what is critical inquiry in research

Tip: Use @ to search articles by an author

Critical Inquiry and Inquiry-Oriented Education

Opinion: K.P. Mohanan, Professor, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune

Human violence has multiple roots. Someone who stabs another in a fit of road-rage is acting under blind emotions. Someone who cannot kill humans but is prepared to kill animals has not expanded the scope of their ethical considerations beyond humans. And someone who wages war against another country is guided by ideological or economic factors, unaffected by ethics. To deal with violence, then, education must incorporate strands that aim at the emotional, ethical and intellectual foundations for peace.

Educating emotion requires helping the young liberate themselves from negative emotions such as anger, hostility, hatred, cruelty, intolerance, selfishness and competitiveness, while strengthening positive emotions such as empathy, compassion, love, and the spirit of altruism.

Educating the intellect for peace involves helping learners protect themselves from ideologies of violence. It should also empower them to change systems and practices that either promote violence or fail to prevent violence.

Ethical foundations draw on both emotion and intellect. Enriching the natural ethical instincts is a matter of emotions. Expanding the scope of ethical considerations is a matter of both emotions and reasoning. And connecting ethical values and principles to one’s actions and practices is a matter of reasoning.

In sum, we need a form of education that combines the emotional and the intellectual.  In this article, my concern is with the intellectual part.

Intellectual education needs to include not only the information and knowledge to work towards a non-violent world but also the abilities of critical thinking and inquiry to investigate the causes of violence, and to find ways to dissolve those causes. This means that Inquiry-Oriented Education (IOE), which seeks to develop the capacity for rational inquiry, has to be recognised as an important strand of education. What follows are my reflections on the role of rational inquiry in education and of critical inquiry as a specific form of rational inquiry.

What is Rational Inquiry?

Inquiry is the  investigation of a question on the basis of our own experience and reasoning, to look for an answer and arrive at a conclusion.

It involves:

• Questions  whose answers we wish to find out
• Methodological strategies  to look for answers
• Answers to the questions,  and  conclusions  based on them
• Rational justification  (proof, evidence, arguments) for the conclusions
• Thinking critically about  our own or others’ conclusions and justification

Rational inquiry  is inquiry that is committed to the following axioms:

• Rejecting Logical Contradictions : We must reject statements that are logically contradictory
• Accepting Logical Consequences : If we accept a set of statements, then we must also accept their logical consequences

By ‘logical contradiction’, we mean a combination of a statement and its negation. Thus, the statement that the earth is flat and the earth is not flat constitutes a logical contradiction. A logical consequence of a set of statements is a conclusion derived from them through logic. Thus, the conclusion that all humans are vertebrates is a logical consequence of these statements: (i) all humans are primates; (ii) all primates are mammals; and (iii) all mammals are vertebrates.

For readers who wish to go beyond this brief sketch, a wide range of examples of rational inquiry for school and college education are available at  www.schoolofthinq.com

Inquiry-Oriented Education, which seeks to develop the capacity for rational inquiry, has to be recognised as an important strand of education.

What is Critical Inquiry?

There are many situations where we do not realise our ignorance. We also take many beliefs and practices for granted, without questioning. When we subject such domains to critical thinking, we are pursuing  a special kind of rational inquiry, called  critical inquiry, which begins with doubting and questioning what has been taken for granted (analogous to ‘interrogating/cross-examining’ an ‘expert witness’ including ourselves) and demonstrating that we don’t know what we think we know.

Questions for critical inquiry are triggered by critical thinking.  Critical thinking is a set of mental processes for evaluating the merit of something . ‘Merit’ here could be the truth of a statement (e.g., the statement, ‘That the earth is round’ is true.), the  usefulness  of a product, action, practice, or policy to achieve a given goal (e.g., death penalty to effectively deter crime), the  ethical desirability  of an action, practice, or policy (e.g., the ethical rightness of the death penalty), the  beauty  of a work of art (e.g., Is da Vinci’s Mona Lisa a great painting?), or the  value  of something that we (ought to) strive for (e.g., we ought to liberate ourselves from anger and hatred).

Mathematical and scientific inquiries offer fruitful emotion-free terrains for the practice of critical inquiry.

Examples of Critical Inquiry

Critical inquiry into issues of terrorism, communal violence, forced migrations, xenophobia, nationalist and religious ideologies that promote violence, and the relation between economic policies and violence, are of direct relevance to education for peace. Such issues, however, are emotionally charged. They might be seductive for beginners, but precisely because of their emotional appeal, there is a danger that when investigating them, feelings replace thinking and assertions of personal opinions replace rational conclusions.

My experience suggests that for beginners to engage with such topics with adequate detachment, clarity and rigour, they need to strengthen their mental equipment in two ways: by striving for emotional maturity, in order to detach feelings from reflection and reasoning; and by strengthening and sharpening their intellectual capacity, using topics that would not create emotional storms.

Mathematical and scientific inquiries offer fruitful emotion-free terrains for the practice of critical inquiry. Let me sketch an example.

Suppose we begin a class activity for eighth graders with an innocent-sounding question:  How many angles does a triangle have?  The textbook answer is: Three. We can now initiate critical inquiry:  What is an angle such that triangles have three angles and rectangles have four?

Most novices would think of this as a trivial question. But then, the function of critical inquiry is to challenge complacency.

What is an angle?  A student’s answer might be: “If two straight lines meet in such a way that they do not form a single straight line, what lies between them is an angle.” If so, the combination of two straight lines in Fig. 1 forms an angle, but not in Fig. 2.

What is a right angle? What is an acute angle? What is an obtuse angle? What is a straight angle?  The standard textbook answers are: “A right angle measures 90º; an acute angle is less than a right angle; an obtuse angle is more than a right angle (but less than two right angles); and a straight angle is two right angles.”

We now proceed to rigorous reasoning. Given these ‘definitions’, it follows that angle ABC in Fig. 1 is an obtuse angle; while angle DEF in Fig. 2 is a staight angle. Since any straight line can be viewed as being made up of two straight lines at a straight angle, there is a straight angle at every point in a straight line.

How many angles does a straight line have?  Since every finite straight line has infinitely many points, it has infinitely many straight angles. Therefore, it has infinitely many angles. Since a triangle is made of three straight lines, it has infinitely many angles. This conclusion negates the textbook answer to the question we started with.

We now have to either accept the conclusion that triangles and rectangles have infinitely many angles, or re-define the concept of angle such that we abandon the concept of straight angle from the textbook.

If schools around the world could engage in discussions pursuing rational inquiry into principles and concepts of ethics, there would perhaps be far less violence in the world.

This begins an inquiry into questions whose answers we realise we don’t know:  What is an angle?

This example illustrates the strategy of ‘problematisation’ in critical inquiry: we begin with questions on what we think we know and take for granted; we engage critically with the answer; and realise that we don’t know what we thought we knew, triggering further inquiry.

As I said, math and science offer rich terrains for emotion-free practice of critical inquiry. Once learners acquire the necessary sharpness and strength of mind, they can be guided into critical inquiry in emotion-riddled terrains. We now explore two such examples.

2. Freedom Fighters and Terrorists

We give students the following hypothetical story.

Suppose a country, Arraya, rules over an island, Parumbi. The people of Parumbi don’t want Arraya to govern them, but the people of Arraya want Parumbi under them. Parumbians take up arms to achieve their goal. Their supporters describe them as ‘freedom fighters’, and their activity as an ‘independence struggle’. But the government of Arraya and its supporters describe them as ‘terrorists’, and their activity as ‘terrorism’.

We then give them the following real world story:

An article, “Terrorism, Not Freedom Struggle” (The Times of India, 10 August 2001) stated that “rejecting Islamabad’s description of terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir as freedom struggle,” India’s external affairs minister said that under no circumstance should India accept “Islamabad’s attempt to confer cross-border terrorism a kind of diplomatic legitimacy  1  …” Pakistan’s newspaper Business Recorder quoted Harry Truman as having warned that “once a government is committed to silencing the voice of dissent, it has only one way to go. To employ increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.” It went on to say: “Nothing illustrates the Indian policy, vis-à-vis occupied Kashmir, better than the above quoted remark of the American leader 2 .”

The students’ task is to spell out how we would distinguish between ‘freedom fighters’ and ‘terrorists’ and to define ‘terrorism’ and ‘independence struggle’ such that we can engage in a rational debate on whether a particular movement qualified as an independence struggle or as terrorism.

3. Nation and Nationalism

Activity 1 Write down the answers to the following questions: What is your nationality? Do you feel good when you hear your national anthem or see your national flag? Are there nations that you dislike or are hostile to? Write the names of those nations.

Activity 2 Now consider the following question: What is a nation?

Discussion : Two meanings of the term ‘nation’ emerged:

• People-nation : nation as a people united by a shared ancestry, language, and culture. (e.g. ‘Naga-nation,’ ‘Navaho- nation,’ ‘Palestine as a stateless nation’). People-nation prompts loyalty and, devotion to the people with shared ancestry, language, and culture.
• State-nation : nation as a government that rules a population in a given geographical region. (e.g. India, Pakistan, Vietnam, South Korea, United States of America, Australia, Nigeria, Argentina, and Germany). State-nations are results of war, conquest and power negotiations; they don’t require shared ethnicity, language, or culture.

A promising avenue for emotion-education is perhaps something along the lines of mindfulness meditation: ‘looking’ internally at the contents of one’s own experience . . .

Activity 3 Consider the concept of nationalism : We may define it as: a form of collective identity that prompts loyalty and devotion to  one’s nation .

Discussion : Given the two distinct concepts of nation, we needed to recognise the corresponding concepts of nationalism: people-nationalism and state-nationalism. People-nationalism might perceive the rulers as ‘foreign’, prompting the political separation of one’s people from those rulers. State-nationalism would perceive those involved in that separation as ‘traitors’. State-nationalism then is loyalty and devotion to one’s rulers and is identical to ‘patriotism’.

Activity 4 Let us go back to the questions we asked earlier: What is your nationality? Do you feel good when you hear your national anthem or national flag?

Discussion : Is your concept of nationality grounded in people-nation or state-nation? Do you feel good when you hear the national anthem or see the national flag? Do you feel patriotism rise in your heart? Does that feeling come from loyalty to the people, or to the state?

What would your nationality be now?

Which national anthem and national flag would produce feelings of patriotism in your grandchildren? Which nations are your grandchildren likely to hate?

Now answer the same questions by assuming that there were no wars anywhere in the world after the tenth century, and that the political map continued without change till today.

After thinking through these questions, go back to the concepts of state-nation and peoples-nation and write a one-page reflection on the concepts of nation, nationality, nationalism, and patriotism, and the role of violence in the origin and evolution of nations.

An Example of Ethical Inquiry

As a form of rational inquiry, ethical inquiry seeks to help develop the capacity to construct and evaluate ethical theories at individual and collective levels and to deduce the ethical judgements derived from those theories.

In a class session that I did for 6th Graders in Pune, India, the children came up with this ethical principle:  It is immoral to kill humans and other creatures . During the subsequent discussion, one child said that the principle doesn’t apply to enemies. The entire class agreed that it is okay to kill enemies. The principle was revised as:  It is immoral to kill fellow creatures other than enemies .

Some students even suggested that killing enemies is our ethical duty. This resulted in the following dialogue:

At this point, they were no longer sure about their position on enemies. I gave them a few minutes to discuss the problem in groups and come up with a concept of ‘enemy’ such that killing enemies is okay. After some discussion, most groups came up with the following statements:

Those who want to kill others are our enemies.

Those enemies exist in both India and Pakistan.

I would have liked to raise the question: Is it morally right to kill someone who has killed another? This could have taken us to fairly complex issues like mercy-killing, honour-killing, war, abortion and death penalty. I did not pursue that line of inquiry, for I wasn’t sure if it was age-appropriate for the children.

If schools around the world could engage in discussions of this kind, pursuing rational inquiry into principles and concepts of ethics, there would perhaps be far less violence in the world.

  Contemplative Inquiry

As mentioned earlier, the education of emotions has an important role to play in minimising human violence. A promising avenue for emotion-education is perhaps something along the lines of mindfulness meditation: ‘looking’ internally at the contents of one’s own experience, including sensory and non-sensory experience, as well as the experience of emotions. Meditative techniques such as attending to breathing, body scan, loving-kindness and observing thought are forms of looking at the inner world 3 .

The so-called  contemplative inquiry  in this tradition is a form of rational inquiry that takes the results of such introspection as the grounds of inquiry to arrive at rational conclusions about oneself. This allows us to address questions as, “Am I a covert racist?” “Am I as ethical as I think?”, “Do I carry hatred in me?”, as part of inquiry into a fundamental question: “Who am I?”

Instead of merely experiencing emotions such as anger or hostility, we can employ contemplative inquiry with the rational-perceptual part of the mind examining with equanimity the emotional suffering part. The outcome of attention then forms the basis for rational investigation of oneself.

Inquiry-Oriented Education

Helping the young to develop the capacity to engage in these diverse modes of rational inquiry, combined with practices that enhance positive emotions and dissolve negative ones, is an imperative that institutionalised education can no longer afford to ignore in today’s world. Mathematical, scientific, conceptual, ethical and contemplative inquiries play significant roles in this enterprise, which would involve incorporating the strand of Inquiry-Oriented Education into schooling at the primary, secondary, as well as tertiary levels. UNESCO MGIEP has currently undertaken such a move in a collaborative endeavour with ThinQ 4  in its LIBRE programme.

1   http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Terrorism-not-freedom-struggle-Jaswant/articleshow/1086523490.cms

2   http://www.brecorder.com/index.php?option=com_news&view=single&id=1108304

3  http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_to_choose_a_type_of_mindfulness_meditation

4   www.schoolofthinq.com

K.P. Mohanan  received his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and taught at the University of Texas in Austin, MIT, Stanford University and the National University of Singapore (NUS). At NUS, he initiated the General Education Programme for undergraduate students and, as part of this programme, created a web course on Academic Knowledge and Inquiry.

In January 2011, he moved to IISER-Pune, where he created a three-course package on rational inquiry, covering scientific, mathematical, and conceptual inquiries. He is currently engaged in developing courses and programmes on different types of inquiry-based learning for high school and college students.

Follow us at:

UNESCO MGIEP, ICSSR Building, First Floor 35 Ferozshah Road, New Delhi-110001 Phone: +91 11 23072356-60

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. For more information on how we use cookies, read our privacy policy .

Fill in your details to receive updates from us:

Writing Program at New College

Elements of inquiry: reflection, critical thinking, and research.

Talking informally about their research, many scholars will share a personal connection to the work they do in their professional roles as teachers and researchers. That connection might be grounded in a sense of social responsibility, that is, some commitment to create change. They may talk about the way their research connects meaningfully with personal, family, or community history. It may also be that a scholar pursues a particular research topic because she, he, they find the subject intriguing.  A passion to understand drives research . Often we are curious and driven to know more about issues and questions for no obvious reason at all beyond  fascination .

Far from secondary or extracurricular, personal interests and connections to research can be a powerful pathway for learning and gaining knowledge. As you make your way through this course, we ask that you pursue  twin   paths of inquiry : a path of  reflection  and a path of  research . This course will encourage you down both, thinking and writing about the lived experience that have brought you to your current interests, and pursuing research understood more traditionally as the gathering, analysis, and integration of the work of other scholars and researchers. Both activities will take you on a search for information and knowledge. Click  here  to continue reading.

Critical Thinking: An Engine for Inquiry

You have probably heard teachers talk about “critical thinking” as a method of problem solving. At the risk of being repetitive we will briefly discuss the foundational importance of critical thinking here.

Critical thinking is the activity that joins reflection and research in a process of inquiry, a careful analysis of our own experience and knowledge undertaken even as we gather more information and increase our knowledge. Definitions abound, but we ask you to adopt this definition of critical thinking at least for the duration of this course:

Critical thinking is the habit or practice of non-prejudicial and uncompromising analysis and inquiry, thinking from multiple perspectives, and adopting positions in light of all available information.

But more than just accept this definition without question, let’s put the concept of Critical Thinking to work with you answering some questions found in the  Exercise Tab .

When you are finished, check out the video, titled simply “Critical Thinking.” It offers an extended overview of this important concept.

Reflection Begins with a Decision

Question:   How do you decide what issue to pursue as a topic for inquiry?

Answer:   Choose the one that has already  chosen you .

Some issues make a claim on our interest and grab our attention through the force of their importance. These issues have impact in our lives. There is no end to the variations on  “the call to write,” as scholar and writing teacher John Trimbur  has termed the motivating factors that get writers and researchers working.  [ Read more .]

Choose a Focus

So then, let’s decide: what is the issue? The problem? The occasion? What is the question to answer? What is the challenge to which we must respond individually, locally, as well as a broader society?  You must be the one who makes these decisions in the context of the research and writing for this course.  Therefore, as we have suggested, it is crucial that you choose something that holds real interest for you, something important that demands your attention. Here’s an idea: choose something to research that you would be interested in even if you were not enrolled in a writing course!

Of course, it is impossible to officially require that students care about their work, but we offer this choice as an opportunity for you to experience how your own personal interests can be your guide to important research and writing. Our classroom community is the space in which you can follow your own interests with support, collaboratively.

When you are ready, please proceed to the  Exercise Tab.

Research and Inquiry

What academics include in their definition of  research  will vary from discipline to discipline. In some sciences, laboratory experimentation is a primary form of research, but those experiments will be different depending on the science. Some social scientists—sociologists or anthropologists, for example—often conduct extensive interviews or “ethnographies” to gather information about the experience, attitudes, or way of life among a particular segment of the population. This form of research requires methods of analysis entirely different from those of researchers in the “hard sciences” of biology, chemistry, physics, etc. Scholars in the humanities undertake other research methodologies. Historians and literary critics employ specific kinds of reading methodologies to interpret “primary texts,” perhaps hard copies aging somewhere in an archive, perhaps digitized and readily available.

You get the point;  research  is not a single activity. Research practices are multiple and adaptable.

A common and fundamental element unites most research methodologies, however. Academic research is driven by questions. These questions emerge around gaps or problems within the overall body of knowledge that makes up a discipline. This kind of research question focuses on how to build on and correct previous scholarship.

Research questions also emerge in direct response to situations “in the real world,” for there isn’t much truth to the old stereotype that academic researchers are cut off from reality and work among abstract ideas in the “ivory tower.” Certainly, we hope your direction for inquiry will be “worldly,” so to speak, engaging issues all the more important for their immediate relevance in the social world.

Whatever the focus, the time for developing research questions has arrived.

Formulating a Research Question

One way to summarize the difference between high school and college work is that in high school you were trained to answer questions that were put to you. As a student in the university, you must decide which questions are most important to ask, and more, which are most important to pursue with all your intellectual energy.

Carefully posing questions is a very important activity for academic researchers, the ranks of whom you have now joined. A research question emerges from interest and necessity and points to the direction further inquiry will take. But as your work in the previous section brainstorming possible topics suggests, coming up with a research question capable of moving you in a clear direction of inquiry will also take time and careful thought. 

This is why we believe that the questioning process must precede the answering process. While students are often told to begin research projects with a thesis statement, that is, the main claim they will support with their research, our point is that before a student can arrive at a thesis, she or he must first gather strong knowledge and certainty about a topic in order even to conceive of let alone argue a thesis.  Again, a process of inquiry is first necessary.[ Read More .]

Revising the Research Question

Once you receive feedback from your classmates, teacher, and others, you will be in a place where you can revise your research question. Remember that the final decision is yours. You will have to decide which advice for revision to take and which to ignore. However, we offer the following questions for you to consider as you revise:

• Is there agreement among your readers that your research question is too broad?
• Have you been good advice for narrowing your research question, or can you think of a good way to focus the question?
• Is there a consensus among readers that your research question is too narrow? What ideas do you have for making it more general?
• Have you received feedback that suggests you have some misunderstanding of the issue at hand?
• Have your readers provided you with specifics about what it is you misunderstand?
• Did you receive comments about the clarity of your question? Were your readers specific about how to clarify your statement of the question?

After reviewing your initial research question, all of the response initiated by this question, as well as your answers to the above questions, you are ready to move from working exercises to a formal presentation of your Research Question.

You can access the full assignment description  here .

Writing Program

Select Section

What is Critical Research? | Definition, Examples & Methods

Introduction

What does critical research mean, what is an example of critical qualitative research, approaches to critical theory.

Critical research was created out of a need to examine power , inequities, and the resulting societal implications on the status quo in society. It is a necessary departure from traditional scientific research in that it looks beyond what is directly observable to analyze the social world and develop social theory from novel perspectives to address previous injustices. In this article, we'll look at what critical theory entails for qualitative research , as well as the different strands that make up critical research.

In specific terms, critical research examines the nature of power dynamics influencing the social world. More broadly, this has implications for understanding inequality and disparity across cleavages of race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and economic class, among other differences in identity.

