teach.
47
,
474
496
(
2010
).
2.
National Research Council
,
A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas
, edited by the
Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards, Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
(
The National Academies Press
,
Washington, DC
,
2012
).
3.
Singapore Ministry of Education, Science syllabus: Lower secondary (Express/Normal Academic)
, http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/syllabuses/sciences/files/science-lower-secondary-2013.pdf (
2013
).
4.
See also
Fouad
Abd-El-Khalick
, et al, “
Inquiry in science education: International perspectives
,”
Sci. Educ.
88
,
397
419
(
2004
).
5.
John
Settlage
, “
Demythologizing science teacher education: Conquering the false ideal of open inquiry
,”
J. Sci. Teach. Educ.
18
,
461
467
(
2007
).
6.
Ronald D.
Anderson
, “
Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry
,”
J. Sci. Teach. Educ.
13
,
1
12
(
2002
).
7.
Stella
Hadjiachilleos
, et al, “
The impact of cognitive and affective aspects of cognitive conflict on learners' conceptual change about floating and sinking
,”
Res. Sci. Tech. Educ.
31
,
133
152
(
2013
).
8.
See, for example,
Erin M.
Furtak
, “
The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching
,”
Sci. Educ.
90
,
453
467
(
2006
).
9.
Magaret R.
Blanchard
 et al, “
Is inquiry possible in light of accountability?: A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction
,”
Sci. Educ.
94
,
577
616
(
2010
).
10.
Irit
Sadeh
and
Michal
Zion
, “
Which type of inquiry project do high school biology students prefer: Open or guided?
Res. Sci. Educ.
42
,
831
848
(
2012
).
11.
Paul A.
Kirschner
 et al, “
Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching
,”
Educ. Psych.
41
,
75
86
(
2006
).
12.
See, for example,
Jim
Nelson
and
Jane B.
Nelson
, “
Buoyancy can-can
,”
Phys. Teach.
53
,
279
(
May
2015
).
13.
See, for example,
Charles
Eick
, et al, “
Breaking into inquiry
,”
Sci. Teach.
72
,
49
53
(
2005
).
14.
Yuen Sze Michelle
Tan
and
Samson M.
Nashon
, “
Promoting teachers' collaborative exploration of a new science curriculum: The case of a Singapore learning study
,”
Pro. Dev. Educ.
41
,
671
689
(
2015
).
15.
Dan
MacIsaac
and
Kathleen
Falconer
, “
Reforming physics instruction via RTOP
,”
Phys. Teach.
40
,
479
(
Nov.
2002
).
16.
Benny H. W.
Yung
, “
Teaching Inquiry: Global Influences and Local Responses
,” in
Inquiry into the Singapore Science Classrooms
, edited by
Aik Ling
Tan
, et al
(
Springer
,
Singapore
,
2014
), pp.
133
138
.
17.
See, for example,
Elliot
Mylott
, et al, “
Kinesthetic activities for the classroom
,”
Phys. Teach.
52
,
525
(
Dec.
2014
).
18.
See, for example,
Ted
Forringer
, “
A guided inquiry on Hubble plots and the Big Bang
,”
Phys. Teach.
52
,
199
(
April
2014
).
19.
Yuen Sze Michelle
Tan
and
Samson M.
Nashon
, “
Promoting teacher learning through learning study discourse: The case of science teachers in Singapore
,”
J. Sci. Teach. Educ.
24
,
859
877
(
2013
).
20.
Elizabeth
Bondy
and
Pamela
Williamson
, “
Dialogue as Support in Teacher Collaborative Inquiry
,” in
Perspectives on Supported Collaborative Teacher Inquiry
, edited by
David
Slavit
, et al
(
Lawrence Erlbaum
,
Mahwah, NJ
,
2009
), pp.
99
118
.
AAPT members receive access to The Physics Teacher and the American Journal of Physics as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.