From Inquiry to Learning: Exploring Non-Mathematics Students’ Experiences with Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) Approach
Main Article Content
Abstract
Non-mathematics students in tertiary education encounter varied academic demands that require active participation, critical thinking, collaboration, and independent learning, yet their experiences with inquiry-based learning (IBL) remain insufficiently understood. This qualitative study examines how non-mathematics students experience and navigate IBL within their classroom contexts. Using purposive sampling, the researchers conducted focus group discussions with selected tertiary-level non-mathematics students and analyzed the data through a grounded theory approach to identify recurring concepts, categories, and emerging themes. The findings highlighted four central dimensions of students’ experiences: active and participatory engagement, development of higher-order thinking and problem-solving skills, collaborative learning, and application of knowledge to meaningful and authentic situations. Furthermore, the findings revealed that complex inquiry tasks, limited time, group dynamics, varying levels of confidence and preparedness, and insufficient guidance can constrain students’ engagement and learning. To support meaningful inquiry experiences, students emphasized the importance of clear instructional guidance, appropriate scaffolding, supportive classroom environments, manageable learning activities, and responsive teacher facilitation. Teachers play a critical role in balancing student autonomy with structured support, particularly when learners encounter uncertainty or difficulty in navigating open-ended inquiry tasks. The study concludes that effective IBL among non-mathematics students requires pedagogical responsiveness, appropriate instructional structure, and learning environments that enable students to actively participate, collaborate, think critically, and construct meaningful understanding
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Afikah, A., Rahmadani, A., Rohaeti, E., Jumadi, J., & Wilujeng, I. (2025). Profiling students’ critical thinking and communication skills through research-oriented collaborative inquiry learning. International Journal of Learning and Teaching, 17(2), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.18844/ijlt.v17i2.9709
Ahmad, M., & Wilkins, S. (2024). Purposive sampling in qualitative research: A framework for the entire journey. Quality & Quantity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-024-02022-5
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Attard, C., Berger, N., & Mackenzie, E. (2021). The positive influence of inquiry-based learning teacher professional learning and industry partnerships on student engagement with STEM. Frontiers in Education, 6, Article 693221. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.693221
Beetham, H. (2020). Learning activities and activity systems. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Principles and practices of design (3rd ed., pp. 32–48). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351252805-3
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (Eds.). (2020). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Principles and practices of design (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351252805
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415
Bogador, C. J., Camarao, M. K. G., Matunding, C. G., & Sombria, K. J. F. (2024). Challenges and benefits of inquiry-based learning in physics. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 5(7), 2716–2732. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.05.07.26
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2024). Supporting best practice in reflexive thematic analysis reporting in palliative medicine: A review of published research and introduction to the Reflexive Thematic Analysis Reporting Guidelines (RTARG). Palliative Medicine, 38(6), 608–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163241234800
Chang, C.-J. (2023). Designing a scaffolding inquiry-based instruction to promote non-engineering students in STEM learning. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computers in Education (Vol. 2, pp. 736–740). Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education. https://doi.org/10.58459/icce.2023.1450
Chen, F., & Chen, G. (2025a). Learning analytics in inquiry-based learning: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 73, 2131–2161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10507-9
Chen, F., & Chen, G. (2025b). Technology-enhanced collaborative inquiry in K–12 classrooms: A systematic review of empirical studies. Science & Education, 34, 1731–1773. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00538-8
Dah, N. M., Noor, M. S. A. M., Kamarudin, M. Z., & Azziz, S. S. S. A. (2024). The impacts of open inquiry on students’ learning in science: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 43, Article 100601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100601
De Van Vo, D., & Mooney Simmie, G. (2025). Assessing scientific inquiry: A systematic literature review of tasks, tools and techniques. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23, 871–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10498-8
Dewi, S. E., Setyosari, P., Hanafi, Y., & Supriyono. (2025). Effect of inquiry-based learning on students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis. Journal of Institutional Research South East Asia, 23(3), 18–[page range should be verified].
Eguia, J. U., & Padro, P. C. (2023). The lived experiences of BEED students on the academic transition from distance education to limited face-to-face learning modality: A qualitative inquiry. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.36713/epra14766
Gabriento, J. (2025). Inquiry-based learning as a mediator on academic adaptability and 21st century skills of senior high school students in science. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 33(10), 1114–1120. https://doi.org/10.70838/PEMJ.331002
Harleni, et al. (2025). Unveiling the impact of inquiry-based learning: A meta-analysis of student learning outcomes. AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v17i3.7061
Miasero, M. L. (2024). Inquiry-based learning: Perspectives of elementary teachers. International Journal of Research in Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(6), 30–37.
Polman, J. L., & Scornavacco, K. (2022). Meanings and practices of inquiry-based teaching and learning in the International Baccalaureate. International Baccalaureate Organization.
Sasse, H., Weber, A. M., Reuter, T., & Leuchter, M. (2025). Teacher guidance and on-the-fly scaffolding in primary school students’ inquiry learning. Science Education, 109(2), 579–604. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21921
Stratton, S. J. (2024). Purposeful sampling: Advantages and pitfalls. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 39(2), 121–122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X24000281
Tuguic, L. A., & Bilan, H. P. (2023). College education students’ learning experiences on the advent of online distance education in the Philippines: A phenomenological study. The Qualitative Report, 28(7), 1869–1879. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2023.5644
. Norozi, S. A. (2025). Creating learning environment through well-being-related activities for university students. Cogent Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2553830
Saka, Rahmon & Chinagozi, OSADEME & Joe, ONONOKPONO. (2023). Exploratory Research Design in Management Science: A Review of Literature on Conduct and Application. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science. VII. 1384-1395. 10.47772/IJRISS.2023.7515.
Tajik, Omid & Golzar, Jawad & Noor, Shagofah. (2024). Purposive Sampling. 2. 1-9. 10.22034/ijels.2025.490681.1029.
Rosairo, Rohitha. (2023). Thematic Analysis in Qualitative Research. Journal of Agricultural Sciences – Sri Lanka. 18. 10.4038/jas.v18i3.10526.
Siqi-Liu A, Egner T. Contextual Adaptation of Cognitive Flexibility is driven by Task- and Item-Level Learning. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2020 Aug;20(4):757-782. Doi: 10.3758/s13415-020-00801-9. PMID: 32495271; PMCID: PMC7396276.
Watson, Silvana. (2016). The Role of Executive Functions in Classroom Instruction of Students with Learning Disabilities. International Journal of School and Cognitive Psychology. 03. 10.4172/2469-9837.1000167.
Faber THE, Dankbaar MEW, van den Broek WW, Bruinink LJ, Hogeveen M, van Merriënboer JJG. Effects of adaptive scaffolding on performance, cognitive load and engagement in game-based learning: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 2024 Aug 29;24(1):943. Doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05698-3. PMID: 39210381; PMCID: PMC11360721.
Zeitlhofer, Ines & Zumbach, Joerg & Schweppe, Judith. (2024). Complexity affects performance, cognitive load, and awareness. Learning and Instruction. 94. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.1020