---------------------------♦----------------------------- INTRODUCTION

Later years have viewed a developing call for inquiry to play an essential part in science instruction (e.g., AAAS, 1994; NRC, 1996; Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Linn, diSessa, Pea & Songer, 1994). This call for request-built studying is based in light of the distinguishment that science is basically an inquiry-driven, open-finished methodology and that learners must have private experience with deductive inquiry to grasp this basic part of science (NRC, 1995, Project 2061, Linn, Songer & Eylon, 1996). Besides, inquiry exercises give a profitable setting for learners to gain, clear up, besides apply a comprehension of science notions. In the meantime, PC innovations are getting expanded consideration from the science training commmunity due to fervor regarding their possibility to uphold new types of analysis. The aforementioned two change fads are meeting up in the manifestation of various ventures to make intends for innovation-underpinned, request-based science studying. For instance, an impressive number of instructive exploration and advancement activities are at present investigating the utilization of machines and systems to gather, trade, and break down exploratory information. In the earth sciences apart from everyone else, scores of instructive activities have been started in the final decade to give information and dissection apparatuses to the instructive neighborhood. Different undertakings captivate learners in the gathering and trade of exploratory information. A considerable lot of the aforementioned tasks in the United States are the immediate come about of NASA and National Science Foundation subsidizing modifies planned to help synergies between the experimental exploration and training groups. The objective of this paper is to address the requirements of architects of instructive encounters like the aforementioned. Throughout the final six years, the creators have been occupied with the examination of innovation-underpinned inquiry learning, through the configuration, usage, and assessment of logical visualization instruments for learners. Our objective has been to grasp the chances and snags introduced by logical visualization as an innovation to help request-based studying. In the chase for this goal, we have advanced a succession of investigative visualization territories and request-based curricula, and contemplated their utilization in both lab and open school classroom settings. In the process of this research, we have stood up to various critical challenges to the execution of analysis-based studying and investigated configuration methodologies for reacting to them. In this paper, we talk over the aforementioned challenges and methodologies in the connection of a configuration history blanket four eras of programming and curriculum. We start with a discourse of the chances for studying furnished by innovation-upheld inquiry learning all in all what's more how they have an association with the particular space of atmosphere science and the particular innovations of logical visualization. We then present an abstract of the tests for actualizing inquiry learning that this outline history addresses, accompanied by the configuration history itself. Accompanying the history, we highlight the outline procedures we followed and portray how they deliver the for request-based studying. We close with

2

According to constructivist view of learning, learners construct their own understanding of the content under investigation. To achieve this end, learners will need learning environments supporting investigation, insight, reflection and discovery. The constructivist perspective is based on the premise that we all construct our own views of the world around us, through integrating our individual experiences and schema with new knowledge. Therefore, constructivism focuses on preparing the learner to solve problems in ambiguous situations. From a constructivist perspective, knowledge is not independent of the knower; knowledge consists of physical and abstract objects in our experience. For example, there is no one true definition of inquiry waiting to be discovered, but an understanding of inquiry is constructed by individual himself. According to Von Glasersfeld (1996), knowledge is adaptive; the worth of knowledge is not determined by its degree of truth, but by its viability. Those forms of knowledge about inquiry which are viable in classroom practice will become constructed forms of inquiry. For learners, knowledge about any content will be an individual construction through participation in the social and physical environment of the classroom. Constructivists point that it is impractical for teachers to make all the instructional and learning decisions and give the information to students without involving students in the decision making process and assessing students' abilities to construct knowledge. In other words, guided instruction through questioning and inquiry is suggested where students are considered as the heart of learning process, and provided with guidance and concrete teaching whenever necessary. Inquiry-based environment is one that provides and supports development of learning experiences where learners observe events, ask questions, construct explanations, test those explanations, use critical and logical thinking, generalize observed patterns, and consider alternative explanations. In this cyclical process: The learner asks questions. These questions lead to the desire for answers to the question (or for solutions to a problem) and result in the beginning of exploration and hypotheses creation. These hypotheses lead to an investigation to test the hypothesis or find answers and solutions to the question and/or problem. The investigation leads to the creation or construction of new knowledge based on investigation findings. The learner discusses and reflects on this newly-acquired knowledge, which, in turn leads to more questions and further investigation. Inquiry-based Technology Enhanced Collaborative own conclusions through experimentation, observation, investigation and conjecture. One may also provide environments where learners are required to design and carry out experiments. Engaging in setting meaningful learning goals, determining which strategies to use and evaluating learning process are particularly important in technology-based learning situations involving open learning task structure, where these regulatory processes are not outlined by a teacher (Azevedo, Cromley & Seibert, 2004). Research reports that students learn much more when they are given inquiry based learning environments to first experiment on specific information relevant to a topic (Chiappetta & Russel, 1982). Salovaara (2005) indicated that the students who participated in the inquiry-based computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) activities reported deeper-level cognitive strategies such as monitoring, creating representations and sharing information collaboratively.

