How might this influence your teaching? First and foremost, I must admit that I too am guilty of using the initiate, respond, and evaluate form of questioning frequently. Coming from an elementary school background, it always seems quicker and easier to just ask a simple question, get a quick answer, ask another simple question, get another quick answer. Of course not all questions would be in this format, but it was a go-to method of questioning. Reading this chapter has given me an appreciation for the value of deeper questioning, while at the same time offering a plethora of different strategies I can use. I am going to make a concerted effort to include “higher-order” questions into my lessons on a daily basis. Walsh and Sattes QUILT framework of questioning emphasizes that “attention should be given to providing adequate wait time once a question has been asked.” This too is something I struggle with. There are always students in the class that raise their hands immediately, while others never raise their hands at all even though they may know the answer too. I tend to pick the students that raise their hands quickly and I am definitely going to change this practice. I like how the QUILT framework suggests incorporating other students in responding to answers given to questions. The textbook suggests this will “foster more discourse,” and I would like to see this in action for myself. I am definitely going to try this. The ReQuest process seems to encourage cooperative learning amongst students while allowing them to formulate their own questions and use prior knowledge. In our textbook ReQuest is said to be good for using with vocabulary. Teaching science involves introducing students to foreign vocabulary frequently; therefore, I think this could be a useful addition to my repertoire. It seems like this method of questioning would serve to reinforce the knowledge of both the student asking the question, and the student answering the question. Of all of the other strategies discussed in this chapter, I am most interested in the SQ3R. The textbook suggests this is “intended to echo the behavior of effective readers,” which is what really caught my interest. The process followed for this form of questioning seems easy enough to adapt to most content areas. I especially like the recite and review steps, as I personally have used recitation as a tool to learn and remember things. It is like a familiar friend to me. Overall, this chapter was chock full of questioning strategies that seemed to be easy enough to implement regularly, and many were suitable for most content areas. I will definitely be implementing some of these strategies in my own practice.
I am with Michelle on frequently using the initiate, respond, and evaluate form of questioning. It definitely moves the class along much faster, and I am guilty of using this strategy in particular when I think that the students are going to need to get to their practice quickly. Questioning is one of the things that our school focuses a lot on, mirroring the RIDE rubric, and we get a lot of PD on the importance of asking questions. Never have we had these strategies broken down so nicely for us, which encourages me to try more of the techniques, like the SQRQCQ technique given for math word problems. My only question is whether this should be used as an individual questioning technique (for students to set up on the side of their problem to remind them to do it) or if it only works in classroom discussions. I often struggle with intentionally solving problems, out loud, a certain way, only to then watch the scholars solve the problems however they want. I can picture my classes following along with these questions easily enough, but then once I take away the framework of the questions written out for them, they will not be able to use the strategy.
While I was reading this chapter, I kept struggling to picture my 6th grade scholars being able to hold sustain academic conversations with one another. I know that the chapter talks about explicitly teaching into these academic conversations, but I feel we have personally trained our kids to raise their hands in order to speak in class. In advisory we tried to teach into the idea of having a conversation without raising their hands, and students still waited to be called on before they added anything to the conversation! This is probably just some of my ineptitude as a new teacher, but I just don't know how to go about getting the students to have these conversations without prompting each piece along the way.
"A classroom with IRE is the dominant form of discourse quickly becomes a passive learning environment dependent on the teacher for any kind of discussion," (81) after reading this section, this too struck out at me. I do not want to be that teacher but when you only have students for one period at a time, it gets difficult to not ask simple questions in hopes that many questions will be answered and asked within the period. For one of my classes today, I decided to model how to create and ask good, quality questions, as opposed to simple ones. To start I had a list of answers with no questions. Since is was a social studies class and they were studying the amendments, I started with a simple answer: 'pursuit of happiness and freedom'. Those studying the Ninth Amendment had to help me create the ideal question, something that consisted more than "what is the Ninth Amendment.' To turn this simple question into something more qualitative, I asked students to help me formulate the perfect question. After a few suggestions, we came up with this: "Thanks to Madison who helped set forth the Ninth Amendment in December 1791, the people of the US have the right to pursue what three things without the fear of government interference."
