10 SES 11 E, Autonomy, Dialogue and the Psychosocial
Questioning is one of the main techniques used by teachers to help students think and to promote their participation in learning (Wilen & Clegg, 1986). Through questions asked by teachers, students have opportunities to think independently and creatively, to express themselves, and also to have a learning environment which promotes active learning and thinking (Açıkgöz, 2005; Küçük, 2006). Asking higher order questions increases the quality of teaching (Küçük, 2006); however, asking higher order questions alone is not enough. Teachers should also consider asking questions that have a purpose, are clear and understandable, promote higher level thinking skills, are appropriate for students’ cognitive levels, and encourage students to question their own thinking (Wilen & Clegg, 1986). Additionally, teachers should wait long enough for students to formulate an answer and encourage all students to participate in the learning process.
Related research shows that when teachers ask questions that require higher level thinking skills, students themselves start asking higher level questions and also the level of questions asked by teachers is related to students’ levels of achievement (Brualdi, 1998; Cotton, 2000; Harper, Etkina, & Lin, 2003; van Zee et al., 2001). Additionally, waiting long enough after asking a question is very important (Wilen & Clegg, 1986) and providing feedback is essential for increasing students’ achievement and motivation (Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, Kulik, & Morgan, 1991; Çimer, Bütüner & Yiğit, 2010; Nichol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). Teachers are expected to not provide correct answers right away, instead they should guide students to find answers themselves (Küçük, 2006). Nichol & Macfarlane-Dick (2006) stated that effective feedback can provide various benefits such as improving thinking skills, shaping and providing information regarding students’ learning, motivating students, and helping students to reach goals.
Research in Turkey revealed that teachers mainly asked low level questions searching students’ memory skills (Aslan, 2011; Aydemir & Çiftçi, 2008; Ayvacı & Şahin, 2009; Baysen, 2006; Bektaş & Şahin, 2007; Gelen, 2002). Similarly, studies conducted abroad showed that teachers asked more questions that can be considered as low level (Nisa & Khan, 2012; Wilen, 1991). In terms of feedback, a study conducted in Turkey showed that teachers provided evaluative feedback in which they focused on their own judgement regarding what students said. These teachers did not provide descriptive feedback that could allow students to become knowledgeable about their progress and how to improve their skills (Çimer et al., 2010).
Thus, the purpose of this study is to investigate questioning styles of 14 preservice teachers, teaching in two public primary schools in Ankara, according to different variables. The research questions of the study are:
1. What are the distributions of questions asked by preservice teachers according to;
a. Bloom’s taxonomy,
b. Being open/closed ended, and
c. Being related to daily life before and after training?
2. Are there any differences of preservice teachers’ questions before and after the training in terms of;
a. Duration of waiting time,
b. The relationship between the length of waiting time and cognitive levels of asked questions, and
c. The relationship between the length of waiting time and variables of asked questions such as being open/closed-ended and being related to daily life.
3. Are there any differences of preservice teachers’ feedback before and after the training in terms of;
a. Distribution of feedback?
b. The relationship between the kinds of feedback and cognitive levels of asked questions, and
c. The relationship between the kinds of feedback and variables of asked questions such as being open/closed-ended and being related to daily life.
In this weak experimental design study, the one-group pre/post-test design is used. Participants of the study are 14 preservice teachers teaching Turkish language courses in two public primary schools. In order to examine preservice teachers’ questioning styles, length of the waiting time for students to generate answers and feedback, their instructions will be video recorded with their permission. After all preservice teachers are observed for the first time, preservice teachers will have a six-hour long training session regarding how to ask effective questions according to Bloom’s taxonomy, how to generate questions that will help students improve their higher order thinking skills, and providing feedback. Following this training, preservice teachers’ instructions will be video recorded again. Data of the study will be collected through video recording of 28 teaching hours as 14 observations before the training and 14 observations after the training. Recorded videos will be watched and analysed by both researchers. Inter-rater reliability will be calculated. Cognitive levels of the questions asked by preservice teachers will be determined based on Bloom’s taxonomy (e.g., remember, understand, apply, analyse, evaluate and create). The first level of the taxonomy “Remember” includes recognizing and recalling. The second level “Understand” includes interpreting, exemplifying, classifying, summarizing, inferring, comparing and explaining. The third level “Apply” has executing and implementing. Analyse stage includes differentiating, organizing and attributing. While the evaluate stage includes checking and critiquing, the last stage “Create” includes generating, planning and producing. Additionally, asked questions will be analysed whether they are open-ended or not. Close-ended questions ask specific information/facts, are answered with “yes/no” phrases and have one correct answer. Thus, the answer of the question is usually composed of couple of words. For this reason, close-ended questions may limit children’s thinking skills and answer formulation. Open-ended questions, on the other hand, change from person to person and require reasoning and justification skills (Goodwin, Sharp, Cloutier, & Diamond, 1983; Hargreavers, 1984). Feedback given by preservice teachers will be analysed based on Tunstall and Gipps’s (1996) classification within the scope of descriptive and evaluative feedback. The relationships among cognitive levels of asked questions before and after the training, duration of waiting time after questions asked and kinds of given feedback will be analysed by the chi square test.
