TEACHERS’ QUESTIONING TECHNIQUES AND STUDENTS’ RESPONSES IN READING CLASS

INTRODUCTION
 CARS ("Creating A Research Space") Model for Article Introductions

From Swales, J. (1990) "Genre Analysis". Cambridge University Press.

MOVE 1: Establishing a Territory

In the introduction, writers generally start by trying to define a general "terrain" or "layout" of their research territory. This

move can describe the current situation, features and characteristics of that area of study, as well as why it is an important field and

who has already been working in it.

MOVE 1 - STEP 1: CLAIMING CENTRALITY

The writer states that the topic of research is useful, relevant, important, or worth investigating since it forms part of a lively,

significant or well-established research area. Centrality claims frequently serve as topic sentences and are therefore usually followed

by evidence to support this statement.

The effect of...has been studied extensively in recent years.

Of the many..., ....have been the most extensively studied.

The effects of... have received considerable attention

Many investigators have recently turned to...

 A large body of data concerning...has been reported.

In recent years, there have been many papers describing...

Recently, there has been wide interest in...

In recent years, researchers have become increasingly interested in...

Knowledge of...has great importance for...

The study of...has become an important aspect of...

The theory that...has led to the hope that...

The relationship between...is a classic problem in fluid mechanics.

A long-standing problem has been to obtain more information on...

The well-known...phenomena...have been favorite topics for analysis both in...

A central issue in...is the validity of...

MOVE 1 - STEP 2: MAKING TOPIC GENERALISATIONS

These consist of statements concerning the current state of either knowledge, consensus concerningpractice or description of

phenomena.
The general features of... are well known.

Plumage coloration is known to influence mate selection in mallards.

An increase of Mallards in eastern North America has been well documented.

Trout are believed to be relatively immobile.

It is generally accepted that...

There is now much evidence to support the hypothesis that...

A standard procedure for assessing...has been...

Such...methods are often criticized for...

It is commonly suggested that...

Comparisons of spatially separated populations tend to consist of...

These...are often found...

...is a common finding in patients with...

An elaborate system of...is found in the...

MOVE 1 - STEP 3: REVIEWING ITEMS OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH

 Here, the writer needs to relate what has been found (or claimed) with who has found it (or claimed it).

Smith (1989) found a clear relationship between...

Smith (1989) argued that...

Smith (1989) concluded that...

It has been suggested that...(Smith 1989)

Data have been presented in the literature which show that...(Smith 1989)

Observations by Smith (1989) suggest that...

MOVE 2: Establishing a Niche

One way that academic writers find a "niche" (= reviiri) for their research is by showing that the previous research history is

not complete. In other words, that there are aspects of the research field that still require further investigation. The most common way

of achieving this is to present a negative evaluation of some feature of the research "territory" described in Move 1. This is often

signalled by words expressing a contrastor negative evaluation such as the following.

CONTRAST: QUANTIFIERS: VERBS: ADJECTIVES:

 however, but, yet, although, despite, nevertheless, unfortunately few, less, little, no, none, not fail, ignore, lack, neglect,

overlook, question, prevent, hinder, deter, restrict, limit unsatisfactory, elusive, inconclusive, ineffective, limited, restricted,

scarce, uncertain, unclear, unreliable

MOVE 2 - STEP 1A: COUNTER-CLAIMING

This step typically follows Move 1-Step 3 (Reviewing Items Of Previous Research) and is used to introduce an opposing

viewpoint or show the weaknesses in previous research.

However, this view is challenged by recent data showing...

However, these studies have failed to recognize the...

However, recent work in our laboratory suggests that...

...., yet these approaches become increasingly unreliable when...

Although these experiments......, they were performed on...and are therefore suspect.

MOVE 2 - STEP 1B: INDICATING A GAP (in previous research)

 This step typically follows Move 1-Step 2 (Making Topic Generalisations) and indicates an unfilled research"niche" (= reviiri)

or a new way to approach the research problem that the writer intends to pursue.

A considerable amount of research has been... but little research...

...has been extensively studied. However, less attention has been paid to...

As a result, no comprehensive theory appears to exist.

Despite the importance of..., few researchers have studied...

Research has tended to focus on...rather than...

The only reported study to date of...covered a limited range of...

...studies have appeared previously in the literature, but measurements were restricted to...

The properties of...are still not completely understood.

Evidence on this question is presently inconclusive.

MOVE 2 - STEP 1C: RAISING A QUESTION (about previous research)

However, it is not clear whether the use of...can be modified to...

 In spite of these early observations, the mechanism...has remained unclear.

The question remains...?

How much has the seal population actually decreased?

MOVE 2 - STEP 1D: CONTINUING A TRADITION

This step is frequently signalled by causative connectors, such as therefore, hence, consequently or thus, as well as other

expressions indicating a need for further research.

These differences need to be analyzed...

Hence, additional studies of...are needed.

It is desirable to carry out surveys of...

It is of interest to compare....

MOVE 3: Occupying the Niche

Here, the writer states how s/he intends to fill the gap, answer the specific question or continue the research tradition that was

described in Move 2.
 MOVE 3 - STEP 1A: OUTLINING PURPOSES (Why?)

In this step, the writer introduces his/her solution to the problem described in Move 2 by stating the main purpose or aim of the

study. Note in the examples below how the verb tense used depends on whether the writer is referring to a physical or abstract

concept.

PRESENT TENSE:

The present tense tends to be used when the aims are described in terms of the written product, now held physically in the

reader's hands.

(paper, article, thesis → PRESENT tense)

The purpose of this paper is to...

The purpose here is to evaluate...

PAST TENSE:

The past tense tends to be used when the aims are described in terms of abstract concepts such as mental enquiry.

(study, investigation, experiment → PAST tense)

The aim of the present study was to elucidate...

 The objective of this research was to quantify...

Our purpose was to describe...

Unlike Finnish, Japanese and Korean, English can (and actually prefers to) take an inanimate agent as the grammatical subject

of the sentence.

HUMAN AGENT:

In this study, we suggest a 3-step process...

In this letter, we propose a ...algorithm.

In this paper, we attempt to develop a...

