InquiryGPT: Augmenting ChatGPT for Enhancing Inquiry-Based Learning in STEM Education

Abstract

The core purpose of integrating inquiry-based learning strategies into STEM activities is to create a challenging learning environment that stimulates students’ active learning, thereby effectively enhancing their interest in learning, thinking skills, and practical application abilities. To achieve these goals, developing more technology-assisted tools and platforms to improve teaching efficiency and enrich the learning experience becomes crucial. Therefore, this research developed InquiryGPT, which guides students through the POEE inquiry process by imposing limitations, facilitating dialogue, and providing feedback, while avoiding over-reliance on ChatGPT. This promotes the cultivation of higher-order thinking skills through interactions with InquiryGPT, thereby enhancing students’ knowledge construction and understanding. This study, based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), examined the effectiveness of InquiryGPT. The results showed no significant difference between InquiryGPT and ChatGPT in terms of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Additionally, through analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), the study further analyzed the impact of InquiryGPT on students’ higher-order thinking skills and learning scores, proving that it significantly enhances students’ creativity, problem-solving abilities, critical thinking, and knowledge construction.

Keywords

STEM education inquiry-based learning ChatGPT higher order thinking skills knowledge construction technology acceptance model (TAM)

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abdurrahman

Nurulsari̇

Mauli̇na

Ari̇yani̇

(2019). Design and validation of inquiry-based STEM learning strategy as a powerful alternative solution to facilitate gift students facing 21st century challenging. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 7(1), 33–56. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.513308

Adijaya

M. A.

Widiana

I. W.

Parwata

I. G. L. A.

Antara

I. G. W. S.

(2023). Bloom’s taxonomy revision-oriented learning activities to improve procedural capabilities and learning outcomes. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 9(1), 261–270. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.9.1.261

Antonietti

Cattaneo

Amenduni

(2022). Can teachers’ digital competence influence technology acceptance in vocational education? Computers in Human Behavior, 132, 107266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107266

Baidoo-Anu

Ansah

L. O.

(2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AIDS, 7(1), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500

Chai

C. S.

Deng

Tsai

P.-S.

Koh

J. H. L.

Tsai

C.-C.

(2015). Assessing multidimensional students’ perceptions of twenty-first-century learning practices. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(3), 389–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9379-4

Chen

(2021). Effects of STEM inquiry method on learning attitude and creativity. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(11), em2031. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11254

Chen

C.-H.

Huang

Liu

J.-H.

(2020). Inquiry-enhanced digital game-based learning: Effects on secondary students’ conceptual understanding in science, game performance, and behavioral patterns. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(4), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00486-w

Chen

J.-C.

(2022). Developing a cycle-mode POED model and using scientific inquiry for a practice activity to improve students’ learning motivation, learning performance, and hands-on ability. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(7), 1252–1264. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1716023

Cheng

C.-Y.

Kinshuk (2021). Integrating smartphone-controlled paper airplane into gamified science inquiry for junior high school students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(1), 71–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120953598

10.

Chu

S. K. W.

Reynolds

R. B.

Tavares

N. J.

Notari

Lee

C. W. Y.

(2021). 21st century skills development through inquiry-based learning from theory to practice. Springer.

11.

Clarizia

Colace

Lombardi

Pascale

Santaniello

(2018). Chatbot: An education support system for student. Cyberspace Safety and Security. 10th International Symposium, CSS 2018, Amalfi, Italy, 29–31 October, 2018.

12.

Conradty

Bogner

F. X.

(2019). From STEM to STEAM: Cracking the code? How creativity & motivation interacts with inquiry-based learning. Creativity Research Journal, 31(3), 284–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2019.1641678

13.

Conradty

Bogner

F. X.

(2020a). STEAM teaching professional development works: Effects on students’ creativity and motivation. Smart Learning Environments, 7(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-020-00132-9

14.