Using my answers from the rest of the amendments students spent the class coming up with good solid questions that were more than simple.
What would you ask this author over a cup of coffee? What did you find confusing/interesting/surprising? Elaborate. If I met up with the authors of this book, I feel that I would have to question them about the significance of the questioning techniques in math classrooms beyond the higher order thinking questions. I understand the importance of Bloom’s level of questioning, as well as the levels described on page 84 under “effective questioning techniques” that foster genuine inquiry in the class. These questions still fall under the teacher – student – teacher pattern. I find that I understand the QUILT framework, and intuitively follow most of the stages while teaching presently. As often as I ask questions in the class, recall, analysis, and just plain computation questions, I do not have a way of continually fostering these questions in the regular conversations of my groups when they work together, and don’t have consistent literature for them to be using any of the frameworks that would work well in an ELA class. How can I use a questioning system daily in math class when I may not be doing word problems? For each new topic, there are questions that need to be asked, and lots of questions that the students need to ask themselves to answer the problem, but how can I have them discussing problems in their groups if there is not a
What would you ask this author over a cup of coffee? What did you find confusing/interesting/surprising? Elaborate.
I don't like acronyms. I know that sounds simplistic. But, if I met up with the authors I would have to ask them if they know that teachers today are acronym-ed to death. I understand the use of mnemonic devices can be helpful to some – and thus the use of all the acronyms.
There were so many in this chapter that I found it overwhelming and thought I would never be able to remember them unless I made some kind of chart for my classroom. So, I feel they do not help me. I tend to stick to the Bloom’s Taxonomy levels and I appreciate various charts that we have been given which give us different styles of question starters. That’s helpful to me.
As a certified elementary teacher, I am more than familiar with the idea of asking students to “make a connection.” Text to self, text to text, text to world, etc. It’s funny that we assume that students know this, having come up through elementary school where it is used very often. However, they seem to forget this the second they are working on a NECAP reading passage or writing a response to literature.
The questioning technique that was suggested in this chapter that I intend to try, which sounded very interesting to me, was the Question-Answer-Relationship (QAR) chart. I plan to use that chart in my classroom while working with the essential questions that I have formulated (based on an idea in this text) with the current unit I am teaching. I think it will be very helpful for the students in getting them to that higher order thinking goal.
Lisa, I wish I had thought to say the same thing to the authors during my cup of coffee with them. When I first read the chapter and saw the SQ3R method, or the SQRQCQ method, I pictured the students writing these acronyms on the tops of their notes, or reminding one another that they needed to use those methods in class.
Not being fully immersed in the ELA, I could be wrong with this next question. In the common core, aren't the standards getting away from text to self connections, and focusing more on text to text connections? I think that the methods shown in this chapter, especially the QAR chart, will help the scholars to see the academic connections in their classes, and especially make links to other texts. With the focus on cross curricular work, vocabulary instruction will also make these connections easier. Just today I was able to break the word inequality into in and equal, and my students could tell me that the root "in" meant not. They were able to draw these connections between their ELA and math class, and then felt proud of themselves for the rest of the day. I know that the last part of this post was not as scholarly as it could be, but I was impressed with my students and wanted to show off there root knowledge!
I wanted to share this helpful page in case anyone else has struggled with finding the right wording for higher order questions that are aligned with Bloom's taxonomy as described on page 83 of the Fisher and Frey text: http://www.teachthought.com/learning/249-blooms-taxonomy-verbs-for-critical-thinking/
Also, this site had some ideas that reminded me of Photovoice in that it promotes higher order thinking and incorporates technology: http://thejournal.com/articles/2012/09/24/5-mediarich-lesson-ideas-to-encourage-higherorder-thinking.aspx
How might this influence your teaching?
