Pre-Service Teachers’ Beliefs, Difficulties and Practices Toward Inquiry-Based Learning: A Mixed-Method Approach
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the beliefs of pre-service teachers about Inquiry-based learning, their perceived difficulties, and classroom practices in a classroom setting, which are related to their attitudes towards inquiry-based learning at a private university in Davao City during the school Year 2024-2025. This study employed a convergent mixed-method design involving 92 randomly selected pre-service teachers using stratified random sampling for the quantitative phase. For the qualitative phase, a sample of 15 pre-service teachers was selected through purposive sampling. The 15 samples comprised eight in-depth interviews and seven participants for the focus group discussions. Responses were gathered using a modified survey questionnaire, which included teacher beliefs and attitudes about inquiry-based learning. Moreover, quantitative data were summarized using mean and standard deviation, while qualitative data were analyzed through thematic analysis guided by Creswell's Procedural Spirals framework. The findings showed strong positive beliefs concerning the effectiveness of inquiry-based learning in enhancing learning for students, particularly in developing their critical thinking and involvement. However, less confidence in classroom practice suggests difficulty with applying that belief into practice, as demonstrated by qualitative themes. The findings suggested that teacher education programs should offer opportunities for training, mentorship, and practical experiences to bridge the gap between motivation and skill in adopting inquiry-based learning to enhance student learning outcomes for pre-service teachers. To support effective implementation, this study recommends targeted professional development focusing on practical inquiry-based learning strategies, mentorship programs to build teacher self-efficacy, integration of practicum experiences, and curriculum reforms aligned with standardized requirements.
Downloads
References
2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t
3. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A cognitive social theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4. Calleja, J. (2016). Teaching mathematics through inquiry: A continuing professional development programme design. Journal of the International Society for Design and Development in Education.
5. Conroy, R. M. (2018). The RCSI Sample size handbook. A rough guide, 59-61.
6. Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7. Creswell, J. W. (2019). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions.
8. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.
9. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. sage.
10. Felske, C., König, J., Kaiser, G. (2020). Pedagogical knowledge of working math teachers: Validation of the construct representation in the TEDS- M test. Diagnostica, 66(2), 110-122.
11. Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hattie, J. (2016). Visible learning for literacy, grades K-12: Implementing the practices that work best to accelerate student learning. Corwin Press.
12. Fox, S. (2024). How to determine survey sample size. A short guide. https://survicate.com/blog/survey-sample-size/
13. Friesen, S., & Scott, D. (2013). Inquiry-based learning: A review of the research literature. Alberta Ministry of Education, 32, 1-32.
14. Gholam, A. P. (2019). Inquiry-based learning: Student teachers’ challenges and perceptions. Journal of Inquiry & Action in Education, 10(2). https://digitalcommons.buffalostate.edu/jiae/vol10/iss2/6
15. Hein, G. E. (1991). Constructivist learning theory. Institute for Inquiry. Available at:/http://www. exploratorium.edu/ifi/resources/constructivistlearning. htmlS.
16. Hennink, M., & Kaiser, B. N. (2022). Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Social science & medicine, 292, 114523.
17. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.
18. Ketsing, J., Inoue, N., & Buczynski, S. (2020). Enhancing pre-service teachers’ reflective quality on inquiry-based teaching through a community of practice. Science Education International, 31(4), 367-378.
19. Kidwell, V. (2019). Engaging students in inquiry-based science education: The impact of hands-on learning. Science Education, 103(4), 789–811.
20. Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2018). An integrative review of the cognitive costs and benefits of note-taking. Educational Research Review, 25, 97–105.
21. Lehtinen, A., Lehesvuori, S., & Viiri, J. (2019). The connection between forms of guidance for inquiry-based learning and the communicative approaches applied—A case study in the context of pre-service teachers. Research in Science Education, 49(6), 1547-1567.
22. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction— what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20347
23. Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2020). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–16.
24. Ramnarain & Hlatswayo. (2018). Teacher beliefs and attitudes about inquiry-based learning in a rural school district in South Africa. South African Journal of Education, 38(1), 1-10. https://dx.doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n1a1430031
25. Sen, C., Ay, Z. S., & Güler, G. (2021). The effectiveness of inquiry-based learning on middle school students' mathematics reasoning skill. Athens Journal of Education, 8(4), 417-440.
26. Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. Medical Teacher, 33(6), 454–460.
27. Vishnubhotla, M., Chowdhury, A., Apkarian, N. (2022). “I use IBL in this course” may say more about an instructor’s beliefs than about their teaching. Int. J. Res. Undergrad. Math. Ed. 10, 87–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-022-00186-9
28. Voet, M., & De Wever, B. (2019). Teachers’ adoption of inquiry-based learning activities: The importance of beliefs about education, the self, and the context. Journal of teacher education, 70(5), 423-440.
29. Vygotsky, L. S., Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S., & Souberman, E. (1978). The development of higher psychological processes.
30. Wessels, S., Trainin, G., Reeves, J. (2017). Pre-service teachers’ confidence and attitudes toward teaching English learners. Teacher Education and Practice, Vol. 30, No. 3 / Summer 2017.
31. Yıldız-Feyzioğlu, E., & Demirci, N. (2021). The effects of inquiry-based learning on students’ learner autonomy and conceptions of learning. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(3), 401-420.
Copyright (c) 2026 John Laurence H. Benitez, Rachel An Quijada, Amelyn Mae L. Ragas, Exequiel R. Jr. Gono
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
