As I understand it, inductive reasoning is, like Kalach says, looking at a body of evidence and forming an educated prediction. E.g., the sun has been observed to rise in the east and set in the west for fall of recorded history, so barring the existence of dynamics we are unaware of, we can reasonably infer that the sun will continue to rise in the east and set in the west.
Deductive reasoning, on the other hand, is when we can conclude something absolutely must be the case on the basis of its premises. For example, if we could somehow conclude that all swans were white and knew for certain that Steve the Swan was a swan, even without seeing Steve we could know he was white.
It seems to me we never really use deductive reasoning in our day-to-day lives, since everything we "know" we only know to degrees of certainty on the basis of evidence. All of our assumptions are best-fit explanations of the evidence.