In this letter, we provide a novel approach to...

In this paper, we describe novel algorithms for...

In this paper, we present a system for...

In this letter, we analyze the performance of...

In this letter, we present an efficient routing protocol that...

INANIMATE AGENT:

This paper evaluates the effect on...

 This paper presents data on...

This study focuses on a strategy for...

The present study tested...

This thesis proposes a formal procedure for...

This paper introduces a novel architecture for...

This research aims to develop a methodology for...

MOVE 3 - STEP 1B: ANNOUNCING PRESENT RESEARCH (How? Where? When?)

This step represents an alternative strategy to that used in Move 3 - Step 1A. Here, the writer describes the aims in terms of the

steps taken in the study to reach its objectives (i.e., how the research sets out to � accomplish� the aims).

In this paper, we introduce a novel method to... We use the method of in which�. An approximation using a � algorithm

similar to that of [6] is used to evaluate �

 In this paper, we provide a novel approach to model the dynamic behavior of �. We first propose the � functions of �

regions based on the geometric relationship between� and �. We model the � for a wide variety of situations. The � criterion is

then applied to detect the � based on a test statistic, which is a function of the � relationship between � and �. We also

demonstrate how to use this technique in � systems to maximize ...

In this paper, we identify the security problems that � face by developing an application in which� would be used in the near

future� We identify the threats and vulnerabilities to this application �. This paper details why security mechanisms that are

presently used in � environments are inadequate or not appropriate for � designed for this application. We then describe a new

security model that serves as a countermeasure to the identified threats.

MOVE 3 - STEP 2: ANNOUNCING MAIN FINDINGS

In this step, the writer considers the results to be the most important aspect of the research and therefore reports these as part of

the introduction. Beware, not all disciplines allow this in the Introduction Section!
 TEACHERS’ QUESTIONING TECHNIQUES AND STUDENTS’ RESPONSES IN A READING CLASS

INTRODUCTION

Classroom discourse events in a reading class vary depending on several factors such as the creativity of the teacher in her

questioning techniques and how much classroom talk time is shared with the students, mastery of the subject matter and classroom

environment. Effective classroom discussion takes place when teachers possess different techniques in asking questions that elicit

student responses. It is generally accepted that questioning plays an important role to evaluate learners’ understanding and to

encourage student participation in classroom discussion.

Over the past decades, there have been many extensive researches about classroom questioning. Killen (2010) mentioned that

the major reviews in this area indicate that the aspects of questioning that have been investigated most frequently are the cognitive

levels of questions, the difficulty levels of questions and teachers’ patterns of questioning. Duron, Limbach and Waugh (2006)

claimed that to most effectively encourage student participation, teachers must become highly skilled questioners. This is

understandably difficult and takes commitment. The research findings have been quite mixed. However, teachers’ questioning has

continuously been regarded as an important part of teaching as evidenced by several previous research findings.
 Questioning as an important part of teaching is stressed by Cazden (1988). As mentioned in his book, teaching is a linguistic

process in a cultural setting and the study of classroom discourse is a kind of applied linguistics — the study of situated language use

in one social setting. She examined what she calls the languages of curriculum, control, and personal identity and believes that in

classroom discourse, language is used to initiate, monitor, adjust and evaluate cognitive processes. Linguistic communication in the

classroom serves multiple functions. Teachers must make themselves aware of the language patterns in the classrooms and the

function of those patterns of discourse in the educational process. He also noted that the most common pattern of classroom discourse

is the three-part sequence of teacher initiation, student response and teacher evaluation. The teacher usually initiates the interaction

using question form.

According to Lindley (1993), the art of asking questions is one of the basic skills of good teaching. Socrates believed that

knowledge and awareness were an intrinsic part of each learner. Thus, in exercising the craft of good teaching an educator must reach

into the learner's hidden levels of knowing and awareness in order to help the learner reach new levels of thinking. Questioning is the

heart of teaching learning process. Through the art of questioning the teacher can exploit the hidden potentialities of students, however

this mainly depends upon the types of questions teachers ask (www.highlandschools-virtualib.org.uk).

Tsui et al. (2004) also believe that questioning is an essential component of teaching. Questions can draw learners’ attention to

the critical aspects of the object of learning, and open up the space for more investigation on the part of learners. The analysis of

classroom discourse reveals that teacher’s questions are not only evaluative but also supportive in that it seems that questions provoke
deeper thinking in the students. Moreover, it engages students in more cognitively active roles. As Chin (2006) puts it, teachers’

questions stimulate students to “formulate hypotheses, predict outcomes, brainstorm ideas, generate explanations, make inferences and

conclusions, as well as to self-evaluate and reflect on their own thinking.

In a more recent study of Shi-ying (2011) on English teachers’ questioning, she reported that a problem still exists in teacher

questioning. This problem includes teachers’ lack of guiding principles and questioning skills in the classroom. She suggested that

teachers need to learn the theoretical background of classroom questioning; organize activities and exchange professional experiences

and ideas to improve teachers’ questioning, and develop teaching techniques to promote teacher’s professional qualities. Questioning,

therefore, lies at the heart of good and interactive teaching.

It is generally accepted that questioning is the most commonly used technique in teaching. Whatever method or approach a

teacher applies in the classroom she has to employ the most appropriate questioning techniques. Since questioning is basic to good

communication, questions must be at the appropriate level, be of the proper sequence and be worded properly. Questioning, therefore,

lies at the heart of good and interactive teaching.

Cooper (2010) underscores questioning process as an essential part of instruction in that it allows teachers to monitor student

competence and understanding as well as increase thought-provoking discussion. Frequently, a lesson is composed of countless

questions that often require minimal effort and low-level thinking to answer. It is important to present students with questions that

encourage reasoning and that allow them to draw from their prior knowledge rather than accepting “yes or no” responses. Morgan and
Saxton (1991) argue that when teachers pose questions, their questions can relate to a teaching plan or teacher’s lesson material.

According to them, questioning which is related to teaching plan has five reasons, namely: the act of asking questions helps teachers

keep students actively involved in lessons; while answering questions, students have the opportunity to openly express their ideas and

thoughts; questioning students enables other students to hear different explanations of the material by their peers; asking questions

helps teachers to pace their lessons and moderate student behavior, and finally, questioning helps teachers to evaluate student learning

and revise their lesson as necessary.