While there are many different strands to critical research, there are a number of common characteristics that are shared by scholars of critical theory:

• Contextualization : Traditional research assumes a singular, almost absolutist approach to knowledge. In contrast, critical theory challenges the positivist outlook on scientific research and assumes a more sociocultural outlook to the social world. In adopting a more contextualized approach to any particular social phenomenon, scholars look to making propositions specific to different contexts rather than defining grand, unifying theories that explain socially constructed concepts regardless of individual or cultural circumstances.
• Subjectivity : Unlike more positivist approaches to research, critical research presupposes a lack of an ability to directly observe physical reality. Moreover, a researcher's perception is often confounded by culturally-reinforced presumptions such as stereotypes and other biases that privilege those in power. The possibility that the social world can be subjectively construed directly challenges assumptions of a positivist understanding of social phenomena. Instead, critical research encourages scholars and laypeople alike to consider the world from different points of view in order to identify problems and inequities that are otherwise invisible within traditional worldviews.
• Social change : Critical research is seldom interested in generating insights purely out of intellectual curiosity. Critical scholars tend to adopt a philosophy of social justice where research is aimed at benefiting marginalized or oppressed populations who lack the same opportunities and benefits that are otherwise granted to those in mainstream society. In this respect, research and analysis within a critical paradigm are merely preliminary steps in a process that appeals to institutions, stakeholders, and social activists to draw on actionable insights from the research and make tangible proposals for enacting change.
• Transformation : Similar to the imperative of social change, transformation deals with fundamentally altering contemporary paradigms. However, this aspect to critical research is more concerned with problematizing traditional perspectives of the social world and the phenomena within it, both from a layperson's point of view and from the view of traditional academic institutions that perpetuate mainstream scientific inquiry. Rather than simply acknowledge the subjective nature of the social world, critical research calls for fundamentally transforming perceptions and attitudes in a manner that views marginalized populations more equitably.

Whatever your research paradigm, rely on ATLAS.ti

Qualitative data analysis is easier and more intuitive than ever with ATLAS.ti. Download a free trial.

One of the more famous studies to produce a critical analysis is the doll test first devised by Mamie Clark, then conducted with husband Kenneth Clark starting in the 1940s and replicated in later years. In the doll test, children were asked how they felt about dolls that were put in front of them. The children preferred to play with the dolls that looked white rather than the dolls that looked black, and had more positive views about the white-looking dolls. Children who were black also tended to share the same perception of black-looking dolls, which suggested that their surrounding environment - particularly the school system but more broadly the culture around them - profoundly impacted them by reinforcing negative stereotypes about racial minorities.

Critical theorists argue that such stereotypes, especially when perpetuated by institutions like education and mass media, further contribute to economic and social disparities when children of color experience exposure to negative attitudes about race and ethnicity. This novel research provided fundamental insights that led to the following real-world changes:

• Desegregation of schools : This research took place in the era where public schools in the United States were separated by race. The findings from the doll test helped make the case that institutionalized discrimination had effects on the educational and emotional development of children of color, ultimately leading to judicial rulings that contributed to school desegregation.
• Educational reforms : Subsequent discussions of racial stereotypes have helped to further promote initiatives for racial equity and equality in public education. While still undoubtedly controversial to this day, efforts to promote diversity training for teachers, multicultural curriculum development, and other policies to address racial disparities can be partly attributed to the findings of the doll test.
• Anti-discrimination policies : The findings from the doll test form a scientific basis for anti-discrimination frameworks for public policy, workplace organization, and other formal institutions. Where racism and equality might otherwise be abstract, potentially vague concepts, a scientific framework regarding discriminatory attitudes provides a language for discussing practical implications addressing racism.

Here are some of the various forms of critical research. Keep in mind that these approaches are not exclusive to each other, though they have their own distinct focus to shed light on specific issues relevant to the social sciences, nor are they exhaustive of the entire array of critical theory.

• Critical discourse analysis : Researchers who critically analyze communication look at how people exercise power through speech to manipulate or control others. This analytical method connects theories from linguistics, sociology, and anthropology to look at the power of language in constructing social reality.
• Critical ethnography : Ethnography is an all-encompassing approach to research aimed at capturing relationships, practices, and behaviors within any given context. Beyond a comprehensive examination of cultures, critical ethnographers use the resulting findings to advocate for social change.
• Critical methodology : Critical scholars may also look at how methods are used to construct scholars' epistemology about scientific knowledge and question approaches to science that emphasize objectivity to a fault. Critical methodology advocates for reflexivity and participatory research as a departure from traditional research methods.
• Critical race theory : Scholars engaged in critical race theory look at longstanding racial disparities to examine how institutions and power structures perpetuate racism and how people of color can challenge those structures from legal and advocacy standpoints in order to foster equity and equality.
• Decolonizing research : Focusing on the critique that most established research comes from a Western-based perspective, research on decolonization seeks to deconstruct established philosophical paradigms that disadvantage perspectives of indigenous populations, cultures from the Global South, and other communities that have long been ignored by mainstream scholarship.

Turn to ATLAS.ti for insightful data analysis

Powerful tools to draw insights from your data is just a few clicks away. Get started with a free trial.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PMC Canada Author Manuscripts

Critical inquiry and knowledge translation: exploring compatibilities and tensions

Sheryl reimer-kirkham.

* Associate Professor, School of Nursing, Trinity Western University, Langley

Colleen Varcoe

† Associate Professor, School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Vancouver

Annette J. Browne

M. judith lynam, koushambhi basu khan.

‡ Research Manager, School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Vancouver

Heather McDonald

§ Doctoral Candidate, School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Knowledge translation has been widely taken up as an innovative process to facilitate the uptake of research-derived knowledge into health care services. Drawing on a recent research project, we engage in a philosophic examination of how knowledge translation might serve as vehicle for the transfer of critically oriented knowledge regarding social justice, health inequities, and cultural safety into clinical practice. Through an explication of what might be considered disparate traditions (those of critical inquiry and knowledge translation), we identify compatibilities and discrepancies both within the critical tradition, and between critical inquiry and knowledge translation. The ontological and epistemological origins of the knowledge to be translated carry implications for the synthesis and translation phases of knowledge translation. In our case, the studies we synthesized were informed by various critical perspectives and hence we needed to reconcile differences that exist within the critical tradition. A review of the history of critical inquiry served to articulate the nature of these differences while identifying common purposes around which to strategically coalesce. Other challenges arise when knowledge translation and critical inquiry are brought together. Critique is one of the hallmark methods of critical inquiry and, yet, the engagement required for knowledge translation between researchers and health care administrators, practitioners, and other stakeholders makes an antagonistic stance of critique problematic. While knowledge translation offers expanded views of evidence and the complex processes of knowledge exchange, we have been alerted to the continual pull toward epistemologies and methods reminiscent of the positivist paradigm by their instrumental views of knowledge and assumptions of objectivity and political neutrality. These types of tensions have been productive for us as a research team in prompting a critical reconceptualization of knowledge translation.

Introduction

Knowledge translation (KT), and the closely related knowledge exchange, knowledge transfer, knowledge mobilization, and knowledge brokering, has taken hold in a movement for improved uptake of research-derived knowledge in the health services. Undoubtedly, the aim of KT to ground practice, whether planning health service delivery systems, ascertaining the most effective treatment for diseases, or guiding health professionals in decision-making at the point of care, in the best available evidence is fundamental to health care services today. However, approaches to KT are still being developed, and the mechanisms whereby KT best occurs are not entirely clear, particularly when the nature of the knowledge to be translated and the contexts for knowledge uptake vary. There is also beginning exploration of the implications of the philosophic and theoretical grounding of the research knowledge that is being translated.

The purpose of this paper is to engage in a philosophic discussion of the implications of bringing together what could be considered two distinct paradigms or approaches to knowledge; the emerging knowledge translation movement and the genre of critical inquiry. Specifically, we articulate the compatibilities among various critical perspectives, and examine how these might be taken forward, drawing on a KT project that used the concept of cultural safety to prompt critical reflection on critically oriented knowledge from our collective programmes of research ( Anderson et al. , 2008 ; Browne et al. , 2009 ). Our KT project was designed to synthesize and apply knowledge from several research studies informed by critical theories, including studies of help-seeking, health care access, and hospitalization experiences of patients from various backgrounds, involving people who have immigrated to Canada and Aboriginal peoples ( Anderson et al. , 2008 ). The project team aimed to pilot selected KT strategies that would best serve as vehicles for the uptake of this critical knowledge. The objectives of the KT project were to:

• Build on established partnerships between researchers and health professionals to co-create knowledge and incorporate that knowledge into practice.
• Synthesize research findings from several studies that contribute to knowledge focused on the social circumstances of patients’ lives that impact on transitions; and, engage health professionals in dialogue about how this knowledge can facilitate smooth patient transitions between hospital and home.
• Co-create opportunities for health professionals to critically reflect on their assumptions about patients and the impact of these assumptions on patient care.
• Evaluate the impact and effectiveness of this process of KT on the smooth transition of patients from hospital to home.

One of the unique features of this project, compared with other KT projects, was its theoretical framing informed primarily by postcolonial feminism, and the fact that the knowledge being translated was developed using critical inquiry, representing various theoretical perspectives. That most of the studies serving as the source of the knowledge were qualitative in nature added to the distinctiveness.

The paper begins with an historical overview of the development of what we refer to as the ‘critical paradigm’. Postcolonial feminism is situated within this genealogy. Team members have relied upon various critical perspectives within this paradigm for the studies that comprised the knowledge to be translated. In the process of synthesizing knowledge from these studies the team realized the necessity of examining in more depth the ontological and epistemological differences among various theoretical perspectives within the critical paradigm, and we present this next. With this representation of critical perspectives, and their distinctness, we then review some of the epistemological and ontological assumptions underlying current approaches to KT. We ask the question whether knowledge translation might serve as vehicle for the uptake or transfer of critically oriented knowledge into clinical practice. We discuss compatibilities and differences between critical inquiry and knowledge translation, as well as possible limitations of both, as made visible through this exercise. The paper concludes with several recommendations for critical knowledge translation.

Critical inquiry

This KT project was informed by critical perspectives. Because the project focused on cultural safety in the context of providing care to diverse populations, a postcolonial feminist theoretical framing was primarily relied upon for its attention to themes of race, racialization, and associated intersectional oppressions. Doing so carried ramifications for the KT process. Positioned within the critical paradigm, post-colonial feminist theory shares certain features with other critical perspectives but also holds some key distinctive features, a point to which we return shortly. These distinctions and convergences, elucidated in the following brief genealogy of critical traditions, ultimately carry implications for our pursuant reconceptualizations of knowledge translation.

A brief genealogy of critical perspectives

The term ‘critical theory’ was coined in 1937 by Horkheimer to reflect the Marxist-oriented research at the Institute of Social Research founded in Frankfurt, Germany in 1923 (subsequently referred to as the Frankfurt School). Horkheimer, with other colleagues including Adorno and Marcuse, developed critical theory as grounded in social theory and political economy (informed largely by Marxist theory) to carry out systematic critique of existing society, and ally itself with efforts to produce alternatives to capitalism ( Kellner, 2005 ). Habermas, a student of Adorno and Horkheimer, produced a rich body of work that began in a Western Marxist stance and eventually developed into a philosophy of communicative action and critical social theory ( Kellner, 2005 ).

From these predominantly Marxist roots, cultural studies branched off in various forms in the 1960s with French intellectuals such as Sartre, Baudrillard, and Lyotard pursuing what became known as post-modernism, and Derrida and Foucault engaging in the development of post-structuralism ( Barker, 2000 ). During this time, anticolonialists, notably Frantz Fanon, Albert Memmi, and Aime Cesaire, were denouncing European colonialism with analyses of the role of class, race, national culture and violence in the struggle for national liberation, and in retrospect, can be seen to have begun the postcolonial movement. In her overview of the development of postcolonial theorizing, Parry (2004) notes that foremost postcolonial scholar Edward Said both acknowledged the contributions of post-structuralist theory, Western Marxism, and Anglo-American criticism, and observes that within these theories there is indifference to colonialism as constitutive of metropolitan society and culture. In particular, Said called attention to their failure to recognize the work of anticolonialist critics such as Cesaire and Fanon. This then became the departing point for postcolonial theory. Said’s Orientalism , published in 1978, showed how deeply certain visions of Asiatic societies were woven into canonical European literature. Colonization was no longer seen only as enacted in exotic places, but as central to the very existence and identity of European culture ( Cooper, 2005 ). Taking inspiration from Said’s work, postcolonial studies began in the late 1970s and early 1980s in what was then called ‘colonial discourses analysis’ ( Parry, 2004 ).

In the early 1980s, colonial discourse analysis coincided with the institutionalization of an extensive platform of research initiatives, including gender, feminist, African American, ‘ethnic’, and gay/queer studies. Together these initiatives examined how dominant systems of knowledge had affected the discursive regulation and institutional oppression of subordinated communities and marginalized cultural traditions ( Parry, 2004 ). From early roots in Marxist analyses, then, the diverse family of critical theories has developed in many ways, and is now understood to be concerned ‘with issues of power, and justice and the ways that the economy, matters of race, class and gender, ideologies, discourses, education, religion and other social institutions, and cultural dynamics interact to construct a social system’ ( Kincheloe & McLaren, 2000 , p. 281). Key to our discussion here is the shared historical materialist-realist ontology ( Guba & Lincoln, 2005 ) of these critical perspectives that views reality as shaped by social, political, cultural, economic, ethnic, and gender values crystallized over time. Such an ontology makes linkages between the everyday experience of individuals with broader social structures, based on the assumption that the real world makes a material difference in terms of race, class, gender, and other such social categories. Within this stance, the basic critical analytic process is one of scrutinizing taken-for-granted assumptions and relationships by asking how they actually relate to wider oppressive structures and how these structures legitimate and conceal their oppressive mechanisms (Harvey, cited in Labonte et al. , 2005 ).

The development of postcolonial theories can be understood as sharing some early common roots and concerns with other theories in the critical paradigm, but developing a clearly distinct body of scholarship based on critiques of the, by then, established field. Broadly, postcolonial theories are concerned with the legacy and ongoing effects of colonialism. From the groundwork laid by Fanon and other anticolonialists, Said’s Orientalism ( 1978 ) was followed by what is referred to as a ‘linguistic turn’ that saw Spivak (1988) and Bhabha (e.g. The Location of Culture , 1994 ) leading in discursive analyses (influenced by Derrida and Foucault’s deconstruction and post-structural methods). Following from Said’s Orientalism and the provocative question raised by Spivak, ‘Can the subaltern speak?’, a fundamental distinguishing element of postcolonial theories is their commitment to giving voice to subjugated and indigenous knowledges, especially non-Western voices. Parry (2004) observes that within postcolonial critique ‘discourse’ has since been privileged as the model of social practice with the consequence of a remarkable ‘incuriosity about enabling socio-economic and political institutions’ (p. 68), particularly where postcolonialism has found its home in English, Literary Studies, and Cultural Studies university departments. While attention to and critique of dominant discourses and ideologies and their effects is essential, it is insufficient to the cause of redressing pervasive social inequities.

Such concerns, and the widespread inattention to gender analyses in postcolonial theorizing, matched by a lack of race as an analytic category in feminism, led concerned Black feminist scholars such as Patricia Hill Collins, Rose Brewer, and bell hooks to draw attention to how women of Colour are typically positioned in society and how race, class, and gender operate in tandem in what are multiple, shifting sites of oppression. Building on these works, postcolonial feminists [also referred to as ‘feminist postcolonialism’ ( Lewis & Mills, 2003 )] are now relying on intersectional analyses that begin with the assumption that one cannot understand the experiences of ‘women’ or ‘Blacks’, or ‘migrants’ or the ‘poor’ in isolation from all of the multiple social classifications or identities each individual carries, the privilege or disadvantage associated with these identities, and that these social identities are indivisible from each other ( Yuval-Davies, 2006 ).

In summary, central to postcolonial feminist theory as taken up by several team members are the examination of the root causes of racialized, classed and gendered inequities; critical analyses of people’s historical and ongoing experiences of colonialism and neocolonialism; deliberate decentring of dominant culture in order that the perspectives of those who have been marginalized become starting points for knowledge development; and examination of how key concepts such as race, racialization, and culture are constructed with particular effects ( Anderson, 2002 ; Reimer-Kirkham & Anderson, 2002 ). These features of postcolonial feminist theorizing, especially the focus on disrupting the history of race-based thinking and racializing processes, and the concern with the structural inequities perpetuated by historical and current political, economic and social conditions ( Browne et al. , 2005 ; Anderson et al. , 2007 ), offer considerable analytic currency in the area of social justice and health inequities ( Reimer-Kirkham & Browne, 2006 ).

Theoretical pluralism and knowledge synthesis

Members of the research team have also drawn on a range of critical perspectives other than postcolonial feminist theory (e.g. feminist theory, post-structuralism, critical race theory) and various theorists (e.g. Bourdieu, Foucault, Ricouer) to enhance scholarship. A question that engaged the team, particularly in the early phases when we were synthesizing findings from our various studies, was ‘how would we work together, given our work was informed by various theories?’ Ultimately, what drew the team together was a commitment to research for social justice and equity, an ideal shared by the range of critical perspectives upon which team members drew (see Reimer-Kirkham & Browne, 2006 ; and Browne & Tarlier, 2008 for discussion of critical conceptions of social justice). Cultural safety, a concept that several of us had been working with in various ways and to which our team was committed to using, served as the vehicle to operationalize social justice for the KT project (See Browne et al. , 2009 ). Yet, while the team shared these core commitments, during the project (including conceptualization of the project, implementation activities, and analytic processes) we encountered tensions regarding the degree to which we were able to stay focused on, or ‘true’, to the direction provided by the critical framing of the project.

As the project progressed, distinctions between the different theories that informed the various sources of the knowledge for translation came to the attention of the team. These various theoretical traditions influenced what ideas were brought to the foreground. For example, the extent to which gender, race or class were the primary unit of analysis varied. Some of our work drew explicit attention to the corporate context of health care and the impact on nurses’ work (e.g. Varcoe & Rodney, 2001 ); other work emphasized the racialization of nurses’ practice environments (e.g. Varcoe, 2001 ; Reimer-Kirkham, 2003 ); and yet other work focused on the racializing and culturalist discourses that (often inadvertently) influence health care providers’ knowledge and practices ( Varcoe, 2001 , 2009 ; Browne, 2005 , 2007 ). Our individual social locations also entered in, and as the project progressed, we became more reflexive regarding our individual social positions, and how these might lend to privileging particular analyses.

In earlier work by several members of the research team ( Anderson et al. , 2007 ) examining connections between Bourdieu and postcolonial feminist scholarship, the suggestion was made that ‘examining the points of connection between critical theoretical perspectives might further the construction of reflexive and transformative knowledge, to move us forward in addressing past injustices and continuing inequities in health and health-care’ (p. 179). The argument was made for a pragmatism that accommodates theoretical pluralism for the sake of explanatory capacity and praxis while, at the same time, cautioning against ‘marrying’ or merging theories without critically questioning the epistemological and methodological disjunctures between theories. In this KT project, to bring together knowledge for social justice from variously informed critical inquiry studies meant the team needed to continually take note of any such disjunctures.

An important difference between theories within the critical paradigm has to do with the ontology of the subject in regard to the extent to which being and knowing, ontology and epistemology are differentiated. Philosophers from various strands of feminism and hermeneutics argue for seeing knower and knowledge as inseparable (e.g. Harding, 1991 ; Ricoeur, 1991 ). Related is the ontological tension concerning the nature of power. Fenwick (2004) notes that tensions remain unresolved between those arguing for a materialist understanding of power informed by Marxist roots (i.e. power existing in and enacted through structures) and others committed to more discursive analyses of circulating cultural power, drawing on post-structural conceptions of the micropolitics of power. The matter of agency, and particularly how independent from social context the individual is understood to be, follows from how one conceives of power. Although all of the critical perspectives brought to this project hold to the importance of contextual analyses, there are variations in emphasis, reflecting a central problematic in social theory today; the tensions between particularities (the ‘local’) and universals (the ‘global’), agency and structure. To what extent do individuals influence structures, and to what extent are they shaped by structures? Whereas some scholars in the critical paradigm might tend toward an interpretive stance that focuses on the lived reality of individuals (as in the case of critical phenomenology), other analyses function predominantly at macro levels with observations of how privileges and oppressions are structured. For our work together on this project this meant that we grappled with various views of agency. For example, there was some variance in the extent to which some of the team saw nurses’ agency in the practice setting as constrained by the wider context (i.e. the contexts of health care and the social world more generally). Moreover, those team members who drew extensively on feminist theory tended to focus more closely on the experiences of the nurses, while those who relied primarily on postcolonial theorizing were more attuned to racialization in health care services.

