Inquiry in social studies and social science
Linking teachers’ perspectives and classroom practice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.6284Keywords:
Social science education, inquiry-oriented teaching, teacher interview, classroom observations, curriculum reformAbstract
Inquiry-oriented teaching has been central to social science education literature and curricula for years. However, few empirical studies, especially in the Nordic context, have examined such teaching practices across various contexts. This study drew on teacher interviews and video-recorded classroom observations in Norwegian lower and upper secondary social studies and social science to explore teachers’ perceptions and implementations of inquiry under a new national curriculum reform. We used a comparative approach, combining content analysis of interviews and the EDUCATE observation protocol, to identify the prevalence and characteristics of inquiry-oriented teaching practices in the classroom videos.
Our findings suggest clear links between teachers’ perspectives on inquiry in social studies and social science and the teachers’ implementation of inquiry-oriented teaching practices. Most teachers viewed inquiry as inherent to the subject and implemented it in various ways in most lessons. Teachers largely understood inquiry as allowing students to seek information and develop answers independently; they emphasised the importance of scaffolding and differentiation; and while teachers discussed various social science topics, there was limited focus on research methods in the interviews.
Using the EDUCATE observation protocol for inquiry-oriented teaching, we found that most lesson segments included inquiry-oriented practices; however, they primarily included the investigation phase, while preparation and consolidation of inquiry were observed to a lesser extent. The implications include specific suggestions for developing inquiry-oriented teaching in social studies and social science education.
Downloads
References
Alvunger, D. (2018). Teachers’ curriculum agency in teaching a standards-based curriculum. The Curriculum Journal, 29(4), 479–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2018.1486721
Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2019). Comparative case study research. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.343
Blikstad-Balas, M. (2017). Key challenges of using video when investigating social practices in education: Contextualization, magnification, and representation. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 40(5), 511–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2016.1181162
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique (Vol. 5). Rowman & Littlefield.
Bray, M., & Thomas, R. M. (1995). Levels of comparison in educational studies: Different insights from different literatures and the value of multilevel analyses. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 472–491. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.65.3.g3228437224v4877
Brevik, L. M., Gudmundsdottir, G. B., Doetjes, G., & Barreng, R. L. S. (2023). Å observere fagfornyelsen i klasserommet. Observasjonsprotokoller for livsmestring, utforsking og digital kompetanse [Observing the Knowledge renewal in the classroom. Observation manuals for life skills, inquiry and digital competence]. Rapport 1 fra forsknings-og evalueringsprosjektet EDUCATE ved Institutt for lærerutdanning og skoleforskning. Universitetet i Oslo.https://www.uv.uio.no/ils/forskning/prosjekter/educate/rapporter/educate-rapport-1-2023.pdf
Brevik, L. M., Gudmundsdottir, G. B., Aashamar, P. N., Barreng, R. L. S., Dodou, K., Doetjes, G., Hatlevik, O. E., Hartvigsen, K. M., Mathé, N. E. H., Roe, A., Siljan, H., Stovner, R. B., & Suhr, M. L. (2024). Å jobbe utforskende på Vg1 og Vg2. Den enkelte lærers undervisning har mer å si enn fagenes egenart [Exploratory teaching in upper secondary school. The individual teacher’s teaching matters more than the characteristics of the subject]. Rapport 3 fra forsknings- og evalueringsprosjektet EDUCATE ved Institutt for lærerutdanning og skoleforskning. Universitetet i Oslo. https://www.uv.uio.no/ils/forskning/prosjekter/educate/rapporter/educate-rapport-3-2024.pdf
Deng, Z. (2017). Rethinking curriculum and teaching. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.55
Goodlad, J. (1979). Curriculum inquiry. The study of curriculum practice. McGraw-Hill.
Grant, S. G., Swan, K., & Lee, J. (2017). Inquiry-oriented practice in social studies education: Understanding the inquiry design model. Taylor & Francis.
Hidle, K. M. W., & Skarpenes, O. (2021). «Formalistisk obskurantisme»? Forsøk på dechiffrering av læreplanen i samfunnsfag ["Formalist Obscurantism"? An Attempt to Decipher the Social Studies Curriculum]. Nordidactica: Journal of Humanities and Social Science Education, 11(3), 24–50.
Holmberg, U., Johansson, P., Britton, T. H., Johansson, M., & Nordgren, K. (2022). Frågedriven undervisning for at organiseranormativa kunskapspraktiker i SO-ämnena [Exploratory Teaching to Organize Normative Knowledge Practices in Social Studies Subjects]. Nordidactica: Journal of Humanities and Social Science Education, 4, 124–153.
Hopmann, S. T. (2003). On the evaluation of curriculum reforms. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(4), 459-478. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270305520
Hughes, S., & Lewis, H. (2020). Tensions in current curriculum reform and the development of teachers’ professional autonomy. The Curriculum Journal, 31(2), 290–302. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.25
Karseth, B., Kvamme, O. A. & Ottesen, E. (2022). Fra politiske intensjoner til nytt læreplanverk: Prosesser, rammer og sammenhenger [From political intentions to to a new curriculum: Processes, framing and connections]. Rapport 4 fra prosjektet EVA2020 ved Utdanningsvitenskapelig fakultet. Universitetet i Oslo. https://www.uv.uio.no/forskning/prosjekter/fagfornyelsen-evaluering/publikasjoner/eva2020-delrapport-4.pdf
Klette, K. (2018). Individualism and collectivism in Nordic schools: A comparative approach. In N. Witoszek & A. Midttun (Eds.), Sustainable modernity (pp. 59–78). Routledge.