Cotton (2000) stresses that questioning is second only to lecturing in popularity as a teaching method and that classroom

teachers spend anywhere from thirty-five to fifty percent of their instructional time conducting questioning sessions. She further

claims that questioning has been an interest to researchers and practitioners because of its widespread use as a contemporary teaching

technique. The high incidence of questioning as a teaching strategy, and its consequent potential for influencing student learning

have led many investigators to examine relationships between questioning methods and student achievement and behavior. She

considered three aims of questioning, namely: increasing attainment, enhancing retention and encouraging participation. The

following observations are drawn by Cotton: Instruction which includes posing questions during lessons is more effective in

producing achievement gains than instruction carried out without questioning students. On the average, during classroom recitations,

approximately 60 percent of the questions asked are lower cognitive questions, 20 percent are higher cognitive questions, and 20

percent are procedural. Higher cognitive questions are not categorically better than lower cognitive questions in eliciting higher level
responses or in promoting learning gains. Lower cognitive questions are more effective than higher level questions with young

(primary level) children, particularly the disadvantaged. Lower cognitive questions are more effective when the teacher's purpose is to

impart factual knowledge and assist students in committing this knowledge to memory. In most classes above the primary grades, a

combination of higher and lower cognitive questions is superior to exclusive use of one or the other. Increasing the use of higher

cognitive questions (to considerably above the 20 percent incidence noted in most classes) produces superior learning gains for

students above the primary grades and particularly for secondary students. Simply asking higher cognitive questions does not

necessarily lead students to produce higher cognitive responses. Teaching students to draw inferences and giving them practice in

doing so result in higher cognitive responses and greater learning gains.

Dumteeb (2009) in his study suggested that it is generally recognized that teachers normally use questioning techniques to

determine the extent of students’ understanding, to stimulate thinking and imagination, to direct their attention, to involve the students

in classroom discussions, and to reflect on the implications of their studies. Questioning techniques bring out the outcomes that the

teachers expect from their students in any of their lessons, activities and discoveries. He concluded that teachers must be skilled at

asking appropriate questions, at probing and challenging students’ responses, at leading invigorating discussions and at organizing the

classroom in order to facilitate critical thinking. On the other hand, Lewis (n.d.) claimed that when teachers are skilled in utilizing

questions, students will realize that questioning is a valuable tool in organizing their thoughts to attain certain learning objectives.

Furthermore, he asserted that in the language classroom, questions are also considered an effective mode of teaching in various ways.
For instance, teachers can ask questions to arouse students’ curiosity, focus their attention on the lesson, maintain their interests,

motivate students to investigate and learn new knowledge, and test the students’ knowledge and understanding of what they have

learned.

According to Critelli and Tritapoe (2010), those teachers who have mastered the art of questioning receive excessive response

from their students thus, creating a lively and satisfactory classroom interaction. On the other hand, as cited in http://e-

journal.ikippgrismg.ac.id/index.php/eternal/article/view/165, there are four possible ways of handling students’ wrong and "I-don't-

know" answers. First, acknowledge the wrong answer but refocus the student's attention on the question. Another way is to

contextualize the problem and make the leaner identify himself with it. Thirdly, decompose the question from high-level to simple,

factual questions, and lastly, offer lead questions as deemed necessary.

In a related study, Lynch (1996) reported that in the language classroom, the more opportunities that are given to students to

generate responses, the more they can improve language ability, and interactive and critical thinking skills. As educational theories

have long called for the inclusion of critical thinking skills in the curriculum and higher cognitive learning ability can drive critical

thinking skills, it is important and worthwhile to investigate the degree to which, and the ways in which, teachers use various cognitive

level of questions to foster students’ critical thinking skills, teachers’ questioning techniques, and how students respond to questions of

varying cognitive levels in the language classroom.

 It is noteworthy that even in modern times, the use of Socratic questioning has become popular through

disciplined questioning that can be used to pursue thought in many directions and for many purposes, including: to explore complex

ideas, to get to the truth of things, to open up issues and problems, to uncover assumptions, to analyze concepts, to distinguish what

one knows from what he does not know, to follow out logical implications of thought, or to control the discussion. The key to

distinguishing Socratic questioning from questioning per se is that Socratic questioning is systematic, disciplined, and deep, and

usually focuses on fundamental concepts, principles, theories, issues, or problems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_questioning).

Paul and Elder (2006) support Socratic questioning. According to them, teachers, students or indeed anyone interested in

probing thinking at a deep level can and should construct Socratic questions and engage in these questions. When teachers use

Socratic questioning in teaching, their purpose may be to probe student thinking, to determine the extent of student knowledge on a

given topic, issue or subject, to model Socratic questioning for students, or to help students analyze a concept or line of reasoning. It is

suggested that students should learn the discipline of Socratic questioning so that they begin to use it in reasoning through complex

issues, in understanding and assessing the thinking of others, and in following-out the implications of what they, and others think. In

teaching, teachers can use Socratic questioning for at least two purposes, namely: To deeply probe student thinking, to help students

begin to distinguish what they know or understand from what they do not know or understand (and to help them develop intellectual

humility in the process), and to foster students' abilities to ask Socratic questions, to help students acquire the powerful tools of

Socratic dialogue, so that they can use these tools in everyday life (in questioning themselves and others). To this end, teachers can
model the questioning strategies they want students to emulate and employ. Moreover, teachers need to directly teach students how to

construct and ask deep questions. Beyond that, students need practice to improve their questioning abilities.

Furthermore, they claim that the art of Socratic questioning is intimately connected with critical thinking because the art of

questioning is important to excellence of thought. What the word "Socratic" adds to the art of questioning is systematicity, depth, and

an abiding interest in assessing the truth or plausibility of things. Both critical thinking and Socratic questioning share a common end.