Another disjuncture of note here is that of whether critical theory functions as a master narrative originating with Western intellectual elites, or whether it begins from the standpoint of subjugated knowledges, outside of Western tradition and Enlightenment thinking. As we have argued elsewhere ( Anderson et al. , 2007 ), ‘postcolonial feminist theorizing begins with the subaltern, gendered voice, with the specific intent of interrupting the “master” narratives’ (p. 185). Thus, as Anderson (2002) has explained:

post-colonial and Black feminist perspectives cannot be extensions of critical perspectives developed within Euro-American traditions. Through dialogue, however, there is the potential to reframe dominant discourses and to create a perspective on knowledge development that reflects multiple social locations. But this is not possible until the voices that have been marginalized are recognized and treated as legitimate in the social production of knowledge. (p. 18)

Embedded then in this difference between knowledge derived from master narratives compared with subjugated knowledges is the epistemological and methodological distinction between deductive theorizing and that of the postcolonial feminist practice of starting with voice and everyday life experiences of those who bear the burden of colonizing histories, impoverishment, and ill health ( Anderson et al. , 2007 ). Our challenge became how to bring marginalized voices into the forefront of health care discourses.

Given this theoretical pluralism within the critical paradigm, and our research team more specifically, we engaged in a process of identifying compatibilities between critical perspectives. Based on our shared commitment, grounded in the critical paradigm, to social justice and addressing health inequities, we centred this process on the concomitant knowledge required to enact this commitment, and the framing of this knowledge in relation to cultural safety for the purposes of translation.

The nature of knowledge produced by critical inquiry

The nature of knowledge produced by critical inquiry is socially organized, meaning it is contextual, perspectival, political, and historical. Knowledge is partial, representing particular realities, while simultaneously organized by the social context, meaning that broader social forces such as economics, gender, history, and politics shape knowledge. Knowledge produced within the critical paradigm is done so with a deep awareness of its social organization, and thus tends toward certain types of knowledge. The research projects drawn on as the source of the knowledge translated in this project elucidated themes such as health inequities, unequal access to health care services, the marginalizing practices of racialization, and assumptions underpinning societal discourses brought to health care provider–recipient encounters ( Anderson et al. , 2008 ). This knowledge was characterized by at least four key features: how oppression is understood, how culture is defined, the importance of social determinants of health, and the continuities between social and health care inequities.

As made clear by postcolonial feminist scholars, we stress the importance of understanding oppression not as an ‘us’ and ‘them’ phenomenon ( Collins, 1990 ; Anderson, 2002 ), but rather as shifting systems of privilege and disadvantage, where a person can be simultaneously advantaged and disadvantaged. However, we understand the shifting locations of privilege and oppression as falling along axes of power represented by intersecting social categorizations such as gender, race, and class ( Yuval-Davies, 2006 ).

The synthesized knowledge formulated by our team was also founded on critical perspectives of culture itself, viewing culture not as static, neutral, or reified, but as a power-laden social construction inscribed with racialized images and assumptions ( Anderson et al. , 1991 ; Reimer-Kirkham et al. , 2002 ; Lynam et al. , 2007 ). Postcolonial feminist scholarship departs from what has become ‘the common mode of exploring “difference” (i.e. a culturalist focus on culture as a relatively static set of beliefs, values, norms, and practices attached to a discrete group sharing a common ethnic background by pointing to the politics of race , particularly in sustaining colonizing relationships’ ( Reimer-Kirkham & Anderson, 2002 , p. 3) (see also Browne et al. , 2009 ).

Our scholarship invariably sheds light on the broader context of health care services, and the social distribution of health and illness given our scrutiny of the effects of operations of power across macrostructural and micropolitical levels. While we argue for access to appropriate, efficient, and effective health care services, health care in and of itself is not a major predictor of health status. Social and economic determinants of health, also referred to as the ‘social gradient of health’ ( Marmot, 2006 , p. 2), mean that other factors such as poverty, nurturing childhood environments, housing, employment, social support, clean water, and food (factors that are shaped along the axes of gender, race, migration experiences, age, ability and so on) are as important or more important to health status. These social determinants are typically beyond the sphere of influence for health care professionals and arguably are also outside the domain of health policy, depending on how health ministries’ mandates and policy jurisdictions are aligned. Moreover, Labonte et al. (2005) assert: ‘One cannot talk meaningfully about the social determinants of health – nor begin to impact on them – without recognizing that they reflect underlying social processes’ (p. 8). These underlying social processes, so determinative of health status, include capitalist, neoliberal and neocolonial ideologies and practices that serve as the roots of poverty, under-housing, inadequate access to services, and so forth. These root causes and their outcomes are central to the interests of critical inquiry. Thus, we understand health inequities as contiguous with and partially constituted by wider social inequities. The same dynamics that sustain wider social inequities also shape health care services, inequities in access to health care, and health care encounters.

Thus the knowledge generated by critical inquiry and brought together for the purposes of this KT project represents a type of knowledge distinct from the types of knowledge (such as clinical or health care administration knowledge) typically relied upon in health care contexts. Yet, our assumption in undertaking this project was that critically oriented knowledge is crucial for the effective, efficient, and equitable delivery of health services. The question we took up in this project was how such knowledge could be integrated into clinical practice settings, alongside and complementary to other health care knowledges. Could knowledge translation, as it is currently conceptualized, serve as a mechanism for the uptake of such critical knowledge into health care practice? We turn now to a discussion of some of the philosophical assumptions that underlie current KT discourses.

Knowledge translation

Knowledge translation, as a movement, has seen remarkable uptake in a short period of time, with national organizations around the world endorsing knowledge translation (although specific terminology, interpretation, and implementation vary to some extent) as core to the research enterprise. Where differentiation is made between KT and related processes such as diffusion and dissemination, KT is generally understood as a much broader concept that places a significant emphasis on the implementation of research-derived evidence within a complex system of exchange among stakeholders. A recent study ( Tetroe et al. , 2008 ) to determine the knowledge translation policy, expectations, and activities of health research funding agencies internationally found that while the specific terminologies and strategies may vary, KT is being increasingly recognized as an important area of research internationally and the research funders are seen as taking increasing (though variable) roles in KT. In the UK, promoting and strengthening translational research has been a key priority for the Medical Research Council, which describes translational research as ‘the process of the bidirectional transfer of knowledge between basic work (in the laboratory and elsewhere) with that of the person, in health or disease’ ( MRC, 2007 , p. 3). Research partnerships such as those between researchers and health care organizations have also been recognized as one of the key strategies for KT by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality in the United States. Like the UK and US, over recent years the national funders of health research in Australia (National Health and Medical Research Council) and in New Zealand (Health Research Council) have emphasized knowledge translation through funding and support of research that addresses knowledge gaps and through promoting partnerships between research organizations, government agencies, individual researchers and consumer groups to assist in building research capacity and to enhance the translation of research into policy and practice ( NHMRC, 2000 ; HRC, 2007 ; MRC, 2007 ).

In Canada, KT has gained considerable momentum since the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Canada’s national medical and health research funding agency, brought it to the forefront of its national research agenda in 2000. Motivated by the observation that despite large monetary investments by funding agencies such as CIHR into research, research findings were not being implemented into clinical practice, and patients were as a result not receiving the best possible care, Canada’s national health research funding agency set out a strategic knowledge translation plan ( Graham et al. , 2006 ). The Canadian Institutes of Health Research defines KT as:

a dynamic and iterative process that includes synthesis, dissemination, exchange and ethically sound application of knowledge to improve the health of Canadians, provide more effective health services and products and strengthen the health care system. This process takes place within a complex system of interactions between researchers and knowledge users which may vary in intensity, complexity and level of engagement depending on the nature of the research and the findings as well as the needs of the particular knowledge user. (cited in Graham & Tetroe, 2009 , p. 46)

Thus, knowledge translation is generally understood as consisting of two concepts, knowledge creation and action ( Graham et al. , 2006 ), and all the phases encompassed by and between these two concepts.

Notably, evidence within the knowledge translation movement is expanded beyond what is typified by views of evidence within evidence-based practice discourses. Knowledge translation discourses operate in similar fields as those of evidence-based practice (EBP) and evidence-based medicine (EBM); however, conflation of the two movements should be resisted. The knowledge translation movement is more recent and perhaps so because despite decades of EBM the gap between knowledge and action persisted ( Graham et al. , 2006 ). Emerging in the 1980s, EBM (which served as the basis for other evidence-based movements) attempted to offer a new approach to clinical problem solving for medical practitioners that involved the preparation, maintenance, and dissemination of systematic reviews in all fields of health care ( French, 2002 ; Orsini, 2007 ). Sackett et al. ’s (1996) definition of evidence-based medicine has served as template for the majority of subsequent EBP definitions: ‘Evidence-based medicine is the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients’ (p. 71). The adoption of EBM as a guiding principle inevitably privileged disciplines that could produce ‘hard’ or concrete facts derived from accepted (or taken-for granted) positivist assumptions about the nature of knowledge ( Orsini, 2007 ).

With the broadened understanding of evidence beyond what typifies EBP, the knowledge translation movement has been described as a ‘cultural shift in professional practice’ ( Rycroft-Malone, 2005 , p. 170) with some commentators (e.g. Hedges, 2007 ) drawing on the Kuhnian notion of a paradigm shift to communicate the extent of this cultural shift. In our reading of the KT literature, some of the most noteworthy cultural shifts represented by the movement include:

• a shift to acknowledge the complexity of knowledge translation as other than a linear rational process;
• a shift in how evidence is viewed, from preference for context-stripped evidence to the integration of context-sensitive knowledge; with a recognition of the diverse ways of generating knowledge that counts as legitimate evidence;
• an acknowledgement of the contributions of non-instrumental uses of knowledge;
• a shift from silos of practice and research to university – community/clinical partnerships and exchange;
• a shift in the responsibilities of the researcher, from detached scientist to involved collaborator, negotiator and communicator of knowledge; and
• knowledge translation as occurring at many levels, aimed not only at health care practitioners but actively involving policy and decision-makers.

The KT paradigm shift as summarized by Dickinson (2004) is that of viewing knowledge as a product to knowledge as a process. How knowledge is viewed carries significant implications for how translation is envisioned and ultimately evaluated. An emphasis, for example, on evaluating the ‘success’ of KT on the basis of behavioural and practice changes (i.e. ‘did people change their behaviours?’) could be understood as reminiscent of the knowledge as instrumental stance, rather than knowledge as processual, and also reflective of the ongoing tension between practice and academic discourses.

Knowledge translation and critical inquiry: compatibilities and dilemmas

With these substantive shifts represented by the knowledge translation movement, there was considerable appeal to us, as a group of researchers drawing on critical perspectives, to engage with the leading edges of knowledge translation. We anticipated that these conceptions of the nature of evidence, the acknowledgement of context-sensitive knowledge, and multi-level engagement with practitioners, decision-makers, and organizations would lend themselves to the uptake of critical knowledge. The pilot project prompted us to contemplate how to best conceptualize and implement KT in order to realize the benefits a postcolonial feminist framing offers; those of giving voice to subjugated knowledges, promoting reflexivity, linking agency and structure, and challenging racializing discourses and practices. The focus of this last section is to examine in more detail the implications of bringing together knowledge translation and critical inquiry. While compatibilities exist between the two traditions, certain dilemmas arise when bringing them together. We conclude by proposing features of knowledge translation generated by critical inquiry that in its very processes of implementation also reflects tenets of critical inquiry.

Critiques of KT through a critical lens

Examining KT through the lens of critical inquiry further elucidates certain limitations already identified in the literature. Concerns of a fundamental ontological nature have been raised in regards to how KT and EBP movements translate theory into practice. Doane and Varcoe (2008) draw attention to how singular emphases on knowledge apart from the knower overlook the interrelationship of meaning, interpretation, subjectivity, and context. Drawing on Ricoeur’s insights, they contend that understanding, including interpretation and translation, are not simply modes of knowing, but are ways of being and ways of relating; action is fundamentally ontological. With such an understanding, the focus shifts to a ‘ way-of-being in which the interconnection of theory, evidence and practice is lived’ ( Doane & Varcoe, 2008 , p. 289).

The assumption that knowledge can be packaged and translated as a neutral, discrete entity is increasingly being cited as a problematic underpinning of the knowledge-to-action movements ( Lambert, 2006 ; Reimer-Kirkham et al. , 2007 ; Kitson, 2008 ). Poole (2008) points to the oversight of extant KT literature that infers researcher as ‘expert’ translating knowledge without accounting for the complicated relations of power shaping any exchange. A parallel concern regarding the acontextual tendencies of KT has to do with how complexities of clinical practice (the messiness of the everyday) are typically not considered ( Reimer-Kirkham et al. , 2007 ; Doane & Varcoe, 2008 ). Similarly, Genuis and Genuis (2006) critique reductionist views of health and illness in KT literature and practices that tend to overlook the social conditions that determine health. From a postcolonial feminist perspective, these concerns extend to name narrow interpretations of evidence that marginalize certain types of knowledge. By relying primarily on knowledge generated through randomized controlled trials that typically do not involve non-English speaking patients, do not account for the social context of people’s lives, and historically have not included representation from women, incomplete non-representative knowledge is applied ( Reimer-Kirkham et al. , 2007 ). The convincing body of evidence concerning the social determinants of health is difficult to translate into health service delivery through KT approaches ( Kemm, 2006 ; Reimer-Kirkham et al. , 2007 ).

Related concerns have addressed the specific methods of knowledge translation, noting, among other concerns, a bias toward individualistic interventions (as opposed to organizational or system-oriented interventions) ( Lambert, 2006 ; Poole, 2008 ). The emerging nature of KT as a ‘new’ field is facing continual pull back toward entrenched views regarding evidence and established methods of EBP. In our situation, relying on ‘credible messenger’, ‘action plans’, and ‘just in time teaching’ ( Lavis et al. , 2003 ) as KT strategies proved problematic at the level of basic paradigmatic disagreement ( Anderson et al. , 2008 ). This prompted our investigative team to reflect carefully on the assumptions that we brought in relation to the need for particular KT strategies at the outset of this study.

These critiques of KT, amplified through a critical lens, suggest areas for future development. Lambert (2006) recommends the future trajectories of KT as responding to structural influences and contextual dimensions. Remembering our earlier observation of the ‘paradigm shift’ represented by KT, we are cautious to not discount the possibilities of KT for the translation of critical knowledges, despite these critiques. The challenge, we suggest, is to be aware of the continual pull toward using KT methods more akin to traditional EBP and reminiscent of the positivist paradigm by their instrumental views of knowledge and assumptions of objectivity and political neutrality. By bringing KT and critical inquiry (CI) together, we have also come to appreciate anew the need for ongoing reflexivity about how we work within the critical paradigm.

KT dilemmas related to the nature of critical inquiry

Bringing KT and CI together raises another set of dilemmas stemming from the nature of CI itself, what Fenwick (2004) characterizes as the challenge of moving from a theory of CI to the practice of CI. The very strengths of CI (critique and the critical questioning of taken-for-granted assumptions and identifying how the operations of power through social structures shape the everyday, along with postcolonial feminism’s commitment to foreground marginalized voices) can also be the source of considerable angst among researchers, and between researchers and other stakeholders (e.g. participants, clinical and administrative partners) when critical researchers attempt to move beyond the walls of the academy. These dilemmas have to do with the role (and method) of critique and the adequacy of certain critical conceptualizations ( Fenwick, 2004 ).

Anyone relying on CI in the enterprise of KT is inevitably faced with questions regarding the role of critique. Critique is a hallmark of scholarship within the critical paradigm, and is not synonymous with criticism. By critique we mean examining the conditions and assumptions upon which something exists (in our case, health, social justice and health inequities, and health care services) and, following deconstruction, envisioning a renewed or reconstructed way. The method of critique is also reflexive, marked by tentativeness or openness, given that critique, as knowledge, is always partial and put forth from a particular social location ( Heyting & Winch, 2004 ). The call for knowledge translation as engagement between researchers and practice, a call that aligns with postcolonial feminist values of giving voice, reciprocity, and partnerships within research relations, can paradoxically result in a bind for the researcher between the purposes of critique and partnership. Indeed, Fenwick (2004) notes that some critical theorists argue that emancipatory practice ‘within capitalist institutions is completely untenable and that what emerges would always be a domesticated shadow of critical struggles against oppression, exploitation and inequity’ (p. 200). From such a position, some critical academics disengage, resorting to a type of intellectual elitism, rather than risking dilution of critical messages. However, in order to accomplish KT, an antagonistic or confrontational stance on the part of the researcher is equally untenable. Is it possible to ‘stay true’ to the tenets of CI and communicate the knowledges derived from CI while at the same time seeking engagement? Mendez (2008) writing from the perspective of an ‘activist scholar’ suggests a ‘strategic duality’ in which the researcher uses her position within the academy to contribute to social justice struggles by working to place alternate voices and ways of knowing at the centre (p. 138). Mendez names several resources from feminist thought for the balancing of this strategic positioning, including a process-oriented view of social change and transformation, a reconceptualization of power as multidimensional and intersectional, and an ongoing feminist critique of conventional academic epistemologies.

Employing a more reflexive stance regarding academic epistemologies, one might question the adequacy of some critical conceptualizations ( Fenwick, 2004 ). To what extent do they construct certain groups within health care organizations as wielding power, as though unified, over other groups, also fixed, who suffer under domination and oppression? It would not be accurate to portray health care decision-makers and managers as a homogeneous block of ‘oppressors’, given the intersectional, sometimes ambiguous, variations produced by gender, race, class, and other systems of social classification. Similarly, Nelson (1997) has pointed out that while nursing often is positioned as ‘oppressed’, doing so oversimplifies nursing and overlooks the complexities of advantage and disadvantage within nursing. Positioning health care providers as oppressors and patients from racialized backgrounds as oppressed also suggests oversimplifying complex social relations and processes ( Tang & Browne, 2008 ). Likewise, when taking critique to a broader social level, for example, analysing the role of neoliberal ideology in perpetuating social injustices and health inequities, we must find ways to account for shifting and contradictory discourses that remain incomplete, at least to some extent. For example, in the Canadian context, calls for equity compete continuously with more oppressive rhetoric, as noted in Henry and Tator’s (2006) observation of Canada’s democratic racism. Moreover, reflexivity is required on the part of the critical researcher to avoid taking on a self-selected role of zealot. Researchers cannot offer critique from neutral stances that position them as somehow apart from the everyday workings of power. The act of using critique to name that which needs to be ‘transformed’ is itself an expression of power/privilege. In the companion paper ( Browne et al. , 2009 ), we attempt to reflect critically on the KT process and, in particular, on the assumptions we have brought to it.

Our experience in this pilot project has been that bringing together CI with KT (as with other domains of practice) is not easy. There are profound, though not incommensurable or insurmountable, differences between the knowledge translation and critical paradigms. We concur therefore with Fenwick’s (2004) observation that ‘without further theorizing of fundamental contradictions [of critical studies and practice] and their political play in work-place organizations, little may be gained except perhaps further disillusionment and duplicity’ (p. 200). Likewise, we echo the call for enriched theories of knowledge translation ( Rycroft-Malone, 2005 ; Estabrooks et al. , 2006 ). Toward these ends of contributing to the theorizing of both critical theory and knowledge translation, our efforts in this paper have been to articulate the compatibilities between various critical perspectives, and to subsequently examine how these might be taken forward in a knowledge translation project aimed at promoting cultural safety in practice.

Concluding comments: toward a critical conception and implementation of knowledge translation

This paper has presented both opportunities and challenges that arise when KT and CI are brought together. The tensions we experienced during this project have been productive in prompting us to examine the underpinning assumptions of the two movements, and have thereby opened the door to consider how to move toward more critical conceptions of knowledge translation while also thinking through the implications of integrating critical perspectives into health care services. In the spirit of CI, with the acknowledgement of the partial nature of knowledge, we offer our insights here as a beginning conversation. We are left with questions as to whether these various perspectives (both within CI and between KT and CI) can be integrated given the epistemological and ontological differences among them.

Critical inquiry’s essential features of critique, reflexivity, and action (or, deconstruction and reconstruction) are marked by tentativeness, openness, and focus on process, and therefore do not fit easily with the KT methods of ‘packaging’ knowledge for practice. Researchers within the critical paradigm engaging in KT may experience pressure to be concrete and specific, while the knowledge derived from critical inquiry typically calls for broad based changes. This disjuncture is exemplified by postcolonial feminism’s injunction to disrupt histories of race-based discourses and practices, an ‘end’ that may be accomplished to some extent by KT efforts, but that ultimately represents a social problem not amenable to ‘easy fixes’ and that will extend into the foreseeable future. The CI focus thus is one of process as much as outcome. A related tension to be worked out when bringing CI and KT together stems from how CI seeks to balance agency and structure. While KT activities can (and ought to) be targeted at level of individual nurses, organizational and structural contexts must be brought into view. The challenge is that of considering both limits and possibilities for individual and collective agency without invoking the paralysis of privileging structural constraints, nor falling into the short-sightedness of overlooking structural constraints.