ReplyDeleteFirst and foremost, I must admit that I too am guilty of using the initiate, respond, and evaluate form of questioning frequently. Coming from an elementary school background, it always seems quicker and easier to just ask a simple question, get a quick answer, ask another simple question, get another quick answer. Of course not all questions would be in this format, but it was a go-to method of questioning. Reading this chapter has given me an appreciation for the value of deeper questioning, while at the same time offering a plethora of different strategies I can use. I am going to make a concerted effort to include “higher-order” questions into my lessons on a daily basis.
Walsh and Sattes QUILT framework of questioning emphasizes that “attention should be given to providing adequate wait time once a question has been asked.” This too is something I struggle with. There are always students in the class that raise their hands immediately, while others never raise their hands at all even though they may know the answer too. I tend to pick the students that raise their hands quickly and I am definitely going to change this practice. I like how the QUILT framework suggests incorporating other students in responding to answers given to questions. The textbook suggests this will “foster more discourse,” and I would like to see this in action for myself. I am definitely going to try this. The ReQuest process seems to encourage cooperative learning amongst students while allowing them to formulate their own questions and use prior knowledge. In our textbook ReQuest is said to be good for using with vocabulary. Teaching science involves introducing students to foreign vocabulary frequently; therefore, I think this could be a useful addition to my repertoire. It seems like this method of questioning would serve to reinforce the knowledge of both the student asking the question, and the student answering the question. Of all of the other strategies discussed in this chapter, I am most interested in the SQ3R. The textbook suggests this is “intended to echo the behavior of effective readers,” which is what really caught my interest. The process followed for this form of questioning seems easy enough to adapt to most content areas. I especially like the recite and review steps, as I personally have used recitation as a tool to learn and remember things. It is like a familiar friend to me.
Overall, this chapter was chock full of questioning strategies that seemed to be easy enough to implement regularly, and many were suitable for most content areas. I will definitely be implementing some of these strategies in my own practice.
I am with Michelle on frequently using the initiate, respond, and evaluate form of questioning. It definitely moves the class along much faster, and I am guilty of using this strategy in particular when I think that the students are going to need to get to their practice quickly. Questioning is one of the things that our school focuses a lot on, mirroring the RIDE rubric, and we get a lot of PD on the importance of asking questions. Never have we had these strategies broken down so nicely for us, which encourages me to try more of the techniques, like the SQRQCQ technique given for math word problems. My only question is whether this should be used as an individual questioning technique (for students to set up on the side of their problem to remind them to do it) or if it only works in classroom discussions. I often struggle with intentionally solving problems, out loud, a certain way, only to then watch the scholars solve the problems however they want. I can picture my classes following along with these questions easily enough, but then once I take away the framework of the questions written out for them, they will not be able to use the strategy.
DeleteWhile I was reading this chapter, I kept struggling to picture my 6th grade scholars being able to hold sustain academic conversations with one another. I know that the chapter talks about explicitly teaching into these academic conversations, but I feel we have personally trained our kids to raise their hands in order to speak in class. In advisory we tried to teach into the idea of having a conversation without raising their hands, and students still waited to be called on before they added anything to the conversation! This is probably just some of my ineptitude as a new teacher, but I just don't know how to go about getting the students to have these conversations without prompting each piece along the way.
"A classroom with IRE is the dominant form of discourse quickly becomes a passive learning environment dependent on the teacher for any kind of discussion," (81) after reading this section, this too struck out at me. I do not want to be that teacher but when you only have students for one period at a time, it gets difficult to not ask simple questions in hopes that many questions will be answered and asked within the period.
DeleteFor one of my classes today, I decided to model how to create and ask good, quality questions, as opposed to simple ones. To start I had a list of answers with no questions. Since is was a social studies class and they were studying the amendments, I started with a simple answer: 'pursuit of happiness and freedom'. Those studying the Ninth Amendment had to help me create the ideal question, something that consisted more than "what is the Ninth Amendment.' To turn this simple question into something more qualitative, I asked students to help me formulate the perfect question. After a few suggestions, we came up with this: "Thanks to Madison who helped set forth the Ninth Amendment in December 1791, the people of the US have the right to pursue what three things without the fear of government interference."