Klette, K., Blikstad-Balas, M., & Roe, A. (2017). Linking instruction and student achievement: Research design for a new generation of classroom studies. Acta Didactica, 11(3), 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.5617/adno.4729
Krutka, D. G., & Hlavacik, M. (2025). Refining criteria for civic inquiry: An analysis of inquiry design model lessons. Theory & Research in Social Education, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2025.2507595
Lu, C., Obenchain, K., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Exploring teachers’ inclination towards adopting inquiry-based learning in social studies: Insights from teacher professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 145, Article 104628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104628
Mathé, N. E. H. & Christensen, A. (2024). Show and tell: Scaffolding practices in social lower secondary social science classrooms. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2024.2378315
Mellegård, I., & Pettersen, K. D. (2016). Teachers’ response to curriculum change: Balancing external and internal change forces. Teacher Development, 20(2), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2016.1143871
Ministry of Education and Research (2018a). Curriculum for social studies – Core elements (SAF01‑04). Established as regulations. The National curriculum for the Knowledge Promotion 2020. https://www.udir.no/lk20/saf01-04/om-faget/kjerneelementer?lang=eng
Ministry of Education and Research (2018b). Curriculum for social science – Core elements (SAK01‑01). Established as regulations. The National curriculum for the Knowledge Promotion 2020. https://www.udir.no/lk20/sak01-01/om-faget/kjerneelementer?lang=eng
Ministry of Education and Research (2017). Core curriculum – values and principles for primary and secondary education. Laid down by Royal decree. The National curriculum for the Knowledge Promotion 2020. https://www.udir.no/lk20/overordnet-del/?lang=eng
National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities. (2021). Guidelines for research ethics in the social sciences and the humanities (5th ed.). https://www.forskningsetikk.no/globalassets/dokumenter/4-publikasjoner-som-pdf/nesh-guidelines-en-2024/
Nicmanis, M. (2024). Reflexive content analysis: An approach to qualitative data analysis, reduction, and description. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241236603
Newmann, F. M. (1991). Higher order thinking in the teaching of social studies: Connections between theory and practice. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 381–400). Routledge.
Priestley, M., Alvunger, D., Philippou, S., & Soini, T. (Eds.). (2021). Curriculum making in Europe: Policy and practice within and across diverse contexts. Emerald Publishing Limited.
Priestley, M., & Philippou, S. (2018). Curriculum making as social practice: Complex webs of enactment. The Curriculum Journal, 29(2), 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2018.1451096
Saye, J. W. (2017). Disciplined inquiry in social studies classrooms. In M. Manfra & C. Bolick (Eds.), Wiley handbook of social studies research (pp. 336–359). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118768747.ch15
Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2004). Scaffolding problem-based teaching in a traditional social studies classroom. Theory & Research in Social Education, 32(3), 349–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2004.10473259
Schweisfurth, M. (2019). Qualitative comparative education research: Perennial issues, new approaches and good practice. In L. Suter, E. Smith, & B. D. Denman (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Comparative Studies in Education (pp. 258–268). Sage.
Selwyn, D. (2014). Why inquiry? In W. Ross (Ed.), The social studies curriculum purposes, problems, and possibilities (pp. 267–287). State University of New York Press.
Solhaug, T., Borge, J. A. O., & Grut, G. (2020). Social science education (Samfunnsfag) in Norway: A country report. Journal of Social Science Education, 19(1), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.4119/jsse-1748
Swan, K., Lee, J., & Grant, S. (2015). The New York State toolkit and the inquiry design model: Anatomy of an inquiry. Social Education, 79(5), 316–322.
Tashakkori, A., Johnson, R. B., & Teddlie, C. (2020). Foundations of mixed methods research. Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage Publications.
Thacker, E. S., Lee, J. K., Fitchett, P. G., & Journell, W. (2018). Secondary social studies teachers’ experiences planning and implementing inquiry using the inquiry design model. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues & Ideas, 91(4–5), 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2018.1490129
Thijs, A., & van den Akker, J. (2009). Curriculum in development. Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.
Willbergh, I. (2015). The problems of ‘competence’and alternatives from the Scandinavian perspective of Bildung. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(3), 334–354.
White, M. C.; Luoto, J. M., Klette, K., & Blikstad-Balas, M. (2022). Bringing the conceptualization and measurement of teaching into alignment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 75(2022), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101204
Young, M., & Muller, J. (2013). On the powers of powerful knowledge. Review of Education, 1(3), 229–250.
Ødegaard, M., Kjærnsli, M., & Kersting, M. (2021). Tettere på naturfag i klasserommet: Resultater fra videostudien LISSI [Zooming in on the science classroom: Results from the Video Study LISSI]. Fagbokforlaget.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Peter Nicolai Aashamar, Nora E. H. Mathé
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Declaration on copyright
- The author/s will keep their copyright and right of reproduction of their own manuscript, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, but give the journal a permanent right to 1) present the manuscript to the public in the original form in which it was digitally published and 2) to be registered and cited as the first publication of the manuscript.
- The author itself must manage its financial reproduction rights in relation to any third-parties.
- The journal does not provide any financial or other remuneration for contributions submitted.
- Readers of the journal may print the manuscripts presented under the same conditions that apply to reproduction of a physical copy. This means that mass reproduction of physical copies or production of copies for commercial purposes is not permitted without the agreement of the author/s.