Our exploration of the genealogy of critical inquiry has highlighted distinctions and commonalities between various critical approaches. Some uncertainties remain for us regarding theoretical pluralism and how to reconcile some of the fundamental differences between critical perspectives when bringing them together in a KT effort aimed at promoting cultural safety, equity, and social justice. While embracing the shared concern for social justice and equity held by various critical perspectives, we raise some caution regarding the possibility of pushing race analyses to the margins when the European voice, represented by many critical perspectives, continues to be privileged. In such cases, theoretical pluralism can result in incomplete analyses; intersectional analyses of how health inequities and social injustice result from simultaneous oppressions are needed.

We continue to engage with questions such as: How might critical conceptions of knowledge translation facilitate the uptake of social justice, equity, and cultural safety? How does the context of health care shape the uptake of critical discourses? At a practical level, what knowledge translation strategies facilitate the uptake of critical knowledges? And how do we, as researchers and practitioners, enact our power and resistances keeping the goals of social justice and equity in view? In the companion paper ( Browne et al. , 2009 ), we further develop our analyses of some aspects of these questions.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for providing funding for the pilot study, ‘Cultural safety and knowledge uptake in clinical settings: A model for practice for culturally diverse populations’, upon which this manuscript is based (KTS-73431).

Joan M. Anderson, The Nominated Principal Investigator, and the three co-Principal Investigators, Annette J. Browne, Sheryl Reimer-Kirkham, and Judith Lynam were engaged in the initial conceptualization of the research proposal for funding, oversight and engagement throughout the project, ongoing critical analysis of the data, analysis and interpretation of the data following the completion of the study, the initial conceptualization of this paper, as well as ongoing critical engagement and written feedback on the other papers based on this study during their production and preparation for submission.

We thank Sabrina Wong, Patricia Rodney, Elsie Tan, Jennifer Baumbusch, and Sannie Y. Tang for their various contributions to the completion of this paper. We are also grateful to the Vancouver Coastal Health (VCH) and in particular to Pat Semeniuk (Regional Director, Learning and Career Development) for facilitating this research project. We are indebted to our research partners in VCH and the health care professionals who engaged with us, both administrators and point-of-care nurses. We are also grateful to the patients who allowed us into their lives at times when they might have been made vulnerable by illness.

• Anderson JM. Toward a post-colonial feminist methodology in nursing research: exploring the convergence of post-colonial and black feminist scholarship. Nurse Researcher. 2002; 9 (3):7–27. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson JM, Blue C, Lau A. Women’s perspectives on chronic illness: ethnicity, ideology, and restructuring of life. Social Science & Medicine. 1991; 33 (2):101–113. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson JM, Reimer-Kirkham S, Browne AJ, Lynam MJ. Continuing the dialogue: postcolonial feminist scholarship and Bourdieu – discourses of culture and points of connection. Nursing Inquiry. 2007; 14 (3):178–188. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson JM, Browne AJ, Lynam JM, et al. Executive summary. [accessed 5 April 2009]; Cultural safety and knowledge uptake in clinical settings: a model for practice for culturally diverse populations. 2008 Available at: http://cghru.nursing.ubc/reports.htm .
• Barker C. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. Sage; London: 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhabha HK. The Location of Culture. Routledge; London: 1994. [ Google Scholar ]
• Browne AJ. Discourses influencing nurses’ perceptions of First Nations patients. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research. 2005; 37 (4):62–87. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Browne AJ. Clinical encounters between nurses and First Nations women in a Western Canadian hospital. Social Science & Medicine. 2007; 64 (10):2165–2176. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Browne AJ, Tarlier D. Examining the potential of nurse practitioners from a critical social justice perspective. Nursing Inquiry. 2008; 15 (2):83–93. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Browne AJ, Smye V, Varcoe C. The relevance of postcolonial theoretical perspectives to research in Aboriginal health. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research. 2005; 37 (4):16–37. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Browne AJ, Varcoe C, Smye V, et al. Cultural safety and the challenges of translating critically-oriented knowledge in practice. Nursing Philosophy. 2009; 10 (3):167–179. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Collins PH. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness and the Politics of Empowerment. Unwin Hyman; Boston, MA: 1990. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooper F. Colonialism in Question: Theory, Knowledge, History. University of California Press; Berkeley, CA: 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dickinson H. A sociological perspective on the transfer and utilization of social scientific knowledge for policy-making. In: Lemieux-Charles L, Champagne F, editors. Using Knowledge and Evidence in Health Care: Multi-disciplinary Perspectives. University of Toronto Press; Toronto, ON: 2004. pp. 41–69. [ Google Scholar ]
• Doane G, Varcoe C. Knowledge translation in everyday nursing: from evidence-based to inquiry-based practice. Advances in Nursing Science. 2008; 31 (4):283–295. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Estabrooks D, Thompson D, Lovely J, Hofmeyer A. A guide for knowledge translation theory. The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions. 2006; 26 :25–36. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fenwick T. Toward a critical HRD in theory and practice. Adult Education Quarterly. 2004; 54 (3):193–209. [ Google Scholar ]
• French P. What is the evidence on evidence-based nursing? An epistemological concern. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2002; 37 (3):250–257. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Genuis S, Genuis S. Exploring the continuum: medical information to effective clinical practice. Paper I: the translation of knowledge into clinical practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2006; 12 (1):49–62. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graham ID, Tetroe JM. Getting evidence into policy and practice: perspective of a health research funder. Journal of Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2009; 18 (1):46–50. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, et al. Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions. 2006; 26 (1):13–24. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guba E, Lincoln Y. Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In: Denzin N, Lincoln Y, editors. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 3. Sage; Thousand Oaks, CA: 2005. pp. 191–218. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harding S. ‘Strong objectivity’ and socially situated knowledge. In: Harding S, editor. Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Cornell University; New York: 1991. pp. 138–163. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hedges JR. The knowledge translation paradigm: historical, philosophical, and practice perspectives. American Emergency Medicine. 2007; 14 (11):924–927. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Henry F, Tator C. The Colour of Democracy: Racism in Canadian Society. 3. Thomson Nelson; Toronto, ON: 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
• Heyting F, Winch C. The role of critique in philosophy of education: its subject matter and ambiguities. Journal of Philosophy of Education. 2004; 38 (3):311–321. [ Google Scholar ]
• HRC. [accessed 15 August 2008]; DHBRF Workshop: Innovation for Health – Sharing Knowledge and Building Relationships. 2007 Available at: http://www.hrc.govt.nz/root/News/Conferences%20and%20Events/DHBRF_Workshop:_Sharing_Innovation_2007.html .
• Kellner D. Western Marxism. In: Harrington A, editor. Modern Social Theory: An Introduction. Oxford University Press; Oxford: 2005. [accessed 5 April 2009]. pp. 154–174. Available at: http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/westernmarxismfinal.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Kemm J. The limitations of ‘evidence-based’ public health. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2006; 2 (3):319–324. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kincheloe JL, McLaren P. Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage; Thousand Oaks, CA: 2000. pp. 279–313. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kitson A. The uncertainty and incongruity of evidence-based healthcare. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare. 2008; 6 (1):1–2. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Labonte R, Polanyi M, Muhajarine N, Mcintosh T, Williams A. Beyond the divides: towards critical population health research. Critical Public Health. 2005; 15 (1):5–17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lambert H. Accounting for EBM: notions of evidence in medicine. Social Science & Medicine. 2006; 62 :2633–2645. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lavis JN, Robertson D, Woodside JM, Mcleod CB, Abelson J the Knowledge Transfer Study Group. How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? Milbank Quarterly. 2003; 81 (2):221–248. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lewis R, Mills S, editors. Feminist Postcolonial Theory. Routledge; New York: 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lynam MJ, Browne AJ, Reimer-Kirkham S, Anderson JM. Re-thinking the complexities of ‘culture’: what might we learn from Bourdieu? Nursing Inquiry. 2007; 14 (1):23–34. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Marmot M. Introduction. In: Marmot M, Wilkinson RG, editors. Social Determinants of Health. 2. Oxford University Press; New York: 2006. pp. 1–5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mendez JB. Globalizing activist scholar: opportunities and dilemmas through a feminist lens. In: Hale C, editor. Engaging Contradictions: Theory, Politics, and Methods of Activist Scholarship. University of California Press; Berkeley, CA: 2008. pp. 136–163. [ Google Scholar ]
• MRC. MRC Workshop: Accelerating the Translation of Medical Research; February 20–21, 2007; Chesham Bucks, UK: Medical Research Council; 2007. [accessed 28 October 2008]. Available at: http://www.mrc.ac.uk/Utilities/Documentrecord/index.htm?d=MRC003642 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Nelson S. Reading nursing history. Nursing Inquiry. 1997; 4 :229–236. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• NHMRC. Health and Medical Research Strategic Review Implementation of the Government’s Response, Final Report. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Orsini M. Discourses in distress: from ‘health promotion’ to ‘population health’ to ‘you are responsible for your own health’ In: Orsini M, Smith M, editors. Critical Policy Studies. UBC Press; Vancouver, BC: 2007. pp. 347–364. [ Google Scholar ]
• Parry B. The institutionalization of postcolonial studies. In: Lazarus N, editor. The Cambridge Companion to Postcolonial Literary Studies. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2004. pp. 66–80. [ Google Scholar ]
• Poole N. Using consciousness-raising principles to inform modern knowledge translation practices in women’s health. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research. 2008; 40 (2):76–93. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reimer-Kirkham S. The politics of belonging in intercultural health care provision. Western Journal of Nursing Research. 2003; 25 (7):762–780. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reimer-Kirkham S, Anderson JM. Postcolonial nursing scholarship: from epistemology to method. Advances in Nursing Science. 2002; 25 (1):1–17. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reimer-Kirkham S, Browne AJ. Toward a critical theoretical interpretation of social justice discourses in nursing. Advances in Nursing Science. 2006; 29 (4):324–339. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reimer-Kirkham S, Smye V, Tang S, et al. Rethinking cultural safety while waiting to do fieldwork: methodological implications for nursing research. Research in Nursing and Health. 2002; 25 (3):222–232. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reimer-Kirkham S, Baumbusch J, Schultz ASH, Anderson JM. Knowledge development and evidence-based practice. Insights and opportunities from a postcolonial feminist perspective for transformative nursing practice. Advances in Nursing Science. 2007; 30 (1):26–40. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ricoeur P. From Text to Action. Essays in Hermeneutics, II. Northwestern University Press; Evanston, IL: 1991. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rycroft-Malone J. Editorial: the politics of evidence-based practice. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing. 2005; 2 (4):169–171. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sackett D, Rosenberg W, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence-based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996; 312 :71–72. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Said EW. Orientalism. Vintage Books; New York: 1978. [ Google Scholar ]
• Spivak GC. Can the subaltern speak? In: Nelson C, Grossberg L, editors. Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Macmillan Education; Basingstoke: 1988. pp. 271–313. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tang S, Browne AJ. ‘Race’ matters: racialization and egalitarian discourses involving Aboriginal people in the Canadian health care context. Ethnicity & Health. 2008; 13 (2):1–19. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tetroe JM, Graham ID, Foy R, et al. Health research funding agencies’ support and promotion of knowledge translation: an international study. The Milbank Quarterly. 2008; 86 (1):125–155. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Varcoe C. Abuse obscured: an ethnographic account of emergency nursing in relation to violence against women. The Canadian Journal of Nursing Research. 2001; 32 (4):95–115. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Varcoe C. Inequality, violence and women’s health. In: Bolaria BS, Dickinson H, editors. Health, Illness and Health Care in Canada. 4. Nelson; Toronto, ON: 2009. pp. 259–282. [ Google Scholar ]
• Varcoe C, Rodney P. Toward ethical inquiry in the economic evaluation of nursing practice. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research. 2001; 33 (1):35–57. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yuval-Davies N. Intersectionality and feminist politics. European Journal of Women’s Studies. 2006; 13 (3):193–209. [ Google Scholar ]

• LOGIN & Help

What Is Critical Qualitative Inquiry?

• Media and Cinema Studies

Research output : Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Critical qualitative inquiry (CQI) serves as an instrument to reveal power and generate previously unthought possibilities for social change. CQI methodologies interrogate and disrupt taken-for-granted assumptions that reify oppressive structures, hegemonic power dynamics, and dominating discourses. Indigenous, critical race, critical feminist scholars, among others, in particular, have emphasized the ways in which power reproduces privilege, power, and oppression on systemic, institutional, and individual levels. The work of feminist scholars of color has especially interrogated the intersection and perpetuation of isms, including that of Arab American feminists, Asian American feminists, Black feminist scholars, Chicana feminists, and Native American feminists, to name a few. The themes and critical insights that emerged from constant comparison and reflexive journaling were then analyzed through the generation of a social spheres/power arenas map, which illustrated and served as a means to complicate the intersection of ‘social spheres’ and ‘power arenas’.

ASJC Scopus subject areas

• General Psychology

Online availability

• 10.4324/9781315431178-7

Library availability

Related links.

• Link to publication in Scopus
• Link to the citations in Scopus

Fingerprint

• Feminist Keyphrases 100%
• Critical Qualitative Inquiry Keyphrases 100%
• Feminist Scholar Arts and Humanities 100%
• Native American Studies Social Sciences 100%
• Perpetuation Social Sciences 100%
• Asian Americans Psychology 100%
• Native Americans Psychology 100%
• Social Sphere Keyphrases 50%

T1 - What Is Critical Qualitative Inquiry?

AU - Denzin, Norman K.

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2015 Taylor & Francis.

PY - 2015/3/31

Y1 - 2015/3/31

N2 - Critical qualitative inquiry (CQI) serves as an instrument to reveal power and generate previously unthought possibilities for social change. CQI methodologies interrogate and disrupt taken-for-granted assumptions that reify oppressive structures, hegemonic power dynamics, and dominating discourses. Indigenous, critical race, critical feminist scholars, among others, in particular, have emphasized the ways in which power reproduces privilege, power, and oppression on systemic, institutional, and individual levels. The work of feminist scholars of color has especially interrogated the intersection and perpetuation of isms, including that of Arab American feminists, Asian American feminists, Black feminist scholars, Chicana feminists, and Native American feminists, to name a few. The themes and critical insights that emerged from constant comparison and reflexive journaling were then analyzed through the generation of a social spheres/power arenas map, which illustrated and served as a means to complicate the intersection of ‘social spheres’ and ‘power arenas’.

AB - Critical qualitative inquiry (CQI) serves as an instrument to reveal power and generate previously unthought possibilities for social change. CQI methodologies interrogate and disrupt taken-for-granted assumptions that reify oppressive structures, hegemonic power dynamics, and dominating discourses. Indigenous, critical race, critical feminist scholars, among others, in particular, have emphasized the ways in which power reproduces privilege, power, and oppression on systemic, institutional, and individual levels. The work of feminist scholars of color has especially interrogated the intersection and perpetuation of isms, including that of Arab American feminists, Asian American feminists, Black feminist scholars, Chicana feminists, and Native American feminists, to name a few. The themes and critical insights that emerged from constant comparison and reflexive journaling were then analyzed through the generation of a social spheres/power arenas map, which illustrated and served as a means to complicate the intersection of ‘social spheres’ and ‘power arenas’.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84983782153&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84983782153&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4324/9781315431178-7

DO - 10.4324/9781315431178-7

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84983782153

SN - 9781629580111

SN - 9781629580128

BT - Critical Qualitative Inquiry

A2 - Cannella, Gaile S

A2 - Salazar Pérez, Michelle

A2 - Pasque, Penny A

PB - Routledge

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Working with sources
• What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

Published on May 30, 2022 by Eoghan Ryan . Revised on May 31, 2023.

Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment .

To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources .

Critical thinking skills help you to:

• Identify credible sources
• Evaluate and respond to arguments
• Assess alternative viewpoints
• Test hypotheses against relevant criteria

Table of contents

Why is critical thinking important, critical thinking examples, how to think critically, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about critical thinking.

Critical thinking is important for making judgments about sources of information and forming your own arguments. It emphasizes a rational, objective, and self-aware approach that can help you to identify credible sources and strengthen your conclusions.

Critical thinking is important in all disciplines and throughout all stages of the research process . The types of evidence used in the sciences and in the humanities may differ, but critical thinking skills are relevant to both.

In academic writing , critical thinking can help you to determine whether a source:

• Is free from research bias
• Provides evidence to support its research findings
• Considers alternative viewpoints

Outside of academia, critical thinking goes hand in hand with information literacy to help you form opinions rationally and engage independently and critically with popular media.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

Critical thinking can help you to identify reliable sources of information that you can cite in your research paper . It can also guide your own research methods and inform your own arguments.

Outside of academia, critical thinking can help you to be aware of both your own and others’ biases and assumptions.

Academic examples

However, when you compare the findings of the study with other current research, you determine that the results seem improbable. You analyze the paper again, consulting the sources it cites.

You notice that the research was funded by the pharmaceutical company that created the treatment. Because of this, you view its results skeptically and determine that more independent research is necessary to confirm or refute them. Example: Poor critical thinking in an academic context You’re researching a paper on the impact wireless technology has had on developing countries that previously did not have large-scale communications infrastructure. You read an article that seems to confirm your hypothesis: the impact is mainly positive. Rather than evaluating the research methodology, you accept the findings uncritically.

Nonacademic examples

However, you decide to compare this review article with consumer reviews on a different site. You find that these reviews are not as positive. Some customers have had problems installing the alarm, and some have noted that it activates for no apparent reason.

You revisit the original review article. You notice that the words “sponsored content” appear in small print under the article title. Based on this, you conclude that the review is advertising and is therefore not an unbiased source. Example: Poor critical thinking in a nonacademic context You support a candidate in an upcoming election. You visit an online news site affiliated with their political party and read an article that criticizes their opponent. The article claims that the opponent is inexperienced in politics. You accept this without evidence, because it fits your preconceptions about the opponent.

There is no single way to think critically. How you engage with information will depend on the type of source you’re using and the information you need.

However, you can engage with sources in a systematic and critical way by asking certain questions when you encounter information. Like the CRAAP test , these questions focus on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

When encountering information, ask:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert in their field?
• What do they say? Is their argument clear? Can you summarize it?
• When did they say this? Is the source current?
• Where is the information published? Is it an academic article? Is it peer-reviewed ?
• Why did the author publish it? What is their motivation?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence? Does it rely on opinion, speculation, or appeals to emotion ? Do they address alternative arguments?

Critical thinking also involves being aware of your own biases, not only those of others. When you make an argument or draw your own conclusions, you can ask similar questions about your own writing:

• Am I only considering evidence that supports my preconceptions?
• Is my argument expressed clearly and backed up with credible sources?
• Would I be convinced by this argument coming from someone else?

If you want to know more about ChatGPT, AI tools , citation , and plagiarism , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• ChatGPT vs human editor
• ChatGPT citations
• Is ChatGPT trustworthy?
• Using ChatGPT for your studies
• What is ChatGPT?
• Chicago style
• Paraphrasing

 Plagiarism

• Types of plagiarism
• Self-plagiarism
• Avoiding plagiarism
• Academic integrity
• Consequences of plagiarism
• Common knowledge

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

You can assess information and arguments critically by asking certain questions about the source. You can use the CRAAP test , focusing on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

Ask questions such as:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence?

A credible source should pass the CRAAP test  and follow these guidelines:

• The information should be up to date and current.
• The author and publication should be a trusted authority on the subject you are researching.
• The sources the author cited should be easy to find, clear, and unbiased.
• For a web source, the URL and layout should signify that it is trustworthy.

Information literacy refers to a broad range of skills, including the ability to find, evaluate, and use sources of information effectively.

Being information literate means that you:

• Know how to find credible sources
• Use relevant sources to inform your research
• Understand what constitutes plagiarism
• Know how to cite your sources correctly

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search, interpret, and recall information in a way that aligns with our pre-existing values, opinions, or beliefs. It refers to the ability to recollect information best when it amplifies what we already believe. Relatedly, we tend to forget information that contradicts our opinions.

Although selective recall is a component of confirmation bias, it should not be confused with recall bias.