Critical thinking provides the conceptual tools for understanding how the mind functions in its pursuit of meaning and truth; Socratic

questioning employs those tools in framing questions essential to the pursuit of meaning and truth. The goal of critical thinking is to

establish an additional level of thinking to our thinking, a powerful inner voice of reason, that monitors, assesses, and reconstitutes—

in a more rational direction—our thinking, feeling, and action. Socratic discussion cultivates that inner voice through an explicit focus

on self-directed, disciplined questioning. It has been suggested by Duron (2006) that questioning techniques allow the teacher to

establish what is already known and then to extend beyond in order to develop new ideas and understandings. It stimulates interaction

between teacher and learner and to challenge the learner to defend his or her position.

In recent years, researchers have become increasingly interested in the different features of teachers’ questioning techniques.

Long and Sato (1984) cited in Ellis (2008) modified Kearsley’s taxonomy to account for the different types of teachers’ questions they

observed in ESL classes. The key distinction was between echoic questions, which ask for the reiteration of an utterance or

verification that it has been understood as intended, and epistemic questions, which serve the purpose of acquiring information. Long
and Sato also termed Kearsley’s evaluative epistemic questions as “display questions”. By and large, this distinction is similar but not

identical to the open/closed distinction of Barnes. In general, according to Ellis (2008), “studies of teachers’ questions in the L2

classroom have focused on the frequency of the different types of questions, wait-time (the length of the time the teacher is prepared

to wait for an answer), the nature of the learners’ output when answering questions, the effect of the learners’ level of proficiency on

questioning, the possibility of training teachers to ask more communicative questions, and the variation evident in teachers’

questioning strategies”.

Ten common features of teachers’ questioning techniques were cited in www.ccsenet.org/ass as follows: 1. wait time 2. “No

Hands Up” 3. spiral questioning 4. ABCDE cards 5. Socratic seminar 7. “Add on” responses 8. white board responses 9. tongue

depressor questioning, and 10. using DOK to design questions that elicit understanding. The focus of these techniques is to gain as

much information as possible about what students know and do not know.

According to Ragawanti (2009), questions are commonly raised to meet several pedagogical purposes such as to see if learners

have acquired the imparted knowledge; to stimulate logical, reflective or imaginative thinking into issues being discussed; to direct

attention to and to keep students involved in the lesson; to give space for self-expression, and to increase motivation and participation.

Sunga (2004) claims that using good questioning techniques in the classroom can help promote positive student learning.

When utilizing questions in daily lessons, teachers allow the students to direct their own learning. Learning something through

discovery is a more effective method of learning that will lead to improve memory and greater student involvement. According to
her, a question is a specialized sentence which begins with the interrogative operator and ends with a question mark. A statement

normally can become a question if the speaker reads it with appropriate voice inflection. When in written form, however, a question

mark is used. A question can be defined based on how it is structured/formed. It may come in the form of a yes/no question, or-

question, wh-question, or tag question. It implicitly states a directive while a directive implicitly states a question. It is meant to elicit a

response, either verbally or nonverbally.

Bloom (1956) presented his taxonomy of questions as a basis for planning educational objectives, teaching-learning activities

and assessment items. His taxonomy has been used in various ways in education even by researchers in diverse disciplines as

theoretical underpinning. It consists of six hierarchical and cumulative levels of cognitive process; knowledge, comprehension,

application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Knowledge is the lowest level of the cognitive process and a prerequisite for all other

higher levels. In this level, questions are asked to require students’ ability to remember and recall knowledge, concepts, and materials

previously learned. The knowledge level of questions involves the recall of specifics and universals; the recall of methods and

processes; or the recall of a pattern, structure or setting. Comprehension requires students to go beyond knowledge by understanding

what they have learned. With comprehension the students must not only have knowledge, but must also understand what they know.

To answer this type of questions correctly, students are required to interpret the facts and understand the meaning of information and

comprehend the way it applies in a specific situation. Some of the key verbs to use in asking comprehensive questions are: describe,

rephrase, relate and explain. With application, the next higher level of cognitive process, students are encouraged to be able to apply
knowledge they have learned and gained in class to various situations. Teachers have always recognized that a student does not really

understand an idea or what they have learned unless they can apply that idea, principle, or knowledge in new problem situations. In

other words, students must be able to use their knowledge in new situations. Application questions can be asked in verbal directives

such as: solve, choose, determine, employ, interpret, demonstrate and relate. In analysis, students must be able to break down or

separate comprehended knowledge into parts and apply it in different situations. So, in the classroom, analysis questions will require

students to go beyond knowledge and application for analyzing their problems. Verbs usually associated with the analysis level are:

analyze why, support, categorize, classify and put in order. Synthesis is another higher cognitive level which requires the creative

combination of knowledge analyzed from several topics to create something which previously did not exist. With synthesis questions,

students must be able to put all the parts together into a whole. They must use their own ideas, background and experiences in

synthesizing process. The synthesis objective can be appraised by questions using verbs such as design, create, construct, develop,

devise and plan. Finally, evaluation is the highest level which is defined as the making of judgments about the value, for some

purpose of ideas, experience, solutions, methods, and materials. The judgment may be either quantitative or qualitative and the criteria

may be either those determined by the students or those which are given to them, and involves the use of criteria as well as standards

for appraising the extent to which particulars are accurate and effective. In Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, evaluation is

placed as the highest category of objectives because it requires some competence in all the previous categories - knowledge,

comprehension, application, analysis and synthesis. Evaluation encourages students to make applied judgments about something they
know, and have analyzed, synthesized, on the basis of criteria which can be made explicit to give their viewpoint. There will be no

correct answer. Verbs used in the evaluation objective are judge, evaluate, criticize, choose, estimate, predict and argue.

Questioning is an essential component of teaching. Tsui, Marton, Mok and Ng (2004) assert that questions can draw learners’

attention to the critical aspects of the object of learning, and open up the space for more investigation on the part of learners. Bloom’s

typological framework was developed for the purpose of describing and analyzing classroom discourse, with a focus on question-

response interactions. The framework was used to analyze the ways in which the teacher had used questions to structure and lead

classroom interactions

Black and Harrison (2001) point out that teachers’ questions that elicit information about students’ understanding can also be

considered as an essential tool for formative assessment. since the quality of teachers’ questions can affect the degree to which the

questions do or do not extend students’ thinking and prolong their ideas, both the actual content of the questions and the ways of

following up on the responses, i.e. feedback, become remarkable. Toni and Parse (2013) report their findings in a study that the

inference question, among different question types, was the most frequently posed question in the target classroom with 27% of

occurrence.