This is an ongoing study. Thus data has yet to be analysed and findings have yet to be obtained. Researchers think that before having the six-hour long training, preservice teachers will ask mainly low level and close-ended questions. It is hoped that this training will increase the quality of preservice teachers’ questioning skills, will inform them about the importance of being patient enough to wait so students can formulate answers, and provide effective feedback. Researchers expect that there will be a relationship among cognitive levels of asked questions, the length of waiting time, and kinds of given feedback. It was thought that the training, which will be given in the process of this research, will increase preservice teachers’ level of knowledge and awareness regarding using questioning as an effective teaching method. Thus, it was hoped that preservice teachers may transfer their experiences to their future teaching practices. At the end of the study, recommendations about using the questioning strategy as a teaching method will be provided for teachers and educators. Researchers expect that results of this study will contribute to the future of teacher education.
Aslan, C. (2011). Effects of teaching applications for developing question asking skills on question forming skills of prospective teachers. Education and Science, 36(160), 236-249. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A. & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 213-238. Baysen, E. (2006). Öğretmenlerin sınıfta sordukları sorular ile öğrencilerin bu sorulara verdikleri cevapların düzeyleri. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 14(1), 21-28. Bektaş, E. & Şahin, A. E. (2007). İlköğretim beşinci sınıf öğretmenlerinin soru-yanıt tekniğini kullanım davranışlarının analizi. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 28, 19-29. Brualdi, A. C. (1998). Clasroom questions. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 6(6), 1-3. Cotton, K. (2000). Classroom Questioning. Retrieved on January 26, 2018 from http://www.learner.org/channel/workshops/socialstudies/pdf/session6/6.ClassroomQuestionig.pdf Çimer, S. O., Bütüner, S. Ö., & Yiğit, N. (2010). An investigation of the types and qualities of teacher feedback. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(2), 517-538. Gelen, İ. (2002). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin sosyal bilgiler dersinde düşünme becerilerini kazandırma yeterliklerinin değerlendirilmesi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 10(10), 100-119. Goodwin, S., Sharp, G., Cloutier, E., & Diamond, N. (1983). Effective classroom questioning. Urbana-Champaign, Center for Teaching Excellence. Hargreaves, D. H. (1984). Teachers’ questions: Open, closed and half-open. Educational Research, 26(1), 46-51. Harper, K. A., Etkina, E., & Lin, Y. (2003). Encouraging and analyzing student questions in a large physics course: Meaningful patterns for instructors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 776-791. Küçük, S. (2006). Türkçe öğretiminde yazılı anlatım çalışmalarının sorularla yönlendirilmesi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(2), 181-200. Nichol, D. J. & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and selfregulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218. Nisa, S. & Khan, A. A. (2012). Questioning practices in a social studies classroom: A case study from Pakistan. International Journal of Social Science and Education, 2(3), 474-482. Tunstall, P. & Gipps, C. (1996). Teacher feedback to young children in formative assessment: A typology. British Educational Research Journal, 22(4), 389-404. Van Zee, E, H., Iwasyk, M., Kurose, A., Simpson, D., & Wild, J. (2001). Student and teacher questioning during conversations about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 159-190. Wilen, W. (1991). Questioning skills for teachers: What research says to the teacher. Washington DC: National Education Association. Wilen, W. & Clegg, A. (1986). Effective questions and questioning: A research review. Theory and research in social education, 14(2), 153-61.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.