Probing
Pearson (2014) notes a positive relationship between the frequency of probing questions and the amount of student oral participation. Probing style questions may be needed when a respondent seems to understand the question but does not give a response that meets the objectives of the question asked (UN/ESCAP 2008). The use of probing questions is designed to clarify or reshape a previous response given to an initial question (UN/ESCAP 2008), to elicit a meaningful and thoughtful follow up response, or solicit new information. Borich (2011) equates probes as questions which follow questions that are designed to deepen, enrich and extend on an earlier response. Borich (2011) also described probing style of questioning as a means to draw out a response, or tease any kind of answer out of students, it is this initial response that can be elaborated on by other students or developed into a more complete or refined response.
Simple probing techniques can involve (1) just simply repeating the question in which the respondent may come up with the correct answer, (2) using neutral or non leading introductions to avoid biaising responses (UN/ESCAP 2008). Possible situations when a respondent does not know the answer to probing questions may mean the respondent does not understand the initial question and is afraid of stating this, the respondent is still taking time to think of a response, and the respondent does not want to answer because of fear due to personal reasons (UN/ESCAP 2008). The use redirection and probing is seen by (Cotton 2000) as part of classroom questioning technique to keep students focused on relevant elements of another students' response or teacher’s question.
Simple probing techniques can involve (1) just simply repeating the question in which the respondent may come up with the correct answer, (2) using neutral or non leading introductions to avoid biaising responses (UN/ESCAP 2008). Possible situations when a respondent does not know the answer to probing questions may mean the respondent does not understand the initial question and is afraid of stating this, the respondent is still taking time to think of a response, and the respondent does not want to answer because of fear due to personal reasons (UN/ESCAP 2008). The use redirection and probing is seen by (Cotton 2000) as part of classroom questioning technique to keep students focused on relevant elements of another students' response or teacher’s question.
Pausing
The technique of pausing after a question is critical to allow students to time to digest what is being asked by the communicator, it is this wait-time which is essential to student thinking (Vogler 2005, Rowe 1986). By wait-time Rowe (1986) referred to the amount of time a teacher allots for student reflection after asking a question and before a student responds (wait-time I) and to the pause after a respondent offers a response (wait-time II). Rowe (1986) trained the teachers to increase their wait time to three to five seconds and found that the quantity and quality of students’ answers improved significantly: students give longer responses, students give more evidence for their ideas and conclusions, students speculate and hypothesize more and more students participated in responding. Furthermore, students ask more questions and talk more to other students Albergaria-Almeida (2010). Cotton (2000) found Keeping the wait-time to about three seconds when conducting recitations involving a majority of lower cognitive questions, while increasing wait-time beyond three seconds when asking higher cognitive questions was conducive to quality responses. Yang (2006) however, posed that the length the teacher might wait for the student's response after he asks a question would be meaningless unless the student thinks over the question during that time. Yang (2006) also points out that what makes a teacher's questions effective is not an absolute amount of pausing time, but the subjective time duration and the meaningfulness of the question to a student's cognition
|
Video 2: Pose, Pause, Pounce, Bounce (Elise Cannan, 2014)
|
Extending
Vogler (2005) describes a pattern of extention questions which involves asking a number of questions at the same cognitive level (extending the topic) before lifting the level of questions to the next level. Without an understanding of knowing the sequence to ask extending questions, delivery techniques such as the use of wait time, prompting, probing, and refocusing students become less effective (Vogler 2005).
One technique that incorporates both pausing and probing and extension techniques to promote classroom discussion of an idea is the Pose Pause Pounce and Bounce technique. Pose a question to the whole class (remind them to be reflective) Pause (give students time to think about the question) Pounce (pick a student to answer the question) and Bounce (engage this answer to another student to add to the response) Pose Pause Pounce Bounce is an effective questioning strategy that promotes active talking and listening during class discussion.
One technique that incorporates both pausing and probing and extension techniques to promote classroom discussion of an idea is the Pose Pause Pounce and Bounce technique. Pose a question to the whole class (remind them to be reflective) Pause (give students time to think about the question) Pounce (pick a student to answer the question) and Bounce (engage this answer to another student to add to the response) Pose Pause Pounce Bounce is an effective questioning strategy that promotes active talking and listening during class discussion.