Domingo (2009) conducted a study on teachers’ skills in classroom questioning and the types of student responses. It revealed

that wait time was the commonly employed teachers’ questioning technique in English classes which got 48.84%. On the other hand,

other questioning techniques were prompting 23%, probing 9.30%, reinforcement 6.98% and redirecting 4.66%. On sequencing of
questions, it revealed that the teacher respondents used extending as the most used way of sequencing. It got a percentage of 42.86%

followed by extending and lifting with 28.57%, sowing and reaping 14.29%, step-by-step down 14.29%, and funneling and nose dive

0% percent respectively.

In a study on types of questions conducted by Dashwood (2005), she developed the alternatives to questioning. Her study

showed that teachers posed open questions more than closed questions in the classroom. A closed question is one in which there are a

limited number of acceptable answers. This type of question is calling for one word or one input answer. An open question is one in

which there are many acceptable answers. This type of question is calling for opinions, views, feelings or experiences since open

questions are designed to give information.

In a recent study, Sri Wahyuni (2010) focused on the basic questioning techniques only. He conducted an analysis based on

the recorded data of five novice teachers when they conducted lessons in class. The recorded data were transcribed. From the

transcriptions, teachers’ talks were identified and classified into types of questions, levels of questions, and basic questioning

components. The findings of the study were: 1) novices used higher number of closed questions; 2) there were more low level

questions conducted by novices, and 3) the large number of the skill components in their teaching activities was the distributing,

pausing and reacting. He also found that teachers’ questioning techniques encourage students to become critical and creative thinkers

regardless of their field of study, interests, and abilities. Questioning should be used purposefully to achieve the goals. Teachers
should ask questions which will require students to use their thinking skill. Another suggestion for teachers to improve their quality of

the classroom questions is by determining the intellectual level of the teachers’ questions.

On students’ responses to teachers’ questions, Nystrand (1997) introduced two types of responses guided by the cognitive and

interpretive levels of student responses. Literal responses are responses demonstrated by recall and attention but no evidence of

comprehension beyond literal recall and perception while interpretive responses contained comments and interpretations inferred from

the text and images and suggested students were connecting the text and images to their lives, to other texts, and to the world. He

further described literal responses which include naming visual elements, direct textual references, choral responses, and expressive

responses. On the other hand, he described interpretive responses as connections, questions, speculations, and inferences.

Inamulllah (2005) utilized Flanders Interaction Analysis (FLINT) Model which asserts that teacher dominates classroom talk

for about two-thirds of the classroom interaction, thus, making students passive and dependent on the teacher during classroom hours.

He supported Flanders when he stated that about 70% of the classroom interaction as that of teacher’s talk.

Stiggins (2008) states that through encouraging students to formulate educated responses and express their opinions, teachers

are able to assess how familiar or interested they are in the material. Continually involving students in their own learning experience

and providing them with valuable feedback is a necessity in promoting progressive learning Brown (2001) argues that the most

important key to creating an interactive language classroom is the initiation of the interaction by the teacher. He asserted that in the

second language classroom where students often do not have a great number of tools for initiating and maintaining language,
questioning strategies provide necessary stepping stones to communication. He further cited the importance of teachers’ questioning

techniques in motivating students to provide accurate responses.

Chin (2006) believes that the representation of teacher questioning in the classroom contributes to an understanding of how

questions can inspire students to respond as part of a teaching sequence. The analysis of classroom discourse reveals that teacher’s

questions are not only evaluative but also supportive in that it seems that questions provoke deeper thinking in the students. Moreover,

it engages students in more cognitively active roles. As he puts it, teachers’ questions stimulate students to “formulate hypotheses,

predict outcomes, brainstorm ideas, generate explanations, make inferences and conclusions, as well as to self-evaluate and reflect on

their own thinking.” It can be hypothesized that by questioning, the teacher provides not only conceptual but also linguistic

scaffolding.

According to Agibuay (2008) cited in http://orrucu.com/sites/default/files/BSEfm_CLASSROOM%20INTERACTION%20IN

%20ENG%20CLASSES.pdf, the most dominant type of student talk is giving specific answers to teachers’ questions. She reported

that even if the teachers’ questions require longer discourses, students who had been trained to give only monosyllabic answers give

generally limited responses. This is affirmed by Salvador (2007) cited in the same website as he claims that one-word answers

predominate in classrooms because of insufficient knowledge about the subject matter.

 Wilen (2004) explores possible responses related to the concern many social studies teachers have: how can reticent students

be encouraged to become active participants in classroom issue discussions? Several assumptions underlie this need: discussion is

essential to a democracy; the citizenship purpose of social studies can be achieved, in part, through involving students in classroom

discussions; students learn from the teacher and peers in discussions; and social issues are appropriate content for classroom

discussions.

Productive feedback, or follow-up, should serve to clarify, synthesize, expand, modify, raise the level of, or evaluate students’

responses. The importance of providing feedback is to encourage student-originated responses while correcting or elaborating on

their effort. In the case of an incorrect response, it is appropriate to ask the student to provide support for their answer in an effort to

guide them towards the correct solution. In addition to providing feedback, probing is another effective technique used to expand

thinking and increase the likelihood of future response. The premise behind probing is to direct the student’s thinking towards the

major concepts or important aspects of the topic. When using this technique, convergent questions, or those that encourage a single

broad content answer, are most appropriate and help to obtain more elaborate responses. In many classrooms, even when teachers

pose divergent, high-level questions, students tend to show more comfort responding with convergent low-level answers

