Teaching science through traditional way of lecturing is very convenient, as in this method the teacher uses his notes or a book and the students listen. This is one reason that lecturing has been the conventional way of teaching science.This kind of teaching and learning process results in just the memorization of the content by the students. As a result students lack analytical, critical thinking and problem solving skills.
The effective way of teaching science is providing inquiry based learning. This is the true way of teaching problem solving skills. The aim of inquiry based learning is to drift the students from passively listening to actively solve a problem by continuing questioning. Inquiry based learning prepares the students to face the real world by making them problem solvers, critical thinkers and strong analyzers.
The article also compares constructivism and inquiry based learning. Though the structure for both seems to be similar, there is one important difference. While the role of teacher is assumed not important by the constructivism, it is instead crucial in inquiry based learning. In inquiry based learning teacher provides students with a challenge followed by further questioning that act as a guidance towards solving that problem. While in constructivism the students are given a tool and are expected to master it by exploring and working their own way.
The current vision, constructivist approach that OLPC originally envisioned for the XO, is to allow the students to develop their skills with the use of machine not necessarily while at school. But this unguided, undisputed and unchallenged use of it won't make it effective.
So though constructivism plays a very important role in teaching science as it allows students to explore and learn, it will be ineffective if it is not inquiry based.