Conradty

Bogner

F. X.

(2020b). STEAM teaching professional development works: Effects on students’ creativity and motivation. Smart Learning Environments, 7(1), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-020-00132-9

15.

Cooper

(2023). Examining science education in chatgpt: An exploratory study of generative artificial intelligence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(3), 444–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10039-y

16.

Davis

F. D.

(1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

17.

Dobber

Zwart

Tanis

van Oers

(2017). Literature review: The role of the teacher in inquiry-based education. Educational Research Review, 22, 194–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.002

18.

El Nagdi

Roehrig

(2020). Identity evolution of STEM teachers in Egyptian STEM schools in a time of transition: A case study. International Journal of STEM Education, 7, 16–41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00235-2

19.

Eroglu

Bektas

(2022). The effect of 5E-based STEM education on academic achievement, scientific creativity, and views on the nature of science. Learning and Individual Differences, 98, 102181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102181

20.

Falloon

Hatzigianni

Bower

Forbes

Stevenson

(2020). Understanding K-12 STEM education: A framework for developing STEM literacy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(3), 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09823-x

21.

Fuchs

(2023). Exploring the opportunities and challenges of NLP models in higher education: Is chat GPT a blessing or a curse? Frontiers in Education, 8, 1166682. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1166682

22.

Granic

Marangunic

(2019). Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2572–2593. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12864

23.

Gunawan

Harjono

Nisyah

M. A.

Kusdiastuti

Herayanti

(2020). Improving students' problem-solving skills using inquiry learning model combined with advance organizer. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 427–442. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13427a

24.

Guo

Lee

(2023). Leveraging chatgpt for enhancing critical thinking skills. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(12), 4876–4883. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00505

25.

Hacioglu

Gulhan

(2021). The effects of STEM education on the students’ critical thinking skills and STEM perceptions. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 7(2), 139–155.

26.

Hamilton

Lesh

Lester

Yoon

(2020). The use of reflection tools to build personal models of problem-solving. In Foundations for the future in mathematics education (pp. 349–366). Routledge.

27.

Hong

J.-C.

Hwang

M.-Y.

Liu

M.-C.

H.-Y.

Chen

Y.-L.

(2014). Using a “prediction–observation–explanation” inquiry model to enhance student interest and intention to continue science learning predicted by their Internet cognitive failure. Computers & Education, 72, 110–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.004

28.

Hong

J.-C.

Tsai

C.-R.

Hsiao

H.-S.

Chen

P.-H.

Chu

K.-C.

Sitthiworachart

(2019). The effect of the “Prediction-observation-quiz-explanation” inquiry-based e-learning model on flow experience in green energy learning. Computers & Education, 133, 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.01.009

29.

Huang

Y.-M.

Cheng

A.-Y.

T.-T.

(2022). Analysis of learning behavior of human posture recognition in Maker Education. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 868487. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.868487

30.

Huang

Y.-M.

Silitonga

L. M.

Murti

A. T.

T.-T.

(2023). Learner engagement in a business simulation game: Impact on higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(1), 96–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331221106918

31.

Karamustafaoglu

Pektas

H. M.

(2023). Developing students’ creative problem solving skills with inquiry-based STEM activity in an out-of-school learning environment. Education and Information Technologies, 28(6), 7651–7669. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11496-5

32.

King

(1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338–368. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312031002338

33.

Krathwohl

D. R.

(2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

34.

Kusmin

(2019). Co-designing the kits of IoT devices for inquiry-based learning in STEM. Technologies, 7(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies7010016

35.

Kyza

E. A.

Georgiou

(2019). Scaffolding augmented reality inquiry learning: The design and investigation of the TraceReaders location-based, augmented reality platform. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(2), 211–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1458039

36.

Lai

C.-S.

(2018). Using inquiry-based strategies for enhancing students’ STEM education learning. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 4(1), 110–117.

37.

Lai

C. Y.

Cheung

K. Y.

Chan

C. S.

(2023). Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation in ChatGPT adoption to support active learning: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100178

38.