Inquiry, the pursuit of open questions, is fundamental to the practice of science. Inquiry-based science learning is based on the idea that science learning should be authentic to science practice, an idea advocated by Dewey (1964a; 1964b). Modern support for inquiry-based learning comes from research in cognitive science that provides evidence for the importance of activity and authentic contexts for learning (e.g., Greeno, Collins, & Resnick, 1996). Authentic activities provide learners with the motivation to acquire new knowledge, a perspective for incorporating new knowledge into their existing knowledge, and an opportunity to apply their knowledge. In contrast to the passive reception of knowledge associated with conventional science learning, inquiry is active. As an authentic scientific practice, inquiry also provides a valuable context for science learning. In this section, we provide a brief rationale for incorporating inquiry into science education and for using technology to support inquiry-based learning. To do so, we highlight the opportunities for learning provided by inquiry and the opportunities to support inquiry-based learning provided by computer technologies. We discuss these opportunities both in general and in the specific case of climatology and scientific visualization that we have explored in our research. Opportunities for Learning : Scientists’ knowledge of scientific concepts, understanding of scientific tools and media, and inquiry skills are inextricably intertwined. Our goal in attempting to implement inquiry-based science learning is to help students develop this same sort of integrated understanding. Participation in inquiry can provide students with the opportunity to achieve three inter-related learning

The first opportunity for learning provided by inquiry is the opportunity to develop general inquiry abilities. In its prototypic form, inquiry-based science learning involves the pursuit of open-ended questions and is driven by questions generated by learners (Welch et al., 1981; Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Linn, Songer & Eylon, 1996). In practice, posing researchable questions and pursuing them through open-ended investigations are abilities that must be learned. General inquiry abilities include posing and refining research questions, planning and managing an investigation, and analyzing and communicating results. Inquiry activities provide the opportunity to develop and exercise these general inquiry abilities. Technological Support for Inquiry-Based Learning : Computing and networking technologies offer dramatic, new opportunities to support inquiry-based learning. For instance, in their analysis of technology as a support for project-based science learning, Blumenfeld et al. (1991) identified six contributions that technology can make to the learning process:

• enhancing interest and motivation;

• providing access to information;

• allowing active, manipulable representations;

• structuring the process with tactical and strategic support;

• diagnosing and correcting errors;

• managing complexity and aiding production.

Even though inquiry offers propelling chances for science learning, there are numerous tests to the efficacious execution of Inquiry – Based Learning. For sample, analysts have recorded that youngsters have challenges directing efficient deductive examinations (e.g., Schauble et al., 1995; Kraijcik et al. 1998). Information assembling, investigation, elucidation, and conveyance are all challenging errands that are made increasingly troublesome by the requirement for substance-range information. While we dropped in this outline prepare with some particular thoughts of how engineering could be utilized to address the tests of Inquiry – Based Learning, we discovered that the aforementioned tests showed up in numerous shapes and that reacting to them viably practically dependably needed the utilization of both mechanical and portrayed beneath exhibit that the inadequacy to address any of the aforementioned challenges effectually can forestall scholars from effectively participating in important examinations and consequently undermine learning. The five tests are: 1. Inspiration. For people to participate in inquiry in a manner that can donate to serious learning they must be sufficiently propelled. The challenging and amplified nature of inquiry needs a larger amount of cause on the part of learners than is requested by above all conventional instructive actions. To cultivate learning, that inspiration must be the effect of premium in the examination, its results, and their suggestions. Any time scholars are not sufficiently propelled or they are not spurred by authentic investment, they either cannot cooperate in inquiry exercises, or they partake in them in a separated way that does not underpin learning. Cause is distinguished by Soloway et al. (1994) as one of three essential challenges for Learner-Centered Design. 2. Approachability of examination systems. For learners to participate in inquiry, they must know how to perform the assignments that their examination needs, they should comprehend the objectives of the aforementioned practices, and they must have the ability to translate their results. Exploratory examination methods for example information gathering and investigation might be confused and regularly need a level of exactness and mind that are most certainly not needed of learners in their regular encounters. In the event that learners are not ready to ace the aforementioned methods, then they can't lead examinations that yield important outcomes. The requirement for devices to be open to learners over the full differences of capacities and earlier encounters is a different test of Learner- Focused Design raised by Soloway et al. (1994). 3. Underpinning information. The plan of examination inquiries, the advancement of an exploration arrangement, and the gathering, investigation, and translation of information, all need science content information. In planning Inquiry – Based Learning, the challenge is giving chances for learners to both improve and apply that exploratory comprehension. Provided that people fail to offer this information and the chance to advance it, then they could be unable to finish significant examinations. 4. Administration of broadened actions. To actualize the extreme objective of open-finished inquiry, learners must have the capacity to compose and operate complex, enlarged exercises. An investigative examination presupposes arranging and coordination of movement and the administration of assets and work features. People are definitely not