(Cruickshank, 2009).
 Furthermore, according to him, redirecting or posing the same question to a different student, is another method that is often

used with students who demonstrate high levels of self-confidence. In contrast, students with a low self-concept respond poorly to this

technique and are often discouraged by it. Rephrasing is a different technique that can also have adverse effects; rather than rewording

a question it is better to obtain a response to serve as a basis then use probing to direct the attention of the student towards the correct

answer When a teacher attempts to explain his question again, students may become confused or lose interest in participating. In

accordance with these techniques, it is important to be aware of and appeal to student’s current level of reasoning and competence as

well as their particular interests. Rhetorical questions, or questions asked for effect instead of to generate responses, can also serve to

confuse students and discourage future participation. These questions tend to discourage continued participation because students are

often unsure if they are actually supposed to respond or if they are not. Designing questions to match objectives and the ability level of

students are imperative in receiving strong responses and connecting major concepts of different lessons. In order to do this however,

planning questions prior to class discussion is necessary to ensure variety; divergent questions that appeal to a higher level of thinking

are often more difficult to formulate, thus many teachers who do not plan in advance resort to asking predominately convergent

questions . The overemphasis on convergent questions lessens student interaction and hinders their ability to comprehend and retain

information.
 To conclude, it can be noted that a considerable amount of research has been conducted about teacher’s questioning

techniques but little research has focused on students’ responses. In view of this notion, the researcher is motivated to conduct the

present study which aims to analyze, describe and interpret the developmental reading teacher’s questioning techniques and students’

responses at the Trece Martires City College (TMCC). The TMCC is on its fourth year operation and currently offering _______

courses, namely: Bachelor of Science in Secondary Education, Bachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Management, _________

The results of this study will be significant to language teachers and students of TMCC and other colleges with similar course

offerings. The findings of the study will serve as a frame of reference in formulating questioning techniques based on students’

responses. This is vital for educational planners in formulating special projects to uplift college education and cope with CHED

accreditation standards. The teachers’ questioning skills can be used as indicators in determining the effectiveness of teachers’

questioning techniques as part of classroom activities to improve students’ responses. Language learners will be given a guide on the

importance of their responses to different teachers’ questioning techniques and vice versa.

Statement of the Problem

In this study, the researcher analyzed the teacher’s questioning techniques and the students’ responses in the developmental

reading class at the Trece Martires City College (TMCC) during the Second Semester of Academic Year 2012-2013.

Specifically, the present study aims to answer the following questions:

 1. What questioning techniques are used by the developmental reading teacher at the TMCC?

2. What are the common features of teacher’s questioning techniques?

3. How do students respond to their teacher’s questions?

Theoretical Framework

The present study is anchored upon the following theories and concepts from theorists and researchers in this particular field of

interest:

Piaget's theory of cognitive development. Piaget's theory of cognitive development is a comprehensive theory about the

nature and development of human intelligence, first developed by Jean Piaget. It is primarily known as a developmental stage theory,

but in fact, it deals with the nature of knowledge itself and how humans come gradually to acquire, construct, and use it. To

Piaget, cognitive development was a progressive reorganization of mental processes as a result of biological maturation and

environmental experience. Children construct an understanding of the world around them, then experience discrepancies between

what they already know and what they discover in their environment. Moreover, Piaget claims the idea that cognitive development is

at the center of human organism and language is contingent on cognitive development. Piaget portrayed children as active and

motivated learners who, through numerous interactions with their physical and social environments, construct an increasingly complex

understanding of the world around them. He proposed that cognitive development proceeds through four stages: (1) the sensorimotor

stage (when cognitive functioning is based primarily on behaviors and perceptions); (2) the preoperational stage (when symbolic
thought and language become prevalent, but reasoning is "illogical" by adult standards); (3) the concrete operations stage (when

logical reasoning capabilities emerge but are limited to concrete objects and events); and (4) the formal operations stage (when

thinking about abstract, hypothetical, and contrary-to-fact ideas becomes possible) ( McLeod, 2012) .

Vygotsky's theory of cognitive development. Vygotsky proposed that adults promote children's cognitive development

both by passing along the meanings that their culture assigns to objects and events and by assisting children with challenging tasks.

Social activities are often precursors to, and form the basis for, complex mental processes: Children initially use new skills in the

course of interacting with adults or peers and slowly internalize these skills for their own, independent use. Often, children first

experiment with adult tasks and ways of thinking within the context of their early play activities. Vygotsky's theory emphasized the

influence of culture, peers, and adults on the developing child. To understand this influence, Vygotsky proposed the "zone of proximal

development." This zone refers to the difference in a child's performance when she attempts a problem on her own compared with

when an adult or older child provides assistance. Imagine that a child is having difficulty with writing letters, and with the help of an

adult who writes out sample letters or helps the child trace over letters, this same child is able to make progress. The help from the

adult is called scaffolding. Just as the scaffolding of a building helps to support it, assistance from adults and peers in a child's

environment helps support the child's development. (http://social.jrank.org/pages/142/Cognitive-Development-Vygotsky-s-

Sociocultural-Theory.html">Cognitive Development - Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory</a>)

 Another theory that supports the present study is the Bloom’s cognitive theory cited by Cruickshank (2009). In Bloom’s

taxonomy of six developmental cognitive levels of learning, each level requires a different mental process or way of thinking. The

ability to solve problems through critical thinking requires higher order thinking skills, which he insists can be taught through higher

level questioning techniques. His theory is significant when determining the types of questions that teachers should ask their students.

Bloom stated that there are six different levels of thinking: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and

evaluation. In describing these six different levels of comprehension, also called the cognitive domain, Bloom states that the first

three were representative of low-order thinking, or content, whereas the last three were representative of high-level thinking, or

process. Effective teachers appeal to each level of thinking to encourage students to draw conclusions, relationships, and applications

of information they receive during class.

On questioning techniques. Wu (1993) presents his taxonomy of questioning techniques. He posits that his taxonomy of

questioning techniques is an essential tool in encouraging students’ interaction and thinking skills through five different questioning

techniques: repetition, rephrasing, simplification, decomposition, and probing. First, repetition or asking an original question again.