Using my answers from the rest of the amendments students spent the class coming up with good solid questions that were more than simple.
What would you ask this author over a cup of coffee? What did you find confusing/interesting/surprising? Elaborate.
ReplyDeleteIf I met up with the authors of this book, I feel that I would have to question them about the significance of the questioning techniques in math classrooms beyond the higher order thinking questions. I understand the importance of Bloom’s level of questioning, as well as the levels described on page 84 under “effective questioning techniques” that foster genuine inquiry in the class. These questions still fall under the teacher – student – teacher pattern. I find that I understand the QUILT framework, and intuitively follow most of the stages while teaching presently. As often as I ask questions in the class, recall, analysis, and just plain computation questions, I do not have a way of continually fostering these questions in the regular conversations of my groups when they work together, and don’t have consistent literature for them to be using any of the frameworks that would work well in an ELA class. How can I use a questioning system daily in math class when I may not be doing word problems? For each new topic, there are questions that need to be asked, and lots of questions that the students need to ask themselves to answer the problem, but how can I have them discussing problems in their groups if there is not a
What would you ask this author over a cup of coffee? What did you find confusing/interesting/surprising? Elaborate.
ReplyDeleteI don't like acronyms. I know that sounds simplistic. But, if I met up with the authors I would have to ask them if they know that teachers today are acronym-ed to death. I understand the use of mnemonic devices can be helpful to some – and thus the use of all the acronyms.
There were so many in this chapter that I found it overwhelming and thought I would never be able to remember them unless I made some kind of chart for my classroom. So, I feel they do not help me. I tend to stick to the Bloom’s Taxonomy levels and I appreciate various charts that we have been given which give us different styles of question starters. That’s helpful to me.
As a certified elementary teacher, I am more than familiar with the idea of asking students to “make a connection.” Text to self, text to text, text to world, etc. It’s funny that we assume that students know this, having come up through elementary school where it is used very often. However, they seem to forget this the second they are working on a NECAP reading passage or writing a response to literature.
The questioning technique that was suggested in this chapter that I intend to try, which sounded very interesting to me, was the Question-Answer-Relationship (QAR) chart. I plan to use that chart in my classroom while working with the essential questions that I have formulated (based on an idea in this text) with the current unit I am teaching. I think it will be very helpful for the students in getting them to that higher order thinking goal.
Lisa, I wish I had thought to say the same thing to the authors during my cup of coffee with them. When I first read the chapter and saw the SQ3R method, or the SQRQCQ method, I pictured the students writing these acronyms on the tops of their notes, or reminding one another that they needed to use those methods in class.
DeleteNot being fully immersed in the ELA, I could be wrong with this next question. In the common core, aren't the standards getting away from text to self connections, and focusing more on text to text connections? I think that the methods shown in this chapter, especially the QAR chart, will help the scholars to see the academic connections in their classes, and especially make links to other texts. With the focus on cross curricular work, vocabulary instruction will also make these connections easier. Just today I was able to break the word inequality into in and equal, and my students could tell me that the root "in" meant not. They were able to draw these connections between their ELA and math class, and then felt proud of themselves for the rest of the day. I know that the last part of this post was not as scholarly as it could be, but I was impressed with my students and wanted to show off there root knowledge!
I wanted to share this helpful page in case anyone else has struggled with finding the right wording for higher order questions that are aligned with Bloom's taxonomy as described on page 83 of the Fisher and Frey text:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.teachthought.com/learning/249-blooms-taxonomy-verbs-for-critical-thinking/
Also, this site had some ideas that reminded me of Photovoice in that it promotes higher order thinking and incorporates technology: http://thejournal.com/articles/2012/09/24/5-mediarich-lesson-ideas-to-encourage-higherorder-thinking.aspx