4

and supervise an broadened methodology, people can't take part in open-finished inquiry or accomplish the potential of Inquiry – Based Learning. 5. The useful obligations of the learning connection. The innovations and exercises of Inquiry – Based Learning should fit inside the useful obligations of the learning earth, for example the limitations infringed by ready assets and settled plans. While this test might not have the same speculative imperativeness as the other four for progressing our comprehension of the learning sciences, it has gigantic reasonable suggestions for configuration. A flop to work inside the ready innovation or fit inside the existing docket in a school will fate a configuration to flop. In this way, gathering the requirements of nature is a basic attention in configuration that must be acknowledged nearby learning needs in the outline of curriculum and innovation.

This study showed that well designed an inquiry-based technology enhanced collaborative learning environment can enhance students learning experiences. The results were consistent with the previous research (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Dede 1998; Chang, et al., 2003). The unique contribution of this study is that this method of learning is valuable for both graduate and undergraduate level students. Undergraduate students' performances were nearly close to graduate students' performances in the same unit of the study. The most productive and worthwhile inquiry based activities in this study requires students to gather data but go beyond simply reporting the findings. When the students were asked to analyze their findings then they compared, contrasted and reflected on them a more sophisticated level of knowledge develops. When they related them to their personal experiences they advanced their knowledge. When they were asked to create or construct some of original knowledge then their educational experiences become true constructivist ones. These results are particularly exciting because they cast a whole new light on the issue of designing inquiry-based learning environments for university courses in general, and enhancing this method by using technology and collaboration in particular.

• Edelson, D. C. (1995). A Design for Effective Support of Inquiry and Collaboration. In J. L. Schnase & E. L. Cunnius (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL '95: The First International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, October 17-20, 1995, Bloomington Indiana, . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

• Gordin, D. N. (1997). Scientific Visualization as an Expressive Medium for Project Science Inquiry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Northwestern University.

• Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, Termites, and Traffic Jams: Explorations in Massively Parallel Microworlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

• Edelson, D. C., Pea, R. D., & Gomez, L. (1996a). Constructivism in the collaboratory. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design, . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

• Greenberg, R., Kolvoord, R.A., Magisos, M., Strom, R.G., Croft, S. (1993). Image processing for teaching. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2, 469-480.

• Thornburg, D. G., & Pea, R. D. (1991). Synthesizing instructional technologies and educational culture: Exploring cognition and metacognition in the social studies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7(2), 121-164.

• Linn, M. C., Bell, P., & Hsi, S. (in press). Lifelong science learning on the Internet: The knowledge integration environment. Interactive Learning Environments.

• White, B.Y. (1993). ThinkerTools: Causal models, conceptual change, and science education. Cognition and Instruction, 10(1), 1-100.

• McCormick B.H., DeFanti T.A., & Brown, M.D. (Eds.). (1987). Visualization in

• Scientific Computing. Computer Graphics, 21(6).

• Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (Eds.). (1978). The hidden costs of reward. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

• Ireton, M. F. W., Manduca, C. A., & Mogck, D. W. (Eds.). (1996). Shaping the future of undergraduate earth science education: Innovation and change using an earth system approach. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.