Lai

T.-L.

Lin

Y.-S.

Chou

C.-Y.

Yueh

H.-P.

(2022). Evaluation of an inquiry-based virtual lab for junior high school science classes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(8), 1579–1600. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211001579

39.

Lee

H.-Y.

Chen

P.-H.

Wang

W.-S.

Huang

Y.-M.

T.-T.

(2024). Empowering ChatGPT with guidance mechanism in blended learning: Effect of self-regulated learning, higher-order thinking skills, and knowledge construction. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00447-4

40.

Lee

H.-Y.

Lin

C.-J.

Wang

W.-S.

Chang

W.-C.

Huang

Y.-M.

(2023). Precision education via timely intervention in K-12 computer programming course to enhance programming skill and affective-domain learning objectives. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00444-5

41.

Wang

Xiao

Froyd

J. E.

(2020). Research and trends in STEM education: A systematic review of journal publications. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00207-6

42.

Liu

(2023). Measuring EFL learners’ use of ChatGPT in informal digital learning of English based on the technology acceptance model. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 18(2), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2023.2240316

43.

Loos

Gröpler

Goudeau

M.-L. S.

(2023). Using ChatGPT in education: Human reflection on ChatGPT’s self-reflection. Societies, 13(8), 196. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13080196

44.

Pang

Shadiev

(2021). Understanding the mediating effect of learning approach between learning factors and higher order thinking skills in collaborative inquiry-based learning. Educational Technology Research & Development, 69(5), 2475–2492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10025-4

45.

Magnussen

Ishida

Itano

(2000). The impact of the use of inquiry-based learning as a teaching methodology on the development of critical thinking. In The impact of the use of inquiry-based learning as a teaching methodology on the development of critical thinking (39, pp. 360–364). SLACK. https://doi.org/10.3928/0148-4834-20001101-07

46.

Mamun

M. A. A.

Lawrie

Wright

(2020). Instructional design of scaffolded online learning modules for self-directed and inquiry-based learning environments. Computers & Education, 144, 103695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103695

47.

Margot

K. C.

Kettler

(2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2

48.

Marpaung

M. E.

(2023). Effect of guided inquiry model with active-reflective dimensional learning style on high school students’ chemistry learning outcomes. Media Eksakta, 19(1), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.22487/me.v19i1.3672

49.

Mustafa

A. S.

Garcia

M. B.

(2021). Theories integrated with technology acceptance model (TAM) in online learning acceptance and continuance intention: A systematic review. 2021 1st Conference on online teaching for mobile education (OT4ME). IEEE.

50.

Nadelson

L. S.

Callahan

Pyke

Hay

Dance

Pfiester

(2013). Teacher STEM perception and preparation: Inquiry-based STEM professional development for elementary teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2012.667014

51.

Nicol

C. B.

(2021). An overview of inquiry-based science instruction amid challenges. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(12), em2042. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11350

52.

Nunnally

J. C.

(1978). An overview of psychological measurement. In Wolman

B. B.

(Ed.), Clinical diagnosis of mental disorders: A handbook (pp. 97–146). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-2490-4_4

53.

Prakash

Litoriya

(2022). Pedagogical transformation of Bloom taxonomy's LOTs into HOTs: An investigation in context with IT education. Wireless Personal Communications, 122(1), 725–736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-021-08921-2

54.

Prananda

Proboningrum

Pratama

Laksono

(2020). Improving higher order thinking skills (hots) with project based learning (pjbl) model assisted by geogebra. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1467(1), 012027. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1467/1/012027

55.

Pujawan

Rediani

Antara

Putri

Bayu

(2022). Revised Bloom taxonomy-oriented learning activities to develop scientific literacy and creative thinking skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(1), 47–60. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.34628

56.