On the other hand, recall bias refers to the differences in the ability between study participants to recall past events when self-reporting is used. This difference in accuracy or completeness of recollection is not related to beliefs or opinions. Rather, recall bias relates to other factors, such as the length of the recall period, age, and the characteristics of the disease under investigation.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Ryan, E. (2023, May 31). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 4, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/critical-thinking/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, student guide: information literacy | meaning & examples, what are credible sources & how to spot them | examples, applying the craap test & evaluating sources, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Assessing Scientific Inquiry: A Systematic Literature Review of Tasks, Tools and Techniques

• Theoretical Studies
• Open access
• Published: 04 September 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• De Van Vo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8515-0221 1 &
• Geraldine Mooney Simmie   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5026-4261 1  

While national curricula in science education highlight the importance of inquiry-based learning, assessing students’ capabilities in scientific inquiry remains a subject of debate. Our study explored the construction, developmental trends and validation techniques in relation to assessing scientific inquiry using a systematic literature review from 2000 to 2024. We used PRISMA guidelines in combination with bibliometric and Epistemic Network Analyses. Sixty-three studies were selected, across all education sectors and with a majority of studies in secondary education. Results showed that assessing scientific inquiry has been considered around the world, with a growing number (37.0%) involving global researcher networks focusing on novel modelling approaches and simulation performance in digital-based environments. Although there was modest variation between the frameworks, studies were mainly concerned with cognitive processes and psychological characteristics and were reified from wider ethical, affective, intersectional and socio-cultural considerations. Four core categories (formulating questions/hypotheses, designing experiments, analysing data, and drawing conclusions) were most often used with nine specific components (formulate questions formulate prediction/hypotheses, set experiment, vary independent variable, measure dependent variable, control confounding variables, describe data, interpret data, reach reasonable conclusion). There was evidence of transitioning from traditional to online modes, facilitated by interactive simulations, but the independent tests and performance assessments, in both multiple-choice and open-ended formats remained the most frequently used approach with a greater emphasis on context than heretofore. The findings will be especially useful for science teachers, researchers and policy decision makers with an active interest in assessing capabilities in scientific inquiry.

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

In contemporary times as more information and knowledge are created in a shorter timeline, the need for scientific literacy and inquiry-based capabilities beyond nature of science is increasing, especially in relation to the pressing needs of the wider world (Erduran, 2014 ). This is a growing concern, in relation to the future survival of humanity and sustainability of the planet for the reconceptualization of science education for epistemic justice and the foregrounding of intersectionality (Wallace et al., 2022 ). At the same time, policymakers and employers demand 21st century skills and inquiry-oriented approaches that include creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, communication and digital competencies (Binkley et al., 2012 ; Chu et al., 2017 ; Voogt & Roblin, 2012 ). Rather than teaching extensive content knowledge, there is a policy imperative to teach skills, dispositions, literacies and inquiry-oriented competencies. Mastery of capabilities, such as inquiry-oriented learning has therefore become a core outcome of national science education curricula globally (Baur et al., 2022 ).

Inquiry orientations are continuously emphasized in science education by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) operating in more than forty countries globally (OECD, 2015 , 2017 ) in the US (National Research Council [NRC], 2000 ), in Europe (European Commission and Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, 2015 ), and in nation states, such as in Ireland with the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA, 2015 ).

The policy imperative for inquiry-oriented activities in science classrooms prompts a growing interest in assessing students’ scientific inquiry capabilities. While scientific inquiry is a well-established research area in science education (Fukuda et al., 2022 ), assessing students’ scientific inquiry capabilities is a growing topic of research, innovation and consideration.

There is a growing demand for innovative assessments that aim to either enhance or replace traditional summative methods. These assessments should focus on creating customized, student-centered formative tasks, tools, and techniques that capture both the final products and the processes used to achieve them (Hattie & Timperley, 2007 ). Many researchers argue that traditional models, originally designed to measure content knowledge, are no longer adequate for assessing competencies. Griffin et al. ( 2012 ) argued that traditional methods lack the ability to measure the higher-order skills, dispositions, and knowledge requirements of collaborative learning. Instead, it is asserted that modes of formative assessment can provide teachers and students with diagnostic information in order to continually adapt instruction and to foster a pedagogical cycle of learning (Kruit et al., 2018 ; Voogt & Roblin, 2012 ).

In this study, we systematically examined the construction, developmental trends and validation tasks, tools and techniques used in assessing students’ scientific inquiry capabilities in educational settings. We combined a systematic literature review from 2000 to 2024, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines with Bibliometric (Diodato & Gellatly, 2013 ) and Epistemic Network Analyses (ENA) (Shaffer et al., 2016 ). Our aim was to illuminate current global trends, possibilities and challenges in relation to the assessment of scientific inquiry and to suggest potential spaces for future research. Our study was guided by the following three research questions:

RQ1: To what extent is research on assessment of scientific inquiry in educational contexts found in the international literature?

RQ2: What are the predominant components, tasks, tools, and techniques used to assess scientific inquiry?

RQ3: What are the trends and developments in the assessment of scientific inquiry?

We structured the paper as follows. First, we briefly interrogate current conceptualisations of inquiry-based learning and scientific inquiry as an important background to the study. Second, we justify our selected methodology, the use of a systematic literature review with bibliometric and ENA analyses. Third, we present the results from each research question in turn. Finally, we discuss the changing shape of this research domain and the implications for the future of science education.

Conceptualizations of Scientific Inquiry

Here we first explore the construct of inquiry-based learning in science education before considering something of the global policy imperatives underway in this regard.

Inquiry-based Approach in Science Education

In science education, two visions of scientific literacy are discussed: Vision I emphasizes scientific content and propositional knowledge, while Vision II focuses on engaging students with real-world applications of science knowledge (Roberts, 2007 ; Roberts & Bybee, 2014 ). Achieving the scientific literacy mentioned in Vision II literacy is a key challenge for 21st-century science education, shifting towards enabling individuals to apply scientific concepts in everyday life rather than solely producing ‘mini-scientists’ (Roberts & Bybee, 2014 ). Balancing these visions is crucial to meeting diverse student needs and enhancing understanding science-in-context in today’s highly scientific world (Roberts & Bybee, 2014 ). Scientific inquiry is considered fundamental to scientific literacy, encompassing practices and epistemology, with a growing focus on the meaning, application and contexts of real world inquiry (Schwartz et al., 2023 ).

An inquiry-orientation therefore provides a pedagogical approach in which students learn by actively using scientific methods to reason and generate explanations in relation to design, data and evidence (Anderson, 2002 ; Stender et al., 2018 ). Neumann et al. ( 2011 ) considered the Nature of Science and Scientific Inquiry as separate domains for inquiry-orientations including for analysing data, identifying and controlling variables, and forming logical cause-and‐effect relationships. Wenning ( 2007 ) proposed a detailed rubric for developing proficiency in scientific inquiry, that included identifying a problem to be investigated, doing background research, using induction, formulating a hypothesis, incorporating logic and evidence, using deduction, generating a prediction, designing experimental procedures to test the prediction, conducting a scientific experiment, observing or simulating a test or model, collecting data, organizing, and analysing data accurately and precisely, applying statistical methods to support conclusions and communicating results. Moreover, Turner et al. ( 2018 ) grouped sixteen of the activities into three components of inquiry for secondary school students in science and math classrooms, namely working with hypotheses (i.e., generation of hypotheses/predictions, designing procedures), communication in inquiry (i.e., interpreting outcomes, asking questions), hands-on inquiry (i.e., recording data, visualising data).

Pedaste et al. ( 2015 ) conceptualised an inquiry-based learning framework of four phases based on their review of thirty-two studies: orientation , conceptualization , investigation , and conclusion . The orientation phase stimulates interest and curiosity, involves background research and results in the writing of a problem statement or topic by the teacher and/or students. Conceptualization involves formulating theory-based questions as predictions or hypotheses. The investigation phase turns curiosity into action through exploration, experimentation, data gathering and interpretation. In the conclusion phase, learners address their original research questions and consider whether these questions are answered, supported or refuted.

The studies showed that the inquiry-orientation enhanced comprehension (Marshall et al., 2017 ), fostered an appreciation of the nature of scientific knowledge (Dogan et al., 2024 ), improved students’ achievement in both scientific practices and conceptual knowledge (Marshall et al., 2017 ). Inquiry-based approach was found to positively impact student engagement and motivation while the hands-on experimental skills made learning science more enjoyable (Ramnarain, 2014 ). Inquiry activities make learning visible and help to integrate scientific reasoning skills for the social construction of knowledge (Stender et al., 2018 ).

Global Policy Imperatives in Relation to Scientific Inquiry

The US National Science Education Standards presented by the National Research Council (NRC, 1996 ) defined inquiry is “a multifaceted activity that involves making observations; posing questions; examining books and other sources of information to see what is already known; planning investigations; reviewing what is already known in light of experimental evidence; using tools to gather, analyze, and interpret data; proposing answers, explanations, and predictions; and communicating the results” (p. 23). Scientific inquiry encompasses the various methods scientists use to investigate the natural world and formulate explanations grounded in evidence from their research. It also involves students’ activities where they gain knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and learn about the processes which scientists use to explore the natural world.

Later NRC standards (2000, 2006) elaborated such proficiency as identifying a scientific question, designing and conducting an investigation, using appropriate tools to collect and analyse data, and developing evidence-based explanations. The US framework for K-12 science education (NRC, 2012 ) focused on a few core ideas and concepts, integrating them with the practices needed for scientific inquiry and engineering design. The emphasis appeared to have shifted from “inquiry” to “scientific practices” as a basis of the framework (Rönnebeck et al., 2016 ). It listed eight components of scientific and engineering practices, including asking questions, developing and using models, planning and carrying out investigations, analyzing and interpreting data, using mathematics and computational thinking, constructing explanations, engaging in argument from evidence, obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information (NRC, 2012 ). The eight practices intentionally intersect and connect with others rather than stand-alone (NRC, 2012 ; Rönnebeck et al., 2016 ).

The Twenty First Century Science program (2006) in England emphasized a broad qualitative understanding of significant “whole explanations” and placed a strong focus on Ideas about Science . It also prioritized developing the understanding and skills needed to critically evaluate scientific information encountered in everyday life. This initiative focuses on a foundational course aimed at fostering scientific literacy among all students. It emphasized equipping students with the knowledge and skills needed to critically evaluate scientific information encountered in daily life​. This connects science to real-world contexts and applications, and the big ideas of science rather than isolated facts​ (Millar, 2006 ).

The 2015 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) specified a number of essential science inquiry competencies in three key areas: explaining phenomena scientifically, interpreting data and evidence scientifically, and evaluating and designing scientific inquiry (OECD, 2017 ). The explaining phenomena dimension involves students being able to identify, provide, and assess explanations for a variety of natural and technological phenomena. The interpreting dimension means that students can describe and evaluate scientific investigations and suggest methods for scientifically addressing questions. The designing dimension refers to students who can analyse and assess claims and arguments presented in various forms and draw accurate scientific conclusions (OECD, 2017 ).

In the 21st-century vision for science education in Europe, involving citizens as active participants in inquiry-oriented learning was essential (European Commission and Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, 2015 ). The scientific inquiry involves students identifying research problems and finding solutions that apply science to everyday life. Inquiry-based science education engages students in problem-based learning, hands-on experiments, self-regulated learning, and collaborative discussion, fostering a deep understanding of science and awareness of the practical applications of scientific concepts.

In summary, global policy imperatives focus on enhancing the cognitive processes and psychological characteristics of scientific inquiry and its application in real-world contexts. This approach consistently emphasizes inquiry as fundamental to teaching and learning science, although the focus has varied over time between Vision I and Vision II in relation to scientific literacy and science education.

Methodology

For the systematic literature review, we used the PRISMA methodology (Moher et al., 2009 ) in order to assemble an evidence base of relevant studies. This was further supported by Bibliometric analysis (Diodato & Gellatly, 2013 ) and ENA analysis (Shaffer et al., 2016 ). Bibliometric analysis is a quantitative method used to evaluate various aspects of academic publications within a specified field of study. It involves the application of mathematical and statistical tools to analyse patterns, and impact within a defined body of literature. It is a powerful tool for analysing the knowledge framework and structure in a specific research area (Diodato & Gellatly, 2013 ). Meanwhile, ENA is an analytical method to describe individual (group) framework patterns through quantitative analysis of data by examining the structure of the co-occurrence or connections in coded data (Shaffer et al., 2016 ). ENA can be used to compare units of analysis in terms of their plotted point positions, individual networks, mean plotted point positions, and mean networks, which average the connection weights across individual networks. This approach has been applied in several fields, including educational research (Ruis & Lee, 2021 ).

A comprehensive examination of extant literature was undertaken using the PRISMA-framework stages, with a specific focus on empirical research. The criterion for article selection was predicated on the utilization of a testing instrument for assessment of scientific inquiry. The inclusion criteria were threefold. Firstly, empirical studies that assessed the information retrieval abilities of students - qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods - were considered. Secondly, the selected studies were required to incorporate scientific inquiry assessment tasks for K-12 science education. Thirdly, the chosen articles were limited to those originally published in the English language and within a timeline from 2000 to 2024 (09/06/2024).

We conducted a systematic search for academic papers in electronic databases as presented in Fig. 1 , employing specific search terms in the title, keywords, and abstract sections: (“inquiry” OR “scientific inquiry” OR “science inquiry” OR “investigation skill”) AND (“assessment” OR “testing” OR “measurement” OR “computer-based assessment”) AND NOT (“review”). The review used two scientific databases: Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). The results in Scopus and WoS suggested 2228 and 1532 references respectively through the first search strategy. After merging the two datasets based on articles’ DOIs indices, as well as following the removal of duplicate entries, we reached 589 articles. We continued to check the titles and abstracts of the remaining articles for pre-selection purposes based on our predefined inclusion criteria. The process led to the identification of 263 papers for further consideration. In this stage, the authors further discussed and agreed on the inclusion criteria, content relevance, methodological quality, and methodological relevance for the selection of papers. We also facilitated discussions among raters to build consensus on ambiguous cases. Finally, we ended up with sixty-three articles selected for our dataset. Then, the data were manually entered one by one, coded and documented for final selection.

Flowchart of the inclusion and exclusion process following PRISMA guidelines

To server our research questions, we collected information from the selected articles as a dataset for thematic analysis in the PRISMA framework. This information included: (1) year of publication, (2) age groups of the participants (categorized into four age groups: 5–10 years, 11–15 ages and 16–18 ages, (3) study context, (4) components of scientific inquiry, (5) instruments/tests, and (6) technique/validation approaches. (Readers can access full raw data at https://osf.io/5bt82 ).

For bibliometric analysis, the data of the selected articles was exported from the Scopus platform. It involved common bibliographical information such authors, title, year, DOI, affiliation, abstract, keyword and reference. We used bibliometric analysis via R software version 4.2.3 (R Core Team, 2023 ) with shiny (Chang et al., 2023 ) and bibliometrix package (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017 ).

To facilitate for ENA analysis, we coded the data regarding components of scientific inquiry, based on existing frameworks (Table 1 ). The analyses were employed via ENA Web Tool (Marquart et al., 2018 ).

The results are presented here in relation to the key research questions. First, we present surface characteristics that provide a general overview of empirical studies on assessing scientific inquiry worldwide. Then, we explore the components, constructs, and techniques most often used in these assessments across the empirical studies with specific illustrative examples highlighted. Finally, we review the results to identify trends and developments in the assessment of scientific inquiry over time.

Studies on Measuring Scientific Inquiry in School Contexts Worldwide

The 63 selected articles comprised a total of 189 authors, with only four single-author articles (Kind, 2013 ; Mutlu, 2020 ; Sarıoğlu, 2023 ; Teig, 2024 ). Bibliometric analysis showed 3194 references cited, while international co-author index and co-author per article was 17.46% and 3.62, respectively. There were 21 papers published from 2000 to 2012. This number more than doubled to 42 articles from 2013 to 2024. The articles were published in 29 journals, with the core source recognized for the International Journal of Science Education ( IJSE) (11 articles) and the Journal of Research in Science Teaching (JRST) (10 articles), followed by the International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education ( IJSME) (7 articles), and the Research in Science and Technological Education (RSTE) (3 articles). Figure 2 depicts the cumulative articles of the core sources’ production during the period from 2000 to 2024. The graph shows the major journals contributing to this field of study (IJSE, JRST and IJSME), and the noticeable growth curve in the last decade.

The cumulative occurrence of articles in key journals published over time

The findings showed that the 63 articles have a global reach, with study contexts spanning 19 different countries and territories. Notably, a high proportion of studies (23 articles, 36.5%) come from the United States, followed by Taiwan (9 articles, 14.3%), Turkey (5 articles, 7.9%), and Germany (4 articles, 6.3%), while Israel and China each contributed 3 studies (4.8%). The distribution indicates that assessing scientific inquiry is a relatively attractive area of research in science education at a global level.

Regarding affiliation contribution, Fig. 3 shows that five universities emerge as the significant contributors to this collection of publications. Among these institutions, two are located in the US: The University of California (UC) and the Caltech Precollege Science Initiative (CAPSI). UC has remained consistently active in the field since 2002, while CAPSI’s involvement has stagnated since 2005. Humboldt University in Berlin (HU-Berlin) began contributing in 2012. Meanwhile, the National Taiwan Normal University (NTNU) has been actively contributing since 2013, with a sharp increase in activity. Beijing Normal University (BNU) entered the research landscape later, but has shown a steady increase in contributions recently. It is noted that the contributions refer to the frequency distribution of affiliations of all co-authors for each paper (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017 ).

Top 5 of the research institution contribution over time

With respect to collaboration network in the research field, Fig. 4 represents collaborative patterns among researchers in selected articles, covering author and country levels. Based on the studies selected, the analysis identified 11 distinct research networks, illustrated in Fig. 4 a, that present as networks with a significant number of researchers. For instance, in the networks, we can find research groups such as the ones led by Wu, Linn, and Gobert. Furthermore, Fig. 4 b shows that the United States play a pivotal role in leading out international collaborations within the field of scientific inquiry assessment.

Collaboration networks of researchers identified in the articles selected

The cumulative participant count involved in all the studies totalled 50,470 individuals, encompassing educational levels from primary to high schools. Participant categorization was contingent upon respective age group, with a predominant focus on students at age range of 11–15 years. Notably, more than half of the studies (36 studies, accounting for 57.1%) were centred on participants in this age range. Following closely, another significant portion, comprising 23 studies (36.5%), targeted students in the 16-18-year students. It was noted that there are seven studies assessing students, covering two age range groups.

Task, Tests and Techniques of Assessing Scientific Inquiry

Components (facets) for assessing scientific inquiry.

In empirical studies selected, various assessment frameworks were introduced to evaluate scientific inquiry, each incorporating a diverse range of specific components. Zachos et al. ( 2000 ) considered scientific inquiry as multi-aspects of competence related to human cognitive characteristics. They employed hands-on performance assessment tasks, Floating and Sinking and the Period of Oscillation of a Pendulum, to assess students’ inquiry abilities within specific components: linking theory with evidence, formulating hypotheses, maintaining records, using appropriate or innovative laboratory materials, identifying cause-and-effect relationships, controlling experiments, and applying parsimony in drawing conclusions.

Cuevas and colleages ( 2005 ) developed contextual problem tasks to assess inquiry in five components: questioning, planning, implementing, concluding, and reporting. Their assessment task described a story about a child named Marie, who was trying to determine if the size of a container’s opening would influence the rate at which water evaporated. Students were asked to formulate a question reflecting the problem Marie was trying to solve, develop a hypothesis, design an investigation, list the materials needed, describe how to record results, and explain how to draw a conclusion. The framework were referred in a study by Turkan and Liu ( 2012 ) and later utilized in a study by Yang et al. ( 2016 ), where science inquiry was defined as comprising seven aspects of identifying a research question, formulating a hypothesis, designing an experimental procedure, planning necessary equipment and materials, collecting data and evidence, drawing evidence-based conclusions, and constructing conceptual understanding.

Other studies described inquiry as process skills (Kipnis & Hofstein, 2008 ), science process skills (Feyzíoglu, 2012 ; Temiz et al., 2006 ) and scientific process skills (Tosun, 2019 ). For example, Temiz et al. ( 2006 ) developed an instrument aimed to measure the development of 12 science process skills: formulating hypotheses, observing, manipulating materials, measuring, identifying and controlling variables, recording the data, demonstrating the ability to use numbers in space and time relationships, classifying, using the data to create models, predicting, interpreting data, and inferring information or solutions to problems. Meanwhile, an inquiry process framework of Kipnis and Hofstein ( 2008 ) included identifying problems, formulating hypotheses, designing an experiment, gathering and analysing data, and drawing conclusions about scientific problems and phenomena.

Furthermore, based on the previous studies (Gobert et al., 2013 ; Liu et al., 2008 ; Pine et al., 2006 ; Quellmalz et al., 2012 ; Zachos et al., 2000 ), Kuo et al., ( 2015 ) defined an inquiry proficiency framework to integrate cognitive skills with scientific knowledge during student participation in activities akin to scientific discovery. The framework emphasized four fundamental abilities as core components including questioning (e.g., asking and identifying questions), experimenting (e.g., identifying variables and planning experimental procedures), analysing (e.g., identifying relevant data and transforming data), and explaining (e.g., making a claim and using evidence). Their scenario-based tasks were created within a web-based application, covering four content areas (Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and Earth Science) across four inquiry abilities (Wu et al., 2015 ). Chi et al. ( 2019 ) defined scientific inquiry as the ability to integrate science knowledge and skills to identify scientific questions design and conduct investigation, analyse and interpret information and generate evidence-based explanations. A hands-on performance assessment instrument for measuring student scientific inquiry competences in the science lab was developed based on this framework (see a sample task in Fig. 5 a).

