Moral Complexities of Student Question-Asking in Classroom Practice

Abstract

Prior research on student question-asking has primarily been conducted from a cognitive, epistemological standpoint. In contrast, we present a hermeneutic-phenomenological investigation that emphasizes the moral-practical context in which question-asking functions as a situated way of being in the midst of practice. More particularly, we present a hermeneutic study of student question-asking in a graduate seminar on design theory (i.e., a seminar focused on theory and philosophy of design, emphasizing the work of design scholars such as Simon, Cross, Krippendorff, and Lawson). The study offers a unique moral-practical perspective on this commonly studied phenomenon. Our analysis yielded four themes regarding the moral-practical intricacies of question-asking in this setting, with a particular focus on time-related constraints on participation, various types of background understanding, and value-laden expectations that participants encountered in this complex ecology of practice.

Phenomenology as a subversive practice.

“…Given this research strategy, question-asking showed up as much more than a straightforward information-gathering or clarification-seeking endeavor. Perhaps most vivid among our findings were accounts of how student questions facilitated or detracted from the overall quality of the class experience (Gong & Yanchar, 2019), interpersonal tensions among students that resulted from certain question-asking styles (Yanchar & Gong, 2020), how questions reflect the various overlapping practices of participants (e.g., participants were students in this class, employees at their workplaces, and community members; Gong, 2018; Gong & Yanchar, 2019), and how students’ purposes in asking certain questions were informed by past experiences, present concerns, and future aspirations (Gong, 2018). Ultimately, student questions, and ways of asking questions, showed up as moral–practical commentaries regarding class content (e.g., readings and discussion topics), other students’ conduct, and what mattered to them, including values (often-tacit) that guided what students felt they should or should not do as class members.…”

“…As should be clear, phenomenological research that employs an explicit theoretical framework could also be directly subversive in nature, offering criticism of traditional accounts in conjunction with efforts to provide methodological and conceptual alternatives. One example of this strategy was offered in a study of graduate student question-asking in the classroom, conducted by a doctoral student and myself (Gong & Yanchar, 2019; Yanchar & Gong, 2020). Mainstream psychological and educational research in this area is overwhelmingly cognitive, logocentric, and quantitative in nature, typically producing thin descriptions of representational structures, computational procedures, and taxonomies (for more details, see Gong, 2018).…”

“…While offering critical assessments at that juncture in a report certainly seems appropriate and performs an important argumentative function, this practice limits critique to the study’s framing and thus fails to provide a more substantive critical juxtaposition of phenomenological and traditional findings—that is, a contradistinction of findings cast in terms of the contribution that each makes (or does not make) to an understanding of the phenomenon in question. For example, the study of graduate student question-asking referenced above (Gong & Yanchar, 2019; Yanchar & Gong, 2020) mentions traditional renderings of the central phenomenon in the discussion and conclusion sections, but could benefit from a more direct and substantial critical juxtaposition to clarify the contribution of the hermeneutic-phenomenological findings presented. The same could be said of many other phenomenological studies reported in the literature (see, e.g., many phenomenological reports appearing in Journal of Phenomenological Psychology , Qualitative Research in Psychology , Phenomenology & Practice , and Qualitative Psychology ).…”

The Moral Ecology of Unstructured Speaking on Study Abroad: Finding Speaking Opportunities

“…The theoretical framework described previously informed a thematic analysis of the data, similar to a process used in other research from a hermeneutic moral realist perspective McDonald & Michela, 2019;, 2020, except that this study used extant data and did not conduct an analysis in tandem with data collection. To improve trustworthiness (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) we conducted progressive subjectivity checks and shared early findings with peers who were familiar with the analytic framework.…”