Putra

Rahman

Ilwandri

Suhayat

Santosa

T. A.

Putra

Aprilisia

(2023). The effect of STEM-based react model on students' critical thinking skills: A meta-analysis study. Literacy: International Scientific Journals of Social, Education, Humanities, 2(1), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.56910/literacy.v2i1.560

57.

Qamariyah

S. N.

Rahayu

Fajaroh

Alsulami

N. M.

(2021). The effect of implementation of inquiry-based learning with socio-scientific issues on students' higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Science Learning, 4(3), 210–218. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v4i3.30863

58.

Rahman

M. M.

Watanobe

(2023). ChatGPT for education and research: Opportunities, threats, and strategies. Applied Sciences, 13(9), 5783. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095783

59.

Scherer

Siddiq

Tondeur

(2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009

60.

Shin

(2023). Enhancing the critical analysis skills in writing a literature review: An application of Bloom’s taxonomy for students in higher education. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 5(1).

61.

Sutiani

Situmorang

Silalahi

(2021). Implementation of an inquiry learning model with science literacy to improve student critical thinking skills. International Journal of Instruction, 14(2), 117–138. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.1428a

62.

Tan

A.-L.

Ong

Y. S.

Tan

J. H. J.

(2023). STEM problem solving: Inquiry, concepts, and reasoning. Science & Education, 32(2), 381–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00310-2

63.

Tran

V. D.

(2014). The effects of cooperative learning on the academic achievement and knowledge retention. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(2), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v3n2p131

64.

Urdanivia Alarcon

D. A.

Talavera-Mendoza

Rucano Paucar

F. H.

Cayani Caceres

K. S.

Machaca Viza

(2023). Science and inquiry-based teaching and learning: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1170487

65.

Vanduhe

V. Z.

Nat

Hasan

H. F.

(2020). Continuance intentions to use gamification for training in higher education: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM), social motivation, and task technology fit (TTF). IEEE Access, 8, 21473–21484. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2020.2966179

66.

Wahono

Lin

P.-L.

Chang

C.-Y.

(2020). Evidence of STEM enactment effectiveness in Asian student learning outcomes. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00236-1

67.

Wale

B. D.

Bishaw

K. S.

(2020). Effects of using inquiry-based learning on EFL students’ critical thinking skills. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 5, 9–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-020-00090-2

68.

Wang

Peng

Wang

(2022). A curation activity-based self-regulated learning promotion approach as scaffolding to improving learners’ performance in STEM courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(4), 843–876. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211056532

69.

White

Gunstone

(1992). Prediction-observation-explanation. Probing understanding, 4, 44–64.

70.

T.-T.

Lee

H.-Y.

P.-H.

Huang

C.-N.

Huang

Y.-M.

(2024). Promoting self-regulation progress and knowledge construction in blended learning via ChatGPT-based learning aid. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(8), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231191125

71.

Yerima

A. B.

(2021). Effects of reflective inquiry teaching method on students’ academic achievement in domestic installation module in technical colleges of yobe state, Nigeria. Middle Eastern Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences, 2(1), 130–142. https://doi.org/10.47631/mejress.v2i1.153

72.

Yilmaz

Maxutov

Baitekov

Balta

(2023). Student attitudes towards chat GPT: A technology acceptance model survey. International Educational Review, 1(1), 57–83. https://doi.org/10.58693/ier.114

73.

Yuliati

Riantoni

Mufti

(2018). Problem solving skills on direct current electricity through inquiry-based learning with PhET simulations. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.1149a

74.

Zaineldeen

Hongbo

Koffi

Hassan

(2020). Technology acceptance model’concepts, contribution, limitation, and adoption in education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(11), 5061–5071. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081106

75.

Zhao

Liu

Tai

K.-H.

Hong

J.-C.

(2021). Exploring the effects on fifth graders' concept achievement and scientific epistemological beliefs: Applying the prediction-observation-explanation inquiry-based learning model in science education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 20(4), 664–676. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/21.20.664