The teacher repeats the question in the hope of enabling students to respond to that question. Rephrasing is reforming an original

question in another way. When there is no response from students, the teacher asks the question again in different words and structures

to make the forms of questions easier for students. Simplification may be regarded as a kind of rephrasing by means of which the

content of the questions is simplified. The teacher can simplify a situation by making the scope of the answers more specific which
helps students understand the question better and thus can answer the question. Decomposition refers to the strategy teachers use to

break down an original question into smaller parts to encourage students to respond to the question. Probing is the strategy for

soliciting more information from students. Its purpose is to encourage students to develop the quality of their responses. It requires

students to expand on and develop a minimally adequate response by making it clearer, more accurate, or more original with

supporting rationale or factual information.

Frankel’s taxonomy of questions was cited by Tejero (2010). She discussed Frankel’s taxonomy of questions for the

questioning technique to develop comprehension and further stimulate students’ response in classroom. She enumerated Frankel’s six

types of questions. Each question objective will use the descriptive guide in analyzing students’ response. Recall questions aim to

determine if the students have acquired or obtained desired amount of factual information. Through this type of question, the teachers

are asking the pupils to remember specific information that they have learned beforehand. There is but one correct answer. Descriptive

questions help the students put together and organize the facts which they have gathered to make some sense of their data. It is

assumed that some types of relationship exist, that there is some continuity or sequence within the material that can be identified.

Pupils are asked to recall information previously learned but they are also being asked to describe aspects of this information in

greater detail. With explanatory questions, students must tell why they think as they do, in short they must explain the reason behind

their answers. Synthesizing questions get the pupils to suggest connections or relationships that they believe contain data support and

on what basis. Such questions require the students to put things together, to combine, relate or connect pieces of previously
unconnected content. They are asked to seek out relationships from connections and draw conclusions. Judgmental questions require

the students to choose among alternatives, making a judgment as to which two or more possibilities are best according to some

established criteria. Finally, open-ended questions require the students to seek and determine for themselves what they consider to be

acceptable answers.

Howard Gardner cited by Berk (2009) introduced the concept of multiple intelligences in which he states that each individual

operates under the conditions of a certain intelligence such as linguistic or musical. In application to questioning techniques, it is

beneficial to ask questions that incorporate as many of the intelligences as possible. This allows teachers to extend their lesson to a

wider range of students and increase participation through individualizing questions; through this method students are able to make

personal connections to their own interests and are encouraged to express their opinions.

Sunga (2004) conceptualized four questioning techniques effectively in teaching: redirection which is a questioning technique

that increases student participation and prevents teacher domination; prompting which uses hints and clues to assist a student to come

up with a response successfully; probing which is a questioning technique that deals with insufficient answers and promotes reflective

thought and critical thinking. There are at least seven probing techniques, namely: probing for clarification; probing for support;

probing for consensus; probing for accuracy; probing for relevance; probing for examples, and probing for complexity. She further

explained that redirection as questioning technique can establish positive patterns and high levels of interaction in the classroom. It

involves the asking of a single question for which there are several answers. It also increases the frequency of questions and students
participation, which in turn, leads to increased student achievement. It can be used effectively with students who do not volunteer to

answer questions; students who need some kind of motivation or stimulation. With regard to prompting , according to her, it uses

hints and clues to assist students to come up with a response successfully. As a strategy, it is based on a series of questions containing

hints that help the learner develop his/her answer. On the other hand, probing is a qualitative technique and should be used for the

promotion of reflective thought and critical thinking. In this technique it is important for the teacher to have the student supply

additional information in order to have better, more incisive answers. She also identified seven probing techniques namely: probing

for clarification, for support, for consensus, for accuracy, for relevance, for examples and for complexity. Probing is the best way to

develop critical thinking skills among students. The fourth questioning technique is wait time which is the amount of time teachers

wait after asking a question or more. It is the time teachers spend in waiting for students to respond.

Finally, regarding students’ responses, Bontao (1997) introduces his concepts on student responses which he classified

according to types. The most appropriate responses match the types of questions posed and consist of grammatically correct answers;

more appropriate responses are those which consist of short periods of hesitation, a few repetition of syllables, words, phrases and

few mispronunciation; appropriate responses are those with long period of hesitation indicated by some cuing from the teacher and/or

by some supplying a word from other students; less appropriate which may or may not be grammatically correct and in a language

other than English such as Filipino, Cebuano, and Ilocano. The inappropriate responses are those which do not match the type of

questions posed. In his subsequent model, Bontao states that

 These theories and concepts provide sufficient bases for the formulation of the conceptual framework of the present study as

shown in the paradigm below.

Conceptual Paradigm

Frame 1 Frame 2

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Developmental reading

teacher’s questioning techniques in Students’ responses in terms

terms of: of appropriateness on a five-point

 redirection scale

 prompting

 probing
 Fig.1.A Schematic Diagram Showing the Independent and Dependent Variables of the Study

Frame 1 illustrates the independent variable which is the questioning techniques of developmental reading teacher

indicated by redirection, prompting, probing and wait time.

Frame 2 shows the dependent variable which is the students’ responses in terms of appropriateness on a five- point

scale.

METHODOLOGY

Research Method

Descriptive method of research was used in this study. According to Calderon and Gonzales (2007) descriptive research

describes and interprets what is. It is concerned with conditions of relationships that exist; practices that prevail; beliefs; processes that

are going on; effects that are being felt, or trends that are developing. The process of descriptive research goes beyond mere gathering

and tabulation of data. It involves the elements or interpretation of the meaning or significance of what is described. Thus description

is often combined with comparison and contrast involving measurements, classifications, interpretation and evaluation.
 In this qualitative research, the researcher analyzed the questioning techniques employed by the developmental reading

teacher and her students’ responses in the developmental reading classroom at the Trece Martires City College. According to

Wahyuni (2010), in the discussion of qualitative research there are some types of study. One of them is the study on document

analysis. The document analysis is a study which focuses on the analysis and interpretation of written, recording, and notes.

Discourse analysis is another type of the study in the document analysis. In this study the discourse analysis focuses on the analysis

and interpretation from recording data.

Population and Subjects of the Study

The study utilized the total population of developmental reading class and their teacher during the Second Semester of

Academic Year 2012-2013.

