No abstract

The purpose of this study was to find out how teachers use questions in classroom discourse to scaffold student thinking and help students construct scientific knowledge. The study was conducted in large-class settings where the medium of instruction was English although the students were non-native speakers of the language. Six teachers teaching grade 7 science classes from four schools participated in the study. Thirty-six lessons covering a range of topics were observed across a variety of lesson structures such as expository teaching, whole-class discussions, and laboratory work. The lessons were audiotaped and videotaped. Verbal transcripts of classroom discourse were analyzed interpretively. Particular attention was paid to questioning exchanges that stimulated productive thinking in students, as manifested by their verbal responses. A framework was developed that included four questioning approaches adopted by the teachers. This included Socratic questioning, verbal jigsaw, semantic tapestry, and framing. This paper describes these various questioning approaches, their features, and the conditions under which they were used. It also discusses the implications of these approaches for instructional practice. The findings from this study have potential in translating research insights into practical advice for teachers regarding tactical moves in classroom discourse, and provide guidelines for teachers to increase their repertoire of questioning skills. ß

Students' questions play an important role in meaningful learning and scientific inquiry. They are a potential resource for both teaching and learning science. Despite the capacity of students' questions for enhancing learning, much of this potential still remains untapped. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to examine and review the existing research on students' questions and to explore ways of advancing future work into this area. The paper begins by highlighting the importance and role of students' questions from the perspectives of both the learner and the teacher. It then reviews the empirical research on students' questions, with a focus on four areas: (1) the nature and types of these questions; (2) the effects of teaching students questioning skills; (3) the relationship between students' questions and selected variables; and (4) teachers' responses to, and students' perceptions of, students' questions. Following this, some issues and implications of students' questions for classroom instruction are discussed. The paper concludes by suggesting several areas for future research that have significant value for student learning.

The purpose of this study was to explore in greater depth what has been called by previous researchers, a deep versus surface approach to learning science. Six Grade 8 students judged as typically using learning approaches ranging from deep to surface were observed and taped during class group laboratory activities in a chemistry unit. They were also interviewed individually before and after instruction about related science concepts. On analysis of the students' discourse and actions during the activities and their interview responses, several differences in learning approaches seemed apparent. These differences fell into five emergent categories: generative thinking, nature of explanations, asking questions, metacognitive activity, and approach to tasks. When students used a deep approach, they ventured their ideas more spontaneously; gave more elaborate explanations which described mechanisms and cause-effect relationships or referred to personal experiences; asked questions which focused on explanations and causes, predictions, or resolving discrepancies in knowledge; and engaged in "on-line theorizing." Students using a surface approach gave explanations that were reformulations of the questions, a "black box" variety which did not refer to a mechanism, or macroscopic descriptions which referred only to what was visible. Their questions also referred to more basic factual or procedural information. The findings also suggest that to encourage a deep learning approach, teachers could provide prompts and contextualized scaffolding and encourage students to ask questions, predict, and explain during activities. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 37: 2000 Some students are more successful than others in learning science. This may be due to differences in the way students learn-whether it is meaningful or rote learning (Ausubel, 1968). Meaningful learning requires relevant prior knowledge, meaningful learning tasks, and a meaningful learning set (Novak, 1988). In contrast, rote learning is arbitrary, verbatim, and not related to experience with events or objects, and lacks affective commitment on the part of the learner to relate new and prior knowledge. The nature of students' learning-that is, meaningful or rote-is related to the construct "approaches to learning." JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING VOL. 37, NO. 2, PP. 109-138 (2000) © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Correspondence to: C. Chin Approaches to LearningApproaches to learning or learning approaches refer to "the ways in which students go about their academic tasks, thereby affecting the nature of the learning outcome" (Biggs, 1994). Research on approaches to learning derives much from the seminal work of Marton and Saljo (1976) on reading from text using phenomenographic methods, where learning is studied from the perspective of the learner, based on qualitative analysis of interview data and descriptive analyses of differences between the learning behaviors of small numbers of students. These authors distinguished betw...

No abstract

This study investigated the potential of students' written and oral questions both as an epistemic probe and heuristic for initiating collaborative argumentation in science. Four classes of students, aged 12–14 years from two countries, were asked to discuss which of two graphs best represented the change in temperature as ice was heated to steam. The discussion was initiated by asking questions about the phenomenon. Working in groups (with members who had differing viewpoints) and guided by a set of question prompts, an argument sheet, and an argument diagram, students discussed contrasting arguments. One group of students from each class was audiotaped. The number of questions written, the concepts addressed, and the quality of written arguments were then scored. A positive correlation between these factors was found. Discourse analysis showed that the initial focus on questions prompted students to articulate their puzzlement; make explicit their claims and (mis)conceptions; identify and relate relevant key concepts; construct explanations; and consider alternative propositions when their ideas were challenged. Productive argumentation was characterized by students' questions which focused on key ideas of inquiry, a variety of scientific concepts, and which made explicit reference to the structural components of an argument. These findings suggest that supporting students in productive discourse is aided by scaffolding student questioning, teaching the criteria for a good argument, and providing a structure that helps them to organize and verbalize their arguments. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 47:883–908, 2010

This study explores how student-generated questions can support argumentation in science. Students were asked to discuss which of two graphs showing the change in temperature with time when ice is heated to steam was correct. Four classes of students, aged 12-14 years, from two countries, first wrote questions about the phenomenon. Then, working in groups with members who differed in their views, they discussed possible answers. To help them structure their arguments, students were given a sheet with prompts to guide their thinking and another sheet on which to represent their argument diagrammatically. One group of students from each class was audiotaped. Data from both students' written work and the taped oral discourse were then analyzed for types of questions asked, the content and function of their talk, and the quality of arguments elicited. To illustrate the dynamic interaction between students' questions and the evolution of their arguments, the discourse of one group is presented as a case study and comparative analyses made with the discourse from the other three groups. Emerging from our analysis is a tentative explanatory model of how different forms of interaction and, in particular, questioning are needed for productive argumentation to occur.

This study employed problem-based learning for project work in a year 9 biology class. The purpose of the study was to investigate (a) students' inspirations for their self-generated problems and questions, (b) the kinds of questions that students asked individually and collaboratively, and (c) how students' questions guided them in knowledge construction. Data sources included observation and field notes, students' written documents, audiotapes and videotapes of students working in groups, and student interviews. Sources of inspiration for students' problems and questions included cultural beliefs and folklore; wonderment about information propagated by advertisements and the media; curiosity arising from personal encounters, family members' concerns, or observations of others; and issues arising from previous lessons in the school curriculum. Questions asked individually pertained to validation of common beliefs and misconceptions, basic information, explanations, and imagined scenarios. The findings regarding questions asked collaboratively are presented as two assertions. Assertion 1 maintained that students' course of learning were driven by their questions. Assertion 2 was that the ability to ask the "right" questions and the extent to which these could be answered, were important in sustaining students' interest in the project. Implications of the findings for instructional practice are discussed.C