PISA 2015 developed the framework to assess 15-year-old students’ scientific inquiry competency of explaining phenomena, designing inquiry, interpreting data (OECD, 2017 ). Some empirical studies (e.g., Intasoi et al., 2020 ; Lin & Shie, 2024 ) developed assessment framework based on the framework to assess scientific inquiry competence of students. For example, Lin and Shie ( 2024 ) developed a PISA-type test to assess Grade 9 students’ scientific competence and knowledge related to curriculum and daily-life contexts (e.g., trolley motion, camping, household electricity, driving speed, etc.).

In the line, Arnold et al. ( 2018 ) referred to scientific inquiry as the competence to emphasize the cognitive aspects of the ability to use problem-solving procedures. Scientific competence was defined as the ability to understand, conduct, and critically evaluate scientific experiments on causal relationships, addressing problems and phenomena in the natural world. Three key sub-competences of experimentation were identified: generating hypotheses, designing experiments, and analysing data. Each sub-competence included five specific components. For instance, the sub-competence of generating hypotheses covered the ability to define the investigative problem, identify the relationship between dependent and independent variables to generate testable hypotheses or predictions and justify them, as well as propose different independent variables or alternative predictions. Zheng et al. ( 2022 ) categorized inquiry into eight components, highlighting information processing and reflective evaluation, echoed in study by Mutlu ( 2020 ).

In other approaches, Nowak et al. ( 2013 ) developed a model for assessing students’ inquiry ability, which had two dimensions: scientific reasoning (including question and hypothesis, plan and performance, and analysis and reflection) and inquiry methods (comprising modelling, experimenting, observing, comparing, and arranging). Together, these dimensions form a 9-cell matrix. Based on the theoretical structure, they developed a test instrument to assess students’ scientific inquiry (see sample item in Fig. 5 b). Meanwhile, Pedaste and colleages ( 2021 ) developed a science inquiry test for primary students based on the four-stage inquiry-based learning framework by Pedaste et al. ( 2015 ). The test encompassed the essential skills aligned with the four stages of the inquiry-based learning framework. These included analytical skills, which are primarily required in the Orientation, Conceptualization, and Investigation phases; planning skills, mainly needed in the Investigation phase; and interpretation skills, primarily needed in the Conclusion and Discussion phases.

Samples of the item/task for assessing scientific inquiry

A virtual experimentation environment developed by McElhaney and Linn ( 2011 ) simulated the experimentation activities of Airbags. These activities illustrated the interaction between the airbag and the driver during a head-on collision, using the steering wheel as a point of reference. Referred the existing studies (e.g., Kind, 2013 ; Liu et al., 2008 ; Pine et al., 2006 ), a simulation-based test developed by Wu et al. ( 2014 ) focused on two types of abilities: experimental and explaining. Experimental ability involved three sub-abilities: identifying and choosing variables, planning an experiment and selecting appropriate measurements, while explaining ability covered three sub-abilities: making a claim, using evidence, and evaluating alternative explanations. They designed four simulation tasks, namely Camera, Viscosity, Buoyancy and Flypaper. For example, the Flypaper task simulated a farm context in which students investigated which colour of flypaper could catch the most fruit flies. They were asked to propose hypotheses related to the decrease in flies according to the given chart, conduct appropriate experiments to measure the effect of the flypaper colour, investigate which colour of flypaper is best for catching fruit flies, and decide on alternative explanations based on the data evidence.

In the vein, Sui et al. ( 2024 ) designed an animation-based web application allow students conduct a scientific inquiry on atmospheric chemistry with animation experiments to understand the climate change and atmospheric chemistry. The scientific inquiry was defined with three core abilities: data analytic, control of variables and scientific reasoning. The digital game-based inquiry, BioScientist (Bónus et al., 2024 ) involved series of tasks, which focused on inquiry skills focusing on design of experiment, identification and control of variables, interpretation of data, and conclusion. For instance, a simulation provided some relevant variables, students need to manipulate the first one and then second variables to generate the data set. Based on the data-based evidence, they selected the answer and draw reasonable conclusions.

In summary, what becomes clear is that the mainstream framing of the construct of scientific inquiry was categorised as lists of specific components of competence. The frameworks for assessing scientific inquiry in technology-rich environments share many similarities with those used in traditional settings. In this view, it may summarise scientific competence into four main sub-competencies and their respective components (facets) based on the existing frameworks, as shown in Table 1 .

The Frequent Usage of the Components in Assessing Scientific Inquiry

In this section, we employed ENA to quantitatively visualize the usage frequency of yed ENA to quantitatively visualize the usage frequency of individual components and their co-usage with others in the selected empirical studies. Figure 6  illustrates the frequency of usage (represented by the size of the nodes) and the degree of co-usage of the components (represented by the width of the lines) across the reviewed studies.

In general, it appears that the nine facets were most often used to assess scientific inquiry, including formulate prediction or hypotheses (FP), formulate questions (FQ), set experiment (DS), vary independent variable (DV), measure dependent variable (DM), control confounding variables (DC), describe data (AD), interpret data (AI), and reach reasonable conclusion (CR). Other components were frequently used in inquiry tasks, including identify independent variable (FI), Identify dependent variable (FD), using appropriate method (AU) and evaluate methods (CE).

The pattern of components of scientific inquiry competence in selected studies simulated in the ENA model

Foundation Frameworks for Scientific Inquiry Assessment

To explore foundational frameworks for scientific inquiry assessment, we employed the Bibliometric analyses via the co-citation networks prevalent in the studies selected. The findings as depicted in Fig. 7 showed that US science education standards (NRC, 1996 ) stood out as the most frequently cited, followed by NRC texts A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas” (2012) and “Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning” (NRC, 2000 ). Other texts were often cited such as: “The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school” (Zimmerman, 2007 ) and “Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States” (2013). It is clear that the 1996 NRC standards were prominently featured in the discussion, while the 2012 framework was referred to more frequently than the actual standards, particularly in terms of citations in the reviewed studies.

The co-citation networks found in the studies reviewed

Constructs, Formats and Techniques Approaches in Assessing Scientific Inquiry

Generally, three types of tests emerged within the realm of scientific inquiry assessment: hands-on performance assessment, a battery of independent tests (paper battery), and digital-based battery tests (online battery) and simulation performance assessment. The analysis revealed that paper battery (41.1%) and on-line battery tests (39.7%) were the most widely applied construct, followed by and simulation performance assessment (37.0%). Hands-on performance (17.6%) still continues to hold its place in the field. The findings also suggest that, regardless of the mode of assessment, multiple-choice (71.4%) and open-ended (69.8%) formats are consistently prevalent. Notably, several studies (44.5%) used a combination of multiple-choice and open-ended formats.

Assessment of Scientific Inquiry in Traditional Environment

Performance assessments represent a groundwork approach to measuring students’ capabilities in scientific investigation, conceptualization, and problem-solving within authentic contexts. Researchers explored various dimensions of hands-on performance assessments, designing tasks that authentically mirror the scientific process. For example, Zachos et al. ( 2000 ) developed performance tasks mirroring scientific inquiry processes, assessing concepts, data collection, and conclusion drawing. Pine et al. ( 2006 ) emphasized inquiry skills like planning and data interpretation. Emden and Sumfleth ( 2016 ) assessed students’ ability in generating ideas, planning experiments, and drawing conclusions through hands-on inquiry tasks. They used video analysis in combined with paper-pencil free response reports to measure performance.

Traditional assessments tend to rely on standardized tests, featuring multiple-choice items aligned with policy-led standards. These tests, often administered in a paper-and-pencil format, measure students’ proficiency levels in comparison with peers. Without the need for advanced technology, they covered a wide range of content and question types, including multiple-choice, short answer, and essays (Fig. 8 ). The majority of studies employed such a battery of independent tests to assess one or more components of scientific inquiry (e.g., Arnold et al., 2018 ; Kaberman & Dori, 2009 ; Kazeni et al., 2018 ; Lin & Shie, 2024 ; Nowak et al., 2013 ; Schwichow et al., 2016 ; Vo et al., 2023 ; Van Vo & Csapó, 2021 ). There were a significant positive correlations between the paper-and-pencil tests and performance assessment tasks (e.g., Kruit et al., 2018 ). Table 2 presents an excerpt from the summarised table of the studies selected (See more Supplemental material at https://osf.io/5bt82 ).

Samples of item/task assessing scientific inquiry in paper-based modality. a A sample item in requiring interpretation [source from Kruit et al. ( 2018 )]. b A sample of a task for assessing inquiry [source from Temiz et al. ( 2006 )]

Assessment of Scientific Inquiry in Digital Based Environments

From 2012 onwards, studies started to increasingly use advanced technologies in digital-based environments in their assessment of scientific inquiry. Studies (e.g., Gobert et al., 2013 ; Kuo et al., 2015 ; Quellmalz et al., 2012 ; Sui et al., 2024 ) started to use innovative tools and methodologies to construct assessment platforms that more accurately captured the nuanced complexities of scientific inquiry. These include dynamic simulations with web-based applications like (Quellmalz et al., 2012 , 2013 ), Inquiry Intelligent Tutoring System (Inq-ITS) (Gobert et al., 2013 ), 3D-game simulation (Hickey et al., 2009 ; Ketelhut et al., 2013 ), PISA 2015 (e.g., OECD, 2017 ; Teig et al., 2020 ) (see Fig. 9 ) and scenario-based tasks integrating multimedia elements (Kuo et al., 2015 ). For example, Inq-ITS is an online intelligent tutoring and assessment platform designed for physics, life science, and earth science. It aims to automatically evaluate scientific inquiry skills in real-time through interactive microworld simulations.

Simulation-based tools like Simulation-based assessment of scientific inquiry abilities (Wu et al., 2014 ; Wu & Wu, 2020 ) can effectively assess abilities in explaining and other relevant components. Immersive virtual settings and automated content scoring engines offered efficient evaluation methods (Baker et al., 2016 ; Liu et al., 2016 ; Scalise & Clarke-Midura, 2018 ; Sui et al., 2024 ) and were potential for formative assessment (Hickey et al., 2009 ). The digital game-based inquiry, i.e., BioScientist (Bónus et al., 2024 ), Quest Atlantis (Hickey et al., 2009 ), allowed students to engage with a series of tasks, which focused on inquiry skills using simulation in which students interacted with suitable elements during the inquiry process. Table 3 illustrates an excerpt regarding components, tools and techniques in digital-based scientific inquiry assessment (See Supplemental material at https://osf.io/5bt82 ).

A screenshot of item 3 of Task 1 from the PISA 2015 item from the Running in Hot Weather unit [Source from OECD ( 2015 )]

Techniques for Developing and Validating Scientific Inquiry Assessment

Most studies referred to the American Education Research Association (AERA, 1999 ) for developing and validating scientific inquiry assessment tasks. This included defining the assessment framework, designing tasks and items, scoring rubrics, and conducting a pilot test (Arnold et al., 2018 ; Kuo et al., 2015 ; Lin & Shie, 2024 ; Lin et al., 2016 ; Nowak et al., 2013 ; Schwichow et al., 2016 ; Vo & Csapó, 2023 ).

Numerous methods and techniques were employed for scoring proficiency in assessing scientific inquiry. Full credit was applied to correct answers in multiple-choice tests and partial credit to score open-ended questions (Arnold et al., 2018 ; Kaberman & Dori, 2009 ; OECD, 2017 ; Sui et al., 2024 ; Teig et al., 2020 ). Interestingly, a high percentage of studies, as much as 36.8%, utilized a 3-point scale rubric in their assessments or evaluations (Intasoi et al., 2020 ). Log-file techniques were increasingly popular for assessing scientific inquiry in recent studies (Baker et al., 2016 ; McElhaney & Linn, 2011 ; Teig, 2024 ; Teig et al., 2020 ). Data-mining algorithms enhanced assessment accuracy (Gobert et al., 2015 ). Virtual Performance Assessments allowed to record a log data (Baker et al., 2016 ), containing students’ actions (e.g., clicks, double clicks, slider movements, drag and drop, changes in the text area) along with the timestamp for each action. Different actions and their timings were combined to reveal behavioural indicators, such as number of actions, number of trials, time before the first action, response time for each item, and total time for each unit. The process of assessment development and validation was found to be based on a construct modelling approach (Brown & Wilson, 2011 ; Kuo et al., 2015 ).

For validation approaches, the face validity of the test instrument was established based on faculty and student feedback (Kuo et al., 2015 ) or expert judgments (Šmida et al., 2024 ; Vo & Csapó, 2023 ; Wu et al., 2014 ). Construct validity focused on the test score as a measure of the psychological properties of the instrument. For validity analysis, most studies applied Rasch measurement model (Arnold et al., 2018 ; Chi et al., 2019 ; Intasoi et al., 2020 ; Kuo et al., 2015 ; Lin & Shie, 2024 ; Liu et al., 2008 ; Nowak et al., 2013 ; Pedaste et al., 2021 ; Quellmalz et al., 2013 ; Scalise & Clarke-Midura, 2018 ; Schwichow et al., 2016 ; Vo & Csapó, 2023 ; Wu et al., 2015 ), followed by factor analyses (Feyzíoglu, 2012 ; Lou et al., 2015 ; Pedaste et al., 2021 ; Samarapungavan et al., 2009 ; Šmida et al., 2024 ; Tosun, 2019 ). Predictive or criterion-related validity was used to demonstrate that the test scores are dependent on other variables, tests, or outcome criteria. In assessment of scientific inquiry, predictive validity referred to some standard tests, such as Lawson’s Classroom Test of Scientific Inquiry (e.g., Kuo et al., 2015 ; Wu et al., 2014 ), Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (e.g., Lou et al., 2015 ), General cognitive ability (e.g., Dori et al., 2018 ; Kruit et al., 2018 ) and science grades in school (Pedaste et al., 2021 ).

Most popular software employed for data analysis including the R (Sui et al., 2024 ; Van Vo & Csapó, 2021 ), ConQuest (Kuo et al., 2015 ; Lin & Shie, 2024 ; Nowak et al., 2013 ; Seeratan et al., 2020 ; Vo & Csapó, 2021 ), SPSS (Bónus et al., 2024 ; Temiz et al., 2006 ) and Winsteps (Arnold et al., 2018 ; Chi et al., 2019 ; Pedaste et al., 2021 ), and LISREL (Tosun, 2019 ).

Developmental Trend in Assessing Scientific Inquiry

The objective here was to investigate the evolving trends and patterns of scientific inquiry employed within the studies over time. The articles were sub-divided into two distinct temporal spans − 2000–2012 and 2013–2024. Figure 10 visualizes patterns of components of scientific inquiry competence which were used the studies in the 2000–2012 period (Fig. 10 a), the 2013–2024 period (Fig. 10 b) and a comparison of that between the two periods (Fig. 10 c). The graph of comparison was calculated by subtracting the weight of each connection in one network from the corresponding connections in another.

The results revealed that some main components, i.e., measure dependent variable (DM), reach reasonable conclusion (CR), identify independent variable (FI), set experiment (DS), control confounding variables (DC), vary independent variable (DV), identify dependent variable (FD), and formulate prediction (FP), were often used consistently over time. However, components such as using appropriate method (AU), evaluate methods (CE), defining task time (DT), defining replication (DR), and recognizing limitations (CL) demonstrated a heightened prevalence in the later period, indicating a heightened emphasis on these aspects of assessing scientific inquiry. Conversely, when examining the earlier period (2000–2012), components like identify independent variable (FI) and justify question / hypothesis (FJ) exhibited a more noticeable frequency of application.

Patterns of facets of scientific inquiry competence in selected studies simulated in the ENA model

To streamline the understanding of these tests in the scientific inquiry tasks, we employed co-occurrence networks adapted in Bibliometric analysis. The analysis revealed that battery independent tests and performance assessment are most frequently used with multiple-choice and open-ended constructs. However, the trend is toward the online and simulation ones with new techniques of log-file tracking and scaffolding (Figure 11 a).

When it comes to emphasizing vision in science education, empirical evidence has shown that the design of inquiry tests incorporated both the content of pure science, vision I scientific literacy, and the science-in-context applications related to science, vision II scientific literacy. This ensures a balanced evaluation that covers fundamental scientific principles as well as their real-world applications. However, it is noteworthy that recent studies have shown a growing preference for assessing scientific inquiry within science-in-context (Figure 11 b).

Trend of types and formats in assessing scientific inquiry. a Co-occurrence networks depicting types, formats and “vision” emphasis. b Types, formats and “vision” emphasis over time

Discussion and Conclusions

The paper utilized the PRISMA guideline for systematic review in combination with bibliometric analyses for reviewing scientific research literature to draw together a detailed overview of research on assessing scientific inquiry abilities in global educational settings.

Our review of the problem of assessing scientific inquiry allowed us illuminate this rapidly changing area of research. In the last two decades, while research on curriculum reforms in science inquiry-orientations have proceeded apace, research on digital modes of assessing scientific inquiry have only recently started to make an impact. Our analysis of sixty-three studies showed that scientific inquiry has been emphasized, integrated, and assessed in the settings of science education around the world. The bulk of this research, started in the US, was brought to global significance through the influence of transnational policy decision-makers, such as the OECD and mainly US-led networks of researchers. The US researchers published several academic papers in the earliest part of the timeline studied, and their findings remain today as foundational citations. This research was quickly followed by new networks forming from Germany, Turkey, Taiwan and China. Co-citation networks revealed that the US National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996 ) remains as a foundational reference, even though the 2012 document should have had nearly equal significance. Surprisingly, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) benchmarks were not cited as frequently in the case.

Over two decades, performance assessments and batteries of independent tests, employing both multiple-choice and open-ended formats, continue to be widely used for assessing scientific inquiry. Hands-on performance assessment remains one of the main modes of assessing competence in scientific inquiry. Moreover, a traditional written test can be easily administered, reliably scored, and is familiar to students, but falls short in effectively capturing the dynamics of real-life inquiry and may be significantly influenced by reading proficiency (Kruit et al., 2018 ). Besides, hands-on performance assessment is not efficient for large-scale assessments (Kuo et al., 2015 ). Therefore, there is a growing emphasis on developing authentic tests. These tests, which may include manipulatives, are considered to provide a more comprehensive assessment of students’ capability in conducting scientific inquiry through multiple formats (e.g., open-constructed, multiple-choice, multiple-true-false, short closed-constructed).

Our analysis showed that original components like formulating questions or hypotheses, designing experiments, analysing data, and drawing conclusions were consistently used for assessing scientific inquiry capabilities over time. However, certain sub-components, such as formulating prediction or hypotheses , formulating questions , setting experiment , varying independent variable , measuring dependent variable , controlling confounding variables , describing data , interpreting data , and reaching reasonable conclusions , were the most frequently used competences in the selected studies. Meanwhile, facets like specifying test time , defining replication , and recognizing limitations were shown to have an increasing prevalence in the last decade. This trend signals a possible enhanced emphasis on these facets or sub-components of scientific inquiry, particularly in digital-based environments. The growing focus on these areas may reflect the advancements in technology that allow for more precise measurement and analysis, thereby promoting a more rigorous approach to scientific inquiry.

In the last decade, online battery tests and simulation performance assessments have gained increasing popularity. These studies reflect the design and enactment of innovative assessments using advanced technology, such as Web-based Inquiry Science Environments (McElhaney & Linn, 2011 ), SimScientists (Quellmalz et al., 2012 , 2013 ), iSA–Earth Science (Lou et al., 2015 ), Multimedia-based assessment of scientific inquiry abilities (Kuo et al., 2015 ; Wu et al., 2015 ), Inq-ITS system (Inquiry Intelligent Tutoring System (Gobert et al., 2013 , 2015 ), Virtual Performance Assessments (Baker et al., 2016 ), Dynamic visualization to design animation-based activities (Sui et al., 2024 ).

In terms of emphasizing vision in science education, empirical evidence demonstrated that the design of inquiry tests included pure science content (vision I) and science-in-context considerations (vision II). However, recent studies increasingly preferred assessing scientific inquiry within real-world contexts. This trend reflects an understanding of the importance of students being able to apply scientific concepts to real-world problems, thus preparing them for the complex, interdisciplinary challenges they are likely to face in their futures. By focusing on context, these studies aim to enhance students’ ability to think critically and engage with science in a way that is relevant to their everyday lives and broader community issues. These are also partly reflected in alignment with national and international frameworks.

Implications

The paper not only identifies various aspects of studies and research within a specific field of assessing inquiry competence, but also provides systematic rationales related to the construction of the tools, tasks and techniques used to assess scientific inquiry capabilities in educational settings. This is valuable for science teachers as they create inquiry-oriented tasks in their classrooms. Additionally, new researchers can gain an overview of the research teams working in this area.