Research Instruments

The researcher utilized three audio-video tapes, one for pretesting and the other two others for actual data gathering on

teachers’ questioning techniques and students’ responses. A table analysis form was prepared for each research instrument. A

descriptive guide on teachers’ questioning techniques based on Sunga (2004). (Please see Appendix B) and another descriptive guide
on students’ responses based on Bontao (1997) were used ( Please see Appendix C) . The instruments were expert validated and

pretested before actual data gathering.

Data Gathering Procedure

A letter of request to conduct the study properly noted by the De La Salle University-Dasmariñas College of Liberal Arts

Graduate Studies Director, Dean and Adviser was sent to the President of the TMCC. There were three 20- minute audio–video

recording for developmental reading conducted with permission from the TMCC President.

According to Derry (2007) video is an important tool that enhances the various methodologies – including ethnography,

experimentation, discourse analysis, interaction analysis, and others. Video offers a means of close documentation and observation

and presents unprecedented analytical, collaborative, and archival possibilities. The three video-taped lessons were properly retrieved

for safekeeping and future transcription.

Data Analysis

Transcription of data without corrections and alterations from the original recorded data was done by the researcher. Coding of

transcribed data was adapted from Shriffin (1996) (Please see Appendix A). Teacher’s questioning techniques and students’ responses
were identified, analyzed and interpreted. Descriptive guide instruments for teacher’s questioning techniques and students’ responses

were used. A table matrix was also be utilized to present teacher’s questioning techniques and students’ responses.
 References

Bloom, B., Englehart, M., Furst, E., &Krathwohl, D. (Eds.). (1956). Taxonomy of

educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I:

Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.

Bontao, E. (1997). Classroom interaction in college freshman English in the four tertiary

programs of Cagayan De Oro College SY 1996-1997: Its implication to the

English Language Program. Unpublished Thesis. National Library

Calderon J. F and Gonzales E. C. (2007).Methods of research and thesis writing.(Rev. ed.). Philippines: National Book Store.

Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse: the language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, Heinemann Educational Books,

1988.
 Cotton, K. (2001). Classroom questioning. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved from

www.nwrel.org/scpd.sirs/3/cu5/html

Critelli A. and Tritapoe B. (2010).Effective questioning techniques to increase class participation. E-Journal of Student

Research Volume 2 Number 1 Spring 2010

Dashwood, A. (2005). Alternatives to questioning: Teacher role in classroom discussion. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly,

Vol.7, 144-165. Retrieved from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/December05PDF%20issue.pdf

Derry, S. (2007).Guidelines for video research in education. Retrieved from http://drdc. uchicago.edu/what/video-research-

guidelines.pdf

Dumteeb, N. (2009). Teachers’ questioning techniques and students’ critical thinking skills: English language classroom in

the Thai context. Retrieved from http://udini.proquest.com/view/teachers-questioning-techniques-and-qid:1876285441/

 Duron, R (2006). Teach through questioning. http://www.isetl.orglijtlhe.

Killen R. (2010). Effective teaching strategies: lesson from research and practice.5 th edition. Cengage Learning.

Lewis, K. G. (n.d.). Developing questioning skills. Retrieved from http://ncnewschools.org/ uploads/library/0807-questioning-

article.pdf

Lynch, L. (2005) What is a language teacher?Retrieved

from http://e-journal.ikippg rismg.ac.id/index.php/eternal/article/view/165.
McLeod, S. A. "Piaget | Cognitive Theory". Simply Psychology. Retrieved 18 September 2012.
 Morgan,Norah H. and Saxton, Juliana.(1991). Teaching,
questioning and learning.Routledge, Chapman & Hall,
Incorporated.

Nystrand, M. (1997).Opening dialogue: understanding the dynamics of language

and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.

Paul, R. and Elder, L. (2006). The art of Socratic questioning. Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Ragawanti D.T. (2009). Questions and questioning techniques: A view of Indonesian students’ preferences. Retrieved

fromhttp://puslit2.petra.ac.id/ejournal/index.php/ ing/ article/view/17891.

Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. Blackwell Publishers. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

 Shi-ying, X. (2011).The present situation of English teachers’ questioning in senior middle school and positive strategies.

Retrieved from http://www.ieitweb.org/ apscj/articles/2011_1_3_1.pdf.

Sri Wahyuni (2010). Technique of questioning carried out by novice teachers. Retrieved from http://e-

jurnal.ikippgrismg.ac.id/index.php/eternal/article/view/165.

Sunga, R. (2004). A teacher’s package on the art of classroom questioning. SIBS Publishing House, Inc.

Tejero, E. (2010). Teaching reading methodologies. National Bookstore, pp. 49-51.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_questioning.

http://e-journal.ikippgrismg.ac.id/index.php/eternal/article/view/165 .
 Appendix A

Schiffrin’s Transcription

Transcription Convention

Symbol Meaning

() vocal noises

$ non- transcription line

? a question mark indicates a rising inflection, not necessarily a question.

, continuing intonation

… noticeable pause or break in rhythm without falling intonation/pause of ½ second or more/show ellipsis, parts omitted

in quotations from other sources

. indicates sentence final falling intonation

CAPS indicate emphatic stress

/words/ in slashes show uncertain transcription

/?/ inaudible utterance

XXXXxxx applause

[] speech overlap

…(N) Long pause

‹ xx › uncertain hearing

A DESCRIPTIVE GUIDE ON TEACHER’S QUESTIONING TECHNIQUES

1. Redirection as questioning technique can establish positive patterns and high levels of interaction in the classroom and it

prevents teacher domination. It involves the asking of a single question for which there are several answers. It also increases

the frequency of questions and students participation, which in turn, leads to increased student achievement. It can be used

effectively with students who do not volunteer to answer questions; students who need some kind of motivation or stimulation.

2. Prompting uses hints and clues to assist students to come up with a response successfully. As a strategy, it is based on a series

of questions containing hints that help the learner develop his/her answer.

3. Probing is a qualitative technique, which deals with insufficient answers and should be used for the promotion of reflective

thought and critical thinking. In this technique it is important for the teacher to have the student supply additional information

in order to have better, more incisive answers. Sunga (2004) identified seven probing techniques namely: probing for

clarification, for support, for consensus, for accuracy, for relevance, for examples and for complexