Why and what kind of questions in the classroom - an analysis

The teacher-student interaction is supposed to be one of the most important factors contributing to the learning among the children. A main part of interaction in the classroom happens through the exchange of questions and answers. The present effort is to observe classroom processes to find out the extent to which teachers use questioning as a tool to ensure reflective learning.

In this regard, I have observed one session in the elementary school. Duration of the session was one hour; roughly forty five minutes were spent in conversation. The observation showed that much of the class time is devoted to the teacher talk rather than students talk. Also, it was observed that the majority of the questions asked by the teacher were of the testing knowledge and reinforcing the learned knowledge. Majority of the responses of the students were of the close ended nature or straight answers to the questions.

A question is any sentence which has an interrogative form or function. In the classroom settings, the teacher questions are defined as instructional cues or stimuli that convey to students the content elements to be learned and directions for what they have to do and how they do it. The teacher raises questions for various purposes. A variety of purposes emerge from analysis of the literature, including:

·To develop interest and motivate students to actively involve in lesson

· To evaluate students' preparation

· To develop critical thinking skills and inquiring attitudes

· To review and summarize previous lessons

· To nurture insights by exposing new relationships

· To assess achievement of instructional goals and objectives

· To stimulate students to pursue knowledge on their own

In the classroom, there are a series of questions that elicit students’ responses and sometimes teacher reactions. Within these responses, students follow a series of steps in order to respond the questions. These steps include:

· Attending to the question

·Deciphering the meaning of the question

· Generating a covert response (i.e., formulating a response in one's mind)

· Generating an explicit response; and often

· Revising the response (based on the teacher probing or other feedback)

The Pattern and sequence of questions

Teacher: What are the animals seen in your villages? Pupil: Dog, cow, bull, buffalo etc. Teacher: What kind of food dog takes? Pupil: It eats bones, rice,daaletc.

Most of the time questions were related to recalling their previous knowledge of the content. There were also questions that seem to be pre-planned to bring out required information suitable for that class. Most of the questions were aimed at recalling the facts or information, gathering information about the topic and checking prior knowledge.

Teacher: What is the difference between birds and animals; give some examples for the same? Pupil: Animals have four legs, tail, etc Birds have two legs, feathers, beak, etc Teacher: Dog is also animal. Pupil: Dog is carnivorous animal

The teacher questioned the pupils about what he had taught in the last class and what they remember about the topic. Questions were asked to broader pupils’ understanding. The teacher tried to make a link between the previous knowledge and the planned content for the current session. The teacher was expecting the pupils to establish the planned link for the desired learning.

Teacher: How does dog catches thieves? Pupil: Thieves don’t feed dogs. Teacher: How? Pupil: It has whiskers on the nose Pupil: By smell Teacher: By sniffing

In the midst of the classroom process, one of the pupils mentioned that dog can also catch thieves. The teacher had given enough scope for comprehension by asking related questions so that pupils could interpret the available information. In the process of questioning, the teacher facilitated the learning by fine tuning the vocabulary.

The classifications of questions are based on the Bloom-Turney model. Interpretation of the pie chart shows that the teacher had asked many questions to fulfil a wide range of functions that included:

• Knowledge and recall (66 per cent)
• Comprehension (30 per cent)
• Analytical (4 per cent)
• Application (0 per cent)
• Synthesis (0 per cent)
• Evaluation (0 per cent)

Following is the pattern of the questions raised by the teacher. Nearly two thirds of the questions (66 per cent) tested pupils’ knowledge and recall i.e. questions of fact. It shows that questions were aimed at accumulating knowledge than creating new knowledge. Nearly one third of the questions (30 per cent) were related to comprehending i.e. related to transform and to interpret the information that was learnt. There was only one open ended question (4 per cent) that tried to prompt deeper thinking response from pupils. These included speculative questions, which invited pupils to offer ideas and opinions for example, “Do you think chewing cud is also good for humans?”

Sequences of questions are supposed to move from recall to evaluation in an upward sequential manner. However in the observed classroom process, it was limited to analysis. There were no questions pertaining to application, synthesis and evaluation. It was difficult for the observer to find out whether children had learnt anything. The teacher provided planned knowledge through sequential questions. There was no scope for reflective learning through these questions.

Whenever pupils did not respond correctly to the questions, either the teacher was silent or diverted their attention towards the current topic or asked questions that could be easily answered. It could be that the teacher encouraged the pupils to give only right answers. Irrespective of any answer, the teacher continued with the planned lesson.

Teacher: Do you know what the difference between carnivorous and herbivorous is? Pupil: Don’t know sir. Teacher: Mumbles! Pupil: Yes sir. Teacher: Have you seen eagle? Pupil: Yes sir, we have seen eagle. Teacher: There are two kinds of teeth in carnivorous animals. Do you know what those are? Pupil: Yes sir, canine teeth. Teacher: What’s the use of canine teeth? Pupil: To chew

In few cases, the teacher did not answer the questions. It could be that the teacher did not know how to answer or to avoid distractions and to stick to the prepared lesson plan. It also shows the teacher’s belief in providing information as learning in a given period of time. From the context of pupils, unexpected answers show that:

* Pupil had misunderstood the question

* Pupil had misinterpreted the question

* Pupil was occupied with something else in the mind

* Pupil was not prepared to expect the question at that point of time

Teacher: Do you think chewing cud is also good for humans? What do you feel humans being ruminant animal? Pupil: No sir. Teacher: Why? Pupil: Mother says so. Teacher:

Sometimes the teacher used questioning to control the pace of the lesson. The teacher used questions to increase or decrease the pace of the lesson depending up on the responses from the pupils. There were some questions which required brief answers and worked as fillers to the topic. If pupil did not respond quickly or correctly, the teacher sometimes answered himself to continue the flow of the lesson.

Teacher: Cow is a domestic animal Teacher: What is cow? Pupil: Cow is a domestic animal Teacher: There are domesticate and wild animals Teacher: What is wild animal? Pupil: Wild animals live in wild or forests Teacher: Have you observed canine teeth? Pupil: Dog has canine teeth. Teacher: What kind of teeth / danthaalu (formal word: danthaalu otherwise it is pallu) dogs have? Pupil:

As part of the evaluation, the teacher asked the pupils to write few sentences about the animal that they had seen. It was observed that the evaluation was aimed at reproducing the learnt content or testing the memory.

It was surprising that all the children had written about cow in few sentences. It was interesting that answers provided by the pupils were part of the previous lesson they had mugged up. In the evaluation, the teacher did not provide enough scope to the pupils to think and analyse their ideas. Neither the teacher nor pupils were beneficial of the evaluation process. Neither the teacher could not assess how much pupils had learnt nor pupil received feedback on the ideas they had produced.

There was hardly any scope in these questions for reflective learning. There were no questions pertaining to application, synthesis and evaluation of the planned content. The classroom session was interactive in one way i.e. only the teacher asked the questions. No questions were asked by the pupils. The pupils either answered the raised questions or listened to the planned lesson attentively.