As I read the article I was able to put my ideas into four different categories to help me describe inquiry. I used these four categories to create by concept map as well as modify my own definition of inquiry. Inquiry encourages students to look at the world around them and ask questions, which leads to the discovery of meaningful concepts and understandings. When participating in inquiry, students must take an active role in their learning and the teacher is no longer the provider of information, but instead on the journey along with the students as a learner themselves. The process of inquiry sparks curiosity within the students encouraging them to continue to explore and ask questions. Throughout the process students learn far more than content, but also develop skills such as observation, problem solving, and critical thinking, and risk taking.

For my initial definition, I said that "Inquiry is the process of exploring the world through questioning and experimenting, which can then lead to new questions to be explored." I see lots of parallels with the science and engineering process as I look at my concept map, and I think the 3-dimensional learning that we do in science fits very well with the inquiry process. A big part of the process is giving students more control over the process. The teachers acts as more of a facilitator and guide - which can be hard to do. As I think about it more, I would add student-driven to my initial definition of inquiry.

I believe that inquiry consists of many different things as I included in my concept map. One thing I did not include was student interest. If students don't have that spark of curiosity it will be hard to engage them.

As a newer teacher (just finished my second year), I am still getting a sense of what inquiry means in a classroom. Teaching is my second career, and my memories of science class during my middle and high school years were a lot like what was described in the reading:  lectures, step-by-step investigations with specific/planned outcomes, and correct answers provided rather than a more "I think" approach. Several of the responses in the reading about inquiry being a metaphor for life and how we explore the world through inquiry as young children really resonated with me. It seems like we get away from that as we grow, especially during today's digital age where almost anything can be "Googled." I think inquiry should challenge the learner to think critically beyond the easy answer they can look up and explore the how/why. Inquiry should help them connect to the world around them and possibly explore solutions to a problem. As the teacher, we need to shift our role to more of a guide during inquiry investigations and experiences and learn to let go of our control. Allowing our students to engage in inquiry means we will not always have the "right answer" for them, and that is ok!

I think that inquiry is exposing students to a topic through various stimulus items then having them pose questions they have related to the topic. After the questioning phase the students will be able to explore the ideas they have through hands-on activities facilitated by the teacher but almost completely student led. In my understanding of inquiry, students come to their own understanding of concepts through exploration of materials and experimentation with ideas. These understandings may lead to new and more complex questions. These understandings should be communicated with the class and teachers can guide students to more work if their understandings are incomplete.

My initial definition (prior to reading the article) was: Inquiry is the action associated with an individual pending curiosity. After reading through the chapter there is A LOT of bullet points I'd like to add to below that definition, but I believe overall it still holds true. My main branches are:

• Skills
• Curiosity
• Empowerment
• Responsibility

All the factors that play into 'inquiry' for me fit into those 4 branches on the map. When educators use an inquiry method of teaching we allow kids to grow. When educators create lessons that have a set answer or a set end goal, we stifle the curiosity of the students because we can handed them the answer and shut down further curiosity as it could have unfolded. Me and the educators I work with focus on being the mentors or the guides in our students "by choice education". We create activities that allow sparks to ingnite in the students and our educators are there to help fan the flames into passion.   I appreciate the spelled out difference between "hands on" and "inquiry" and I find myself explaining that to others fairly often when describing our program. All of the "inquiry is not..." sections were spot on with approaches I've heard from other educators over the past decade. It was wonderful to see the 'truth' behind the myth to better help educators new to the concept of inquiry based learning understand the process more.   The inquiry circle was really interesting to learn about and I will use that cycle moving forward.

I agree with Nicole's comment of inquiry being a natural part of children learning. Inquiry is a natural process of asking questions, observing and thinking.  We are searching for meaning to understand something for ourselves.    The skills of inquiry can be encouraged and practiced.    The definitions of what 'Inquiry is Not' was helpful to me to further my understand of what Inquiry is.  

To me, inquiry seems to be a more natural process of learning for children.  Inquiry stimulates curiosity and encourages close observation of both the natural and material world.  With teachers facilitating, students can think critically and logically while also taking risks.  With structured classroom science activities, students are not discovering things on their own...they are being told what to look for and how to problem solve it.