The foreseeable trend may be that the move towards dynamic and interactive inquiry assessments enables researchers to examine not just the accuracy of students’ responses (product data) but also the procedures and actions they employ to arrive at responses (process data) (Teig, 2024 ). Multi-faceted aspects of scientific inquiry can be observed during assessment tasks. Beside traditional components in formulating questions or hypotheses , designing experiments , analysing data , and drawing conclusions , some new aspects like task time , replication and recognizing limitations seem to more consider as they become measurable in technology-rich environment. Therefore, log-file analysis will be more popular approach in the field.

The development of scientific inquiry assessments should be considered as a multifaceted process of construct modelling. The combination of multiple validity approaches is encouraged in development of the assessment of scientific inquiry. Psychometric analysis through Rasch model is often employed in validating and scaling student performance. Alternative approaches to deal with log-file records are still in the early pioneering stages of development (e.g., Baker et al., 2016 ; McElhaney & Linn, 2011 ; Teig, 2024 ; Teig et al., 2020 ). An automated scoring engine demonstrated a promising approach to scoring constructed-response in assessment of inquiry ability (Liu et al., 2016 ). This opens a potential space for upcoming new research in this field with application of artificial intelligence.

The review illuminates the evolving landscape of scientific inquiry assessment development and validation, emphasizing the importance of a comprehensive and flexible approach to meet the diverse needs of educational and research settings. However, tackling such novel tasks necessitated not only an understanding of scientific inquiry assessment but also sophisticated technology and its corresponding infrastructures. For example, simulation tasks addressing complex real-world problems, such as climate change, water shortages, and global food security, necessitate the collaboration of various relevant stakeholders. It is crucial for research and educational technology institutions to play supportive roles for science teachers. More robust and published research on scientist-led K-12 outreach is essential for enhancing comprehension among scientists and K-12 stakeholders regarding the optimal practices and challenges associated with outreach initiatives (Abramowitz et al., 2024 ).

Science teachers were encouraged to integrate both pure science content and science-in-context applications into their teaching and assessment (Roberts & Bybee, 2014 ). This will involve teachers’ designing inquiry-based activities that apply scientific principles to real-world problems, helping students develop higher-order critical thinking skills and preparing them for future interdisciplinary challenges. Emphasizing real-world applications of scientific inquiry can help to make science education more relevant and engaging for students.

Moreover, the adoption of combined approaches to the literature review, integrating bibliometric and ENA analyses with systematic review PRISMA guidelines, demonstrates a meticulous and systematic approach to data synthesis. Beyond its immediate application here, this research design may serve as a model for future research endeavours, contributing to the advancement of novel methodologies.

Limitation of the Review

The review conducted here was limited to 63 empirical studies published in SCOPUS/WoS data between 2000 and 2024 and in English. It may not cover the full range of academic documents that are made available in other academic databases, potentially missing significant studies published in different languages or within other research repositories.

The nature of psychological issues is often controversial, and our suggested framework for assessing scientific inquiry competence is merely one of several approaches presented in the literature. Different scholars proposed various models, each with its own strengths and limitations, reflecting the ongoing debate and complexity within this field. Furthermore, the selection of articles was conducted and scored by the authors, which introduces the possibility of certain biases. These biases may stem from subjective interpretations, or unintentional preferences, potentially influencing the overall findings.

The application of advanced technology is sophisticated and diverse; we have highlighted only a few features without covering all aspects of digital-based assessment. Therefore, generalizations from the study need to be approached with caution. However, the study provides valuable insights into the fast-globalizing landscape of assessing scientific inquiry and will be of interest to researchers, educators, teachers in science education and those with an interest in grappling with similar problems of assessment.

Abramowitz, B., Ennes, M., Kester, B., & Antonenko, P. (2024). Scientist-school STEM partnerships through outreach in the USA: A systematic review. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10445-7

American Education Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing . American Psychological Association. https://www.aera.net/Portals/38/1999Standards_revised.pdf

Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015171124982

Article   Google Scholar  

Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics , 11 (4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007

Arnold, J. C., Boone, W. J., Kremer, K., & Mayer, J. (2018). Assessment of competencies in scientific inquiry through the application of Rasch measurement techniques. Education Sciences , 8 (4), 184. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8040184

Baker, R. S., Clarke-Midura, J., & Ocumpaugh, J. (2016). Towards general models of effective science inquiry in virtual performance assessments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 32 (3), 267–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12128

Baur, A., Baumgartner-hirscher, N., Lehtinen, A., Neudecker, C., Nieminen, P., Papaevripidou, M., Rohrmann, S., Schiffl, I., Schuknecht, M., Virtbauer, L., & Xenofontos, N. (Eds.). (2022). Differentiation in inquiry-based learning: A differentiation tool with a focus on experimentation . Heidelberg, University of Education.

Google Scholar  

Beaumont-Walters, Y., & Soyibo, K. (2001). An analysis of high school students’ performance on five integrated science process skills. Research in Science & Technological Education , 19 (2), 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140120087687

Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.),  Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century skills (pp.17–66). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bónus, L., Antal, E., & Korom, E. (2024). Digital game-based inquiry learning to improve eighth graders’ inquiry skills in Biology. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 33 , 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10096-x

Brown, N. J. S., & Wilson, M. (2011). A model of cognition: The missing cornerstone of assessment. Educational Psychology Review, 23 (2), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9161-z

Chang, W., Cheng, J., Allaire, J., Sievert, C., Schloerke, B., Xie, Y., Allen, J., McPherson, J., Dipert, A., & Borges, B. (2023). shiny: Web application framework for R (R package version 1.8.0). https://cran.r-project.org/package=shiny

Chi, S., Wang, Z., & Liu, X. (2019). Investigating disciplinary context effect on student scientific inquiry competence. International Journal of Science Education , 41 (18), 2736–2764. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1697837

Chu, S. K. W., Reynolds, R. B., Tavares, N. J., Notari, M., & Lee, C. W. Y. (2017). 21st century skills development through inquiry-based learning: From theory to practice . Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2481-8

Clark, D., & Linn, M. C. (2009). Designing for knowledge integration: The impact of instructional time. Journal of Education , 189 (1–2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022057409189001-210

Cuevas, P., Lee, O., Hart, J., & Deaktor, R. (2005). Improving science inquiry with elementary students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 42 (3), 337–357. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20053

Diodato, V. P., & Gellatly, P. (2013). Dictionary of bibliometrics . Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Dogan, O. K., Han-Tosunoglu, C., Arslan, N., Cakir, M., & Irez, S. (2024). Middle school graduates’ understandings of scientific inquiry and its relation to academic achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22 (1), 143–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-023-10365-y

Dori, Y. J., Zohar, A., Fischer-Shachor, D., Kohan-Mass, J., & Carmi, M. (2018). Gender-fair assessment of young gifted students’ scientific thinking skills. International Journal of Science Education , 40 (6), 595–620. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1431419

Emden, M., & Sumfleth, E. (2016). Assessing students’ experimentation processes in guided inquiry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 14 (1), 29–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9564-7

Erduran, S. (2014). Beyond nature of science: The case for reconceptualising Science for science education. Science Education International , 25 (1), 95–111. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1022972

European Commission and Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2015). Science education for responsible citizenship: Report to the European Commission of the expert group on science education . Publications Office. https://doi.org/10.2777/12626

Feyzíoglu, B. (2012). Developing a science process skills test for secondary students: Validity and reliability study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practices , 12 , 1899–1906. https://xlink.rsc.org/?DOI=C8RP00071A

Fukuda, M., Hajian, S., Jain, M., Liu, A. L., Obaid, T., Nesbit, J. C., & Winne, P. H. (2022). Scientific inquiry learning with a simulation: Providing within-task guidance tailored to learners’ understanding and inquiry skill. International Journal of Science Education , 44 (6), 1021–1043. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2062799

Gobert, J. D., Pedro, S., Raziuddin, M., J., & Baker, R. S. (2013). From log files to assessment metrics: Measuring students’ science inquiry skills using educational data mining. Journal of the Learning Sciences , 22 (4), 521–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.837391

Gobert, J. D., Kim, Y. J., Sao Pedro, M. A., Kennedy, M., & Betts, C. G. (2015). Using educational data mining to assess students’ skills at designing and conducting experiments within a complex systems microworld. Thinking Skills and Creativity , 18 , 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.04.008

Griffin, P., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (Eds.). (2012).  Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills . Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research , 77 (1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487

Hickey, D. T., Ingram-Goble, A. A., & Jameson, E. M. (2009). Designing assessments and assessing designs in virtual educational environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 18 (2), 187–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9143-1

Intasoi, S., Junpeng, P., Tang, K. N., Ketchatturat, J., Zhang, Y., & Wilson, M. (2020). Developing an assessment framework of multidimensional scientific competencies. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE) , 9 (4), 963–970. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i4.20542

Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y. J. (2009). Question posing, inquiry, and modeling skills of Chemistry students in the case-based computerized laboratory environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 7 (3), 597–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9118-3

Kazeni, M., Baloyi, E., & Gaigher, E. (2018). Effectiveness of individual and group investigations in developing integrated science inquiry skills. South African Journal of Education , 38 (3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n3a1549

Ketelhut, D., Nelson, B., Schifter, C., & Kim, Y. (2013). Improving science assessments by situating them in a virtual environment. Education Sciences , 3 (2), 172–192. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci3020172

Kind, P. M. (2013). Establishing assessment scales using a novel disciplinary rationale for scientific reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 50 (5), 530–560. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21086

Kipnis, M., & Hofstein, A. (2008). The inquiry laboratory as a source for development of metacognitive skills. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 6 (3), 601–627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9066-y

Kruit, P. M., Oostdam, R. J., van den Berg, E., & Schuitema, J. A. (2018). Assessing students’ ability in performing scientific inquiry: Instruments for measuring science skills in primary education. Research in Science and Technological Education , 36 (4), 413–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1421530

Kuo, C. Y., Wu, H. K., Jen, T. H., & Hsu, Y. S. (2015). Development and validation of a multimedia-based assessment of scientific inquiry abilities. International Journal of Science Education , 37 (14), 2326–2357. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1078521

Lin, S. F., & Shie, W. C. (2024). A cooperative model of development and validation of a curriculum-based scientific competence test. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 22 (3), 491–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-023-10366-x

Lin, S. W., Liu, Y., Chen, S. F., Wang, J. R., & Kao, H. L. (2015). Development of a computer-based measure of listening comprehension of science talk. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 13 (6), 1469–1486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9559-4

Lin, S. W., Liu, Y., Chen, S. F., Wang, J. R., & Kao, H. L. (2016). Elementary school students’ science talk ability in inquiry-oriented settings in Taiwan: Test development, verification, and performance benchmarks. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 14 (7), 1199–1214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9663-0

Liu, O. L., Lee, H. S., Hofstetter, C., & Linn, M. (2008). Assessing knowledge integration in science: Construct, measures, and evidence. Educational Assessment , 13 (1), 33–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627190801968224

Liu, O. L., Rios, J. A., Heilman, M., Gerard, L., & Linn, M. C. (2016). Validation of automated scoring of science assessments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 53 (2), 215–233. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21299

Lou, Y., Blanchard, P., & Kennedy, E. (2015). Development and validation of a science inquiry skills assessment. Journal of Geoscience Education , 63 (1), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.5408/14-028.1

Marquart, C. L., Hinojosa, C., Swiecki, Z., Eagan, B., & Shaffer, D. W. (2018). Epistemic network analysis (Version 1.7.0) [Software] .

Marshall, J. C., Smart, J. B., & Alston, D. M. (2017). Inquiry-based instruction: A possible solution to improving student learning of both science concepts and scientific practices. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 15 (5), 777–796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9718-x

McElhaney, K. W., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Investigations of a complex, realistic task: Intentional, unsystematic, and exhaustive experimenters. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 48 (7), 745–770. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20423

Millar, R. (2006). Twenty First Century Science: Insights from the design and implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal of Science Education , 28 (13), 1499–1521. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600718344

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology , 62 (10), 1006–1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005

Mutlu, A. (2020). Evaluation of students’ scientific process skills through reflective worksheets in the inquiry-based learning environments. Reflective Practice , 21 (2), 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2020.1736999

National Council for Curriculum and Assessment [NCCA]. (2015). Junior cycle science: Curriculum specification. Author.

National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National Science education standards. National committee for science education standards and assessment . National Academies.

National Research Council [NRC]. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning . National Academies.

National Research Council [NRC]. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas . National Academies. https://smile.oregonstate.edu/sites/smile.oregonstate.edu/files/a_framework_for_k-12_science_education.pdf

Neumann, I., Neumann, K., & Nehm, R. (2011). Evaluating instrument quality in science education: Rasch-based analyses of a nature of science test. International Journal of Science Education , 33 (10), 1373–1405. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.511297

Nowak, K. H., Nehring, A., Tiemann, R., & Upmeier, A. (2013). Assessing students’ abilities in processes of scientific inquiry in biology using a paper-and-pencil test. Journal of Biological Education , 47 (3), 182–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2013.822747

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2017). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework . Author. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264281820-en

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2015). Try PISA 2015 test questions . Author. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/test/pisa2015/#d.en.537240

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. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review , 14 , 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003

Pedaste, M., Baucal, A., & Reisenbuk, E. (2021). Towards a science inquiry test in primary education: Development of items and scales. International Journal of STEM Education , 8 (1), Article 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00278-z

Pine, J., Aschbacher, P., Roth, E., Jones, M., McPhee, C., Martin, C., Phelps, S., Kyle, T., & Foley, B. (2006). Fifth graders’ science inquiry abilities: A comparative study of students in hands-on and textbook curricula. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 43 (5), 467–484. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20140

Quellmalz, E. S., Timms, M. J., Silberglitt, M. D., & Buckley, B. C. (2012). Science assessments for all: Integrating science simulations into balanced state science assessment systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 49 (3), 363–393. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21005

Quellmalz, E. S., Davenport, J. L., Timms, M. J., DeBoer, G. E., Jordan, K. A., Huang, C. W., & Buckley, B. C. (2013). Next-generation environments for assessing and promoting complex science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology , 105 (4), 1100–1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032220

R Core Team. (2023). R: A language and environment for statistical computing . R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.r-project.org/

Ramnarain, U. D. (2014). Teachers ’ perceptions of inquiry-based learning in urban, suburban, township and rural high schools : The context-speci fi city of science curriculum implementation in South Africa. Teaching and Teacher Education , 38 , 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.11.003

Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Routledge.

Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 559–572). Routledge.

Rönnebeck, S., Bernholt, S., & Ropohl, M. (2016). Searching for a common ground – A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities. Studies in Science Education , 52 (2), 161–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1206351

Ruis, A. R., & Lee, S. B. (Eds.). (2021). Advances in quantitative ethnography (Vol. 1312). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-67788-6

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Li, M., Tsai, S. P., & Schneider, J. (2010). Testing one premise of scientific inquiry in science classrooms: Examining students’ scientific explanations and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 47 (5), 583–608. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20356

Samarapungavan, A., Mantzicopoulos, P., Patrick, H., & French, B. (2009). The development and validation of the science learning assessment (SLA): A measure of kindergarten science learning. Journal of Advanced Academics , 20 (3), 502–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X0902000306

Sarıoğlu, S. (2023). Development of Online science process skills test for 8th grade pupils. Journal of Turkish Science Education , 20 (3), 418–432. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2023.024

Scalise, K., & Clarke-Midura, J. (2018). The many faces of scientific inquiry: Effectively measuring what students do and not only what they say. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 55 (10), 1469–1496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21464

Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, J. S., & Enderle, P. J. (2023). Scientific inquiry literacy: The missing link on the continuum from science literacy to scientific literacy. In N. G. Lederman, D. L. Zeidler, & J. S. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 749–782). Routledge.

Schwichow, M., Christoph, S., Boone, W. J., & Härtig, H. (2016). The impact of sub-skills and item content on students’ skills with regard to the control-of-variables strategy. International Journal of Science Education , 38 (2), 216–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1137651

Seeratan, K. L., McElhaney, K. W., Mislevy, J., McGhee, R., Conger, D., & Long, M. C. (2020). Measuring students’ ability to engage in scientific inquiry: A new instrument to assess data analysis, explanation, and argumentation. Educational Assessment , 25 (2), 112–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2020.1756253

Shaffer, D., williamson, Collier, W., & Ruis, A. R. (2016). A tutorial on epistemic network analysis: Analyzing the structure of connections in cognitive, cocial, and interaction data. Journal of Learning Analytics , 3 (3), 9–45. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.33.3

Shahali, E. H. M., & Halim, L. (2010). Development and validation of a test of integrated science process skills. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences , 9 , 142–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.127

Šmida, D., Čipková, E., & Fuchs, M. (2024). Developing the test of inquiry skills: Measuring the level of inquiry skills among pupils in Slovakia. International Journal of Science Education , 46 (1), 73–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2219811

Stender, A., Schwichow, M., Zimmerman, C., & Härtig, H. (2018). Making inquiry-based science learning visible: The influence of CVS and cognitive skills on content knowledge learning in guided inquiry. International Journal of Science Education , 40 (15), 1812–1831. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1504346

Sui, C., Hsiao, S., Yeh, S., Zhao, P., Chang, C., & Lin, J. (2024). Do they have inquiry skill profiles? Exploring high school students’ scientific inquiry in an animation-based activity. Science Education, 108 (2), 467–494. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21844

Teig, N. (2024). Uncovering student strategies for solving scientific snquiry tasks: Insights from student process data in PISA. Research in Science Education , 54 , 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10134-5

Teig, N., Scherer, R., & Kjærnsli, M. (2020). Identifying patterns of students’ performance on simulated inquiry tasks using PISA 2015 log-file data. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 57 (9), 1400–1429. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21657

Temiz, B. K., Taşar, M. F., & Tan, M. (2006). Development and validation of a test of integrated science process skills. International Education Journal , 7 (7), 1007–1027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.127

Tosun, C. (2019). Scientific process skills test development within the topic Matter and its nature and the predictive effect of different variables on 7th and 8th grade students’ scientific process skill levels. Chemistry Education Research and Practice , 20 (1), 160–174. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RP00071A

Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D., & Lesgold, A. M. (2002). Mapping to know: The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education , 86 (2), 264–286. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10004

Turkan, S., & Liu, O. L. (2012). Differential performance by English language learners on an inquiry-based science assessment. International Journal of Science Education , 34 (15), 2343–2369. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.705046

Turner, R. C., Keiffer, E. A., & Salamo, G. J. (2018). Observing inquiry-based learning environments using the scholastic inquiry observation instrument. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 16 (8), 1455–1478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9843-1

Van Vo, D., & Csapó, B. (2021). Development of scientific reasoning test measuring control of variables strategy in physics for high school students: evidence of validity and latent predictors of item difficulty. International Journal of Science Education, 43 (13), 2185–2205. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1957515

Vo, D. V., & Csapó, B. (2023). Exploring inductive reasoning, scientific reasoning and science motivation, and their role in predicting STEM achievement across grade levels. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 21 (8), 2375–2398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10349-4

Vo, D. V., Csapó, B., & Greiff, S. (2023). Development of the control of variables strategy in physics among secondary school students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49, 101371. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TSC.2023.101371

Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21stcentury competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies , 44 (3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938

Wallace, M. F. G., Bazzul, J., Higgins, M., & Tolbert, S. (Eds.). (2022). Reimagining science education in the Anthropocene . Palgrave Macmillan.

Wenning, C. J. (2007). Assessing inquiry skills as a component of scientific literacy. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online , 4 (2), 21–24.

Wu, P. H., & Wu, H. K. (2020). Constructing a model of engagement in scientific inquiry: Investigating relationships between inquiry-related curiosity, dimensions of engagement, and inquiry abilities. Instructional Science , 48 (1), 79–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09503-8

Wu, P. H., Wu, H. K., & Hsu, Y. S. (2014). Establishing the criterion-related, construct, and content validities of a simulation-based sssessment of inquiry abilities. International Journal of Science Education , 36 (10), 1630–1650. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.871660

Wu, H. K., Kuo, C. Y., Jen, T. H., & Hsu, Y. S. (2015). What makes an item more difficult? Effects of modality and type of visual information in a computer-based assessment of scientific inquiry abilities. Computers & Education , 85 , 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.01.007

Yang, K. K., Lin, S. F., Hong, Z. R., & Lin, H. (2016). Exploring the assessment of and relationship between elementary students’ scientific creativity and science inquiry. Creativity Research Journal , 28 (1), 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2016.1125270

Zachos, P., Hick, T. L., Doane, W. E. J., & Sargent, C. (2000). Setting theoretical and empirical foundations for assessing scientific inquiry and discovery in educational programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 37 (9), 938–962. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200011)37:9<938::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-S

Zheng, Y., Yu, S., Zhang, M., Wang, J., Yang, X., Zheng, S., & Ping, X. (2022). Research on performance assessment of students’ inquiry skills in China’s elementary schools: A video analysis of Beijing discovering science around us. Research in Science & Technological Education . https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2022.2126973

Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27 (2), 172–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2006.12.001

Download references

Open Access funding provided by the IReL Consortium. This research was supported by the Irish Research Council under grant number: GOIPD/2023/148.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

EPI•STEM National Research Centre for STEM Education, School of Education, University of Limerick, Castletroy, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland

De Van Vo & Geraldine Mooney Simmie

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to De Van Vo .

Ethics declarations

Declarations of originality.

This manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal.

Conflict of interest

The authors have stated no potential conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Vo, D.V., Simmie, G. Assessing Scientific Inquiry: A Systematic Literature Review of Tasks, Tools and Techniques. Int J of Sci and Math Educ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10498-8

Download citation

Received : 28 February 2024

Accepted : 17 August 2024

Published : 04 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10498-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Scientific Inquiry
• Science Education
• Systematic Literature Review
• Epistemic Network Analysis
• Bibliometrix
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

share this!

September 4, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

Quantum error correction research reveals fundamental insights into quantum systems

by Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics

As scientists and researchers increasingly look to quantum computing to aid in complex problem-solving and advance our understanding of the universe—quantum error correction has become a critical area of scientific inquiry.

Increasing the accuracy and reliability of quantum computers is essential as scientists explore their practical applications—both for fundamental science and future technological applications.

New research published in Nature Physics on September 3, 2024 documents the discovery of a new way to separate nontrivial quantum error correction codes from trivial ones.

The research shows that this new boundary line isn't arbitrary, and therefore represents fundamental progress on how quantum systems work in the real world. It paves the way for future applications not just in quantum computing—but also in condensed matter (with regards to topological order) and quantum gravity (with regards to conformal field theories).

In their article, researchers Jinmin Yi, Weicheng Ye, Daniel Gottesman and Zi-Wen Liu—who have each been supported in their work by Perimeter—detail their discovery of a mathematically rigorous connection between Approximate Quantum Error Correction (AQEC) code properties and the complexity of quantum circuits. Using this connection, scientists can now evaluate the precision level of the quantum code.

Additionally, the researchers' discovery that AQEC codes emerge naturally could help answer some of physics' biggest, most challenging questions.

"This new dividing line that we're proposing between acceptable and unacceptable codes corresponds to something physically meaningful," said Dr. Daniel Gottesman, a longtime Perimeter faculty member and current Co-Director of the Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science at the University of Maryland. "It shows that this was not just some random thing that we came up with, but that it's connected to something fundamental."

The discovery has applications in several fields of study. For example, researchers studying topological order—which explores the intricate properties of quantum materials like fractional quantum Hall states and certain superconductors—have long wrestled with the gap between entanglement conditions and code properties. These scientists now have the tools to better understand the relationship between these conditions, and advance our understanding of unique materials.

Jinmin Yi, a Perimeter PHD student and co-author of the paper, says that their research has provided "a quantitative understanding of why these two notions are actually different," unlocking potential for future research.

The study of AQECs has also uncovered intriguing insights for scientists who are looking to integrate quantum mechanics with Einstein's theory of general relativity—one of physics' most persistent challenges. Specifically, evaluating AQECs using subsystem variance has indicated that certain Conformal Field Theory systems are more likely to integrate with gravitational descriptions.

While each of these areas deserves further study, the initial results are encouraging, and invite future exploration into the scope and utility of AQEC, along with its physical and practical applications.

Journal information: Nature Physics

Provided by Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Nanostructures enable on-chip lightwave-electronic frequency mixer

49 minutes ago

Researcher helps develop new technique to explore oceanic microbes

55 minutes ago

Soil treated with organic fertilizers stores more carbon, study finds

Soil pollution surpasses climate change as top threat to underground biodiversity, study finds

Optoelectronic diamond device reveals an unexpected phenomenon reminiscent of lightning in slow motion

Fetching in cats is more common than previously thought, researchers find

Dozens of viruses detected in Chinese fur farm animals

Boeing will fly its empty capsule back to Earth soon. Two NASA astronauts will stay behind

2 hours ago

Scientists uncover hidden source of snow melt: Dark brown carbon

RNA editing plays critical role in fruit flies' sense of smell and social interactions

Relevant physicsforums posts, my problem with time-dependent schrodinger equation.

7 hours ago

The coefficient of expansion for spin addition

19 hours ago

Does a certainty in the position imply infinite variation in speed?

Sep 2, 2024

Textbook proof of repulsion/attraction of equal charges according to odd/even spin

Why do photon polarization experiments show similar outcomes in different situations.

Aug 30, 2024

Can someone please explain to me the motion of an electron?

Aug 28, 2024

More from Quantum Physics

Related Stories

Higher-order topological simulation unlocks new potential in quantum computers

Artificial intelligence could help make quantum computers a reality

Jul 12, 2024

Toward testing the quantum behavior of gravity: A photonic quantum simulation

Jun 5, 2024

Physicists have built a mathematical 'playground' to study quantum information

Aug 9, 2021

The quantum theory of gravitation, effective field theories and strings: Past and present

May 7, 2024

CCNY team in quantum algorithm breakthrough

Nov 13, 2020

Recommended for you

Entangled photon pairs enable hidden image encoding

3 hours ago

Major leap for nuclear clock paves way for ultraprecise timekeeping

5 hours ago

Bridging quantum mechanics and cosmology: The role of the generalized uncertainty principle

6 hours ago

Cold-atom simulator demonstrates quantum entanglement between electronic and motional states

Sep 3, 2024

Study predicts a new quantum anomalous crystal in fractionally filled moiré superlattices

A device to sort photon states could be useful for quantum optical computer circuits

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

The University of Chicago The Law School

Civil rights & police accountability clinic—significant achievements for 2023-24.

Our Clinic students continue to make a difference in the community, while learning all that it means to be a lawyer.

The Federal Civil Rights Consent Decree Governing the Chicago Police Department

Years of advocacy by Clinic students and our clients resulted in the 2019 federal civil rights Consent Decree that seeks to remedy the Chicago Police Department’s (CPD’s) pattern and practice of excessive and discriminatory violence targeted disproportionately against Black people. Highlights from our Consent Decree work during the 2023-24 academic year include: (1) our success in remedying CPD’s practice of violent, dehumanizing, and discriminatory home raids that have targeted and traumatized Black and Brown children and families in Chicago; (2) the relief that we won in emergency proceedings that we initiated to prevent unlawful mass arrests and First Amendment violations during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago; (3) our progress toward remedying racially discriminatory practices of targeting Black people for unlawful stop-and-frisks and pretextual traffic stops; and (4) advocacy for critical modifications to strengthen and improve the Decree.

Ending Illegal and Discriminatory Home Raids

Clinic students and our community-based clients won a complete overhaul of the policies that govern residential search warrants in Chicago in months-long court supervised multi-party negotiations, briefs, and court proceedings. CPD’s new policies will seek to restrict home raids to circumstances in which they are necessary and forbid raids whenever the potential harms outweigh the expected benefits. CPD will be required to develop a written plan for the execution of every residential warrant to minimize the harm, trauma, and intrusion to families and their homes. Officers will be evaluated for their success in mitigating harm when executing search warrants. The new policies will protect children and vulnerable people from unnecessary harm, including requiring police to schedule raids at times when they are least likely to be home. They ban high-risk nighttime raids and limit no-knock warrants to circumstances in which people’s lives and physical safety are in jeopardy. They prohibit police from leaving families with broken doors and locks vulnerable to crime. And they will require police to thoroughly document and publicly report on each raid to enhance transparency and accountability. In addition, we won measures that will prevent wrong raids, including requiring CPD to independently investigate and corroborate tips, maintain records of any instance in which the informant provided false or inaccurate information, and provide the prosecutor and court with any information that may undermine the credibility of the informant and tip before seeking a warrant. The proposed new policies will soon be subject to public review and comment in anticipation of full implementation. The public and judicial scrutiny that we brought to bear during our enforcement proceedings has already resulted in a tenfold reduction of home raids and prevented the traumatization of thousands of children.

Protecting First Amendment Rights to Protest and the DNC

In spring 2023, we learned that the CPD intended to implement a new policy to facilitate mass arrests during protests and other First Amendment activities in anticipation of the Democratic National Convention. The proposed new policy would have eviscerated relief that we had won in 2021 that fundamentally transformed Chicago police policies governing the policing of First Amendment activities—relief that requires CPD to protect the rights of people to engage in public protest and dissent rather than to stamp out protests. The Clinic filed an emergency enforcement action to enjoin the proposed mass arrest policy. In the proceedings that followed, we succeeded in preventing the parts of the policy that threatened people’s First Amendment rights from taking effect. The First Amendment policy that we had won in 2021 continues to govern during the DNC and all public demonstrations now and in the future. For example, the revised policy on mass arrests will now prohibit police from arresting people engaged in First Amendment conduct for minor offenses unless they pose an immediate threat to the physical safety or property of others. It also explicitly bans retaliation against people for exercising their First Amendment rights.

Strengthening the Consent Decree and Advancing Racial Justice

Having won our community-based clients’ historic power to enforce the Decree, Clinic students continue to fight to strengthen the Decree to make our clients—people who have been most impacted by CPD’s civil rights violations—full and equal partners in the process. As a result of our advocacy, throughout the 2023-24 academic year, the federal court ordered the City to engage with community representatives when developing policies, procedures, and training—including the recent mass arrests policy that the CPD had initially sought to impose without any meaningful community engagement. Clinic students participated in five full-day public hearings in federal court focusing on potential modifications to the Decree and issues of racial justice. Students presented powerful testimony and legal memoranda that advocated for Consent Decree revisions that (a) require de-escalation and reductions in CPD violence; (b) divert people from the criminal legal system through alternatives to arrest and the elimination of unnecessary negative interactions with police; (c) develop non-criminal responses to people experiencing mental health crises (we won implementation of an historic pilot program on this); (d) prohibit police from pointing guns at people unless they present an immediate threat to serious injury or death to another person; (e) require officers to file a written report each time they point a gun at a community member; (f) provide services to survivors of CPD violence and their family members; and (g) address barriers to police accountability that were erected in the new collective bargaining agreements with the unions representing Chicago police officers. We also succeeded in subjecting CPD’s racially discriminatory stop-and-frisk practices to federal court supervision.

The court is currently deciding whether to also subject CPD traffic stops to federal court oversight under the Consent Decree, as traffic stops have become a flashpoint for unnecessary police violence in Chicago as they have skyrocketed in Black and Brown communities. Eighty-five percent of the instances in which Chicago police used force in traffic stops have been directed at Black people. We presented testimony and briefs that seek to outlaw CPD’s practice of using pretextual stops to harass Black and Brown people, disband police tactical units that have been responsible for unnecessary and disproportionate violence directed toward Black and Brown people, and limit CPD traffic stops to violations that pose genuine threats to public safety.

Ending Incommunicado Detention—A Second Consent Decree

The Clinic continues to advance its historic work in making real the fifty-eight-year-old promise of Miranda v. Arizona in Chicago. Tyler Lawson, ’24 , and Katherine Stanton, ’25, led a team of Clinic students that did outstanding advocacy work with our community-based clients and the Office of the Cook County Public Defender after having won a second consent decree that went into effect in February 2023 in Cook County Circuit Court—a decree that is designed to end the decades-long practice of incommunicado detention in CPD stations that has facilitated torture, coerced confessions, and wrongful convictions. Clinic students produced an empirical report with Professor Kyle Rozema that analyzed data from every arrest in Chicago that took place during the first year of the Decree. The Report found ninety-nine percent of people in CPD custody did not access an attorney and more than half of the people most vulnerable to interrogation did not get prompt access to a phone. Inspections by Clinic students inside Chicago police stations revealed that legible signs required by the Consent Decree that inform people in custody of their rights under the Decree and the Public Defender’s free 24-hour hotline number for legal assistance were routinely missing in the places where CPD detains people who may be subject to interrogation. Clinic students also documented that contrary to the Decree, many of the visiting rooms that CPD is required to maintain in every police station did not allow for private and confidential meetings between people in custody and their attorneys. The Clinic presented the Report and our findings to the court. In response, the Honorable Judge Neil H. Cohen directed CPD to work with the Clinic to ensure the installation of appropriate signs and remedy the documented deficiencies with respect to privacy. We are administering a survey to people at their first court appearance to provide the court with additional information about the reasons why people in CPD custody have not promptly accessed phones and counsel. Our preliminary findings indicate that CPD has failed to offer phones or provided the Public Defender’s 24-hour number to people subject to police interrogation. A quarter of the people surveyed report that CPD interrogated them without access to counsel. In addition, Clinic students have engaged in targeted outreach to people at risk of arrest and criminal defense attorneys in Chicago, created fantastic flyers, social media, and written material to educate people about their rights under the Decree, and developed a long-form interview tool to gain additional insight about barriers to access to counsel and phones.

Individual Cases

While we fight for systemic change, the Clinic has continued its tradition of excellence in serving individuals and families in need.

Clinic students won a stage three post-conviction hearing with our client Christopher Ellis before the Honorable Carol Howard in Cook County Circuit Court that can result in vacating Mr. Ellis’s conviction. Two Chicago police officers pulled Mr. Ellis out of his car, beat and tased him, and then falsely accused Mr. Ellis of aggravated battery against the police officers to cover up their abuse. Mr. Ellis was convicted and sentenced to six years in prison. Based on a phenomenal set of briefs written by Clinic students Hannah V.L. George, ’24, and Becky Marvin, ’24, and Professor Herschella Conyers ’ students Amara Shaikh, ’24 , and Liam Grah, ’25, in the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Clinic and Becky Marvin ’s outstanding oral argument, Judge Howard found that the Clinic has made a substantial showing of Mr. Ellis’s innocence and the ineffective assistance of his trial counsel. Judge Howard offered the highest praise to the students’ work. We expect Mr. Ellis’s case to go to trial in the fall.

 Erin Yonchak,’24, presented Clifton Young’s case before the Illinois Torture and Inquiry Relief Commission. Erin’s presentation and supporting written memorandum were nothing short of superb. As a result of Erin’s scrupulous investigation, factual and legal determinations, and recommendations, the Torture Commission found credible evidence that Mr. Young was tortured by Chicago police and ordered a full evidentiary hearing in Cook County Circuit Court that may result in his freedom after having served more than twenty years in prison.

Amrita Krishnan, ’25, is investigating a novel claim of police torture before the Illinois Torture Commission that is based on Chicago police detectives’ exploitation of a person’s withdrawal symptoms from heroin and denial of medical treatment to obtain a confession. This is the first of a series of claims of torture before the Commission based on deliberate indifference to a person in custody’s severe physical and psychological pain associated with drug withdrawal to leverage an incriminating statement. Amrita’s legal and medical research into whether and under what circumstances drug withdrawal can form a basis for a torture claim is precedential. It has the power to establish the governing legal standards in Illinois for assessing torture claims involving withdrawal.

Gabbie Zook, ’24 , Hannah V.L. George, ’24 , and Becky Marvin, ’24, led an investigation with a client who was repeatedly sexually assaulted by a Chicago police officer in public housing when she was a mere teenager. The Clinic helped to connect our client with the Chicago Torture Justice Center to provide her with critical support as she continues to work through her trauma from the repeated assaults. We face a myriad of legal challenges because of the years that have passed since the assaults and Illinois law that protects municipalities from liability when police officers abuse their state power to sexually assault people, but we remain committed to supporting our client in her fight for a measure of justice and healing. Our students’ work has shined a light on a path forward.

Policy Projects

Chicago police transparency.

Natalie Cohn-Aronoff, ’24 , and Amber Hunter, ’25, have led a critical project to prevent the return to a state of police impunity in Chicago. The Clinic is responding to the Fraternal Order of Police’s (FOP’s) efforts to shroud in secrecy the adjudication of cases in which Chicago police officers have been found to have committed the most serious forms of misconduct to warrant firing or suspension of more than a year. After the FOP won an arbitration award that sought to end a sixty-year history of public hearings before a neutral body to be replaced by secret hearings behind closed doors by a handful of handpicked arbitrators who have a long track record of protecting Chicago police officers from accountability, the Clinic began work with a coalition of community, civil rights, and good government groups organized to stop the FOP from turning back the clock on our progress. We drafted press releases and an op-ed that lifted the threat of Chicago police impunity to visibility. We drafted policy and legal material for City Council to provide the basis for challenging the arbitrator’s award. We provided testimony in public hearings that was widely cited in the media. Our work supporting the organization of community members persuaded the Mayor and City Council to reject the Arbitrator’s award by a 3/5 vote in City Council and challenge the award in court. The Cook County Circuit Court then ruled that the Arbitrator’s award violated fundamental state policy in Chicago police transparency and accountability and ordered that the Chicago police disciplinary cases must remain open to the public. The FOP has filed a notice of appeal. A team of Clinic students led by Ben Postone, ’24, is drafting an amicus brief before the Illinois Court of Appeals on behalf of the broad community-based coalition that will explain the nature and strength of the public interest at stake.

At the same time, Clinic students have conducted extensive research and consulted experts in labor law to draft proposed state legislation that requires the public adjudication of Chicago police misconduct cases. The Clinic is collaborating with stakeholders to devise a path to establish law that will guarantee public transparency on CPD misconduct now and in the future. The Clinic has also drafted potential municipal legislation that would enhance Chicago’s Civilian Office of Police Accountability’s (COPA’s) efforts to promote greater transparency and accountability by enabling COPA to promptly publicly release summaries of completed misconduct investigations, prosecute disciplinary proceedings that result from COPA investigations, and restrict the Police Department’s power to overturn misconduct findings only for clear error and disciplinary recommendations only for abuse of discretion.

Sam Hallam, ’25, and Katherine Stanton, ’25, are leading efforts to remedy other aspects of FOP’s new collective bargaining contract that thwart police accountability and transparency in Chicago, including a provision that prohibits the videotaping of conversations between officers and supervisors after a police officer shoots a community member. The recording and use of such conversations are critical tools to remedy the longstanding code of silence in the CPD—a code that has encouraged officers to manufacture a common narrative when an officer shoots or kills a person or is otherwise accused of misconduct.

Medical-Legal Partnership with University of Chicago Trauma Center

Rosie Gruen, ’25 , and Sam Hallam, ’25, have led a medical-legal project that we launched last year with the Trauma Center at the University of Chicago Medical Center (UCMC) and pro bono attorneys from the Akerman law firm to prevent police from to violating patient civil rights and medical privacy and interfering with critical medical care. We formed this partnership to address reports from the doctors and staff at the Medical Center of police abuse of patients who have suffered gunshot injuries; coercive interrogations of people who are being treated for serious injuries; interference with medical care and patient autonomy over medical decisions; searches and seizures of patients’ personal property; invasions of patient privacy and personal health information; shackling and physical abuse of patients; and forcing medical personal to perform invasive tests on patients. The Clinic team has been conducting and working to publish empirical research on interactions between police and professionals and staff at the Medical Center and patients and their family members. In addition to the conducting approximately fifty long-form interviews, the Clinic has researched the intersection of property law, criminal law and procedure, privacy law, constitutional law, and administrative regulations and practices in medical settings around the United States. Students have also consulted with national medical and legal experts. Based upon our research, the Clinic developed a first draft of recommended UCMC policies for internal feedback to prevent ongoing civil rights violations and interference with patient care. Our research has also taught us that despite similar civil rights violations in hospital settings and interference by law enforcement with medical treatment, there is a lack of model policies or established best practices on the subject. We are hopeful that the publication of our research and the policies that we develop at UCMC will serve as a model for hospitals throughout the country and prevent civil and human rights violations and improve health outcomes in the Trauma Center and beyond.

Partnership with the Cook County Public Defender and Zealous

We also built on our partnership with the Cook County Public Defender’s Office and Zealous, a national non-profit dedicated to supporting public defender offices, to identify and address systemic issues in the criminal legal system that deprive clients of the Public Defender and Clinic access to justice. Darius Diamond, ’24 , Gabbie Zook, ’24 , and Katherine Stanton, ’25, have led our efforts on this project. This year, our focus has been to support the Public Defender’s work to create two holistic community defender offices in Chicago—the first is scheduled to open this fall in the Roseland community on Chicago’s South Side. The second will be in the Austin community on the West Side. Clinic students have been on the ground floor in designing the offices and services with community members, public defenders, and people in jail. We are developing plans for Clinic students to maintain a regular presence in the Community Defender Offices to work with public defenders and their clients in addressing police accountability and other systemic barriers to justice.

In addition, students are working with public defenders in Cook County to achieve greater independence from county prosecutors and judges when advocating with their clients to change and enjoin laws, policies and practices that impair the ability of public defenders to represent their clients and to improve the criminal legal system. For example, Clinic students are currently working with the Public Defender to explore ways to change the law to give the Public Defender the power to retain counsel to bring affirmative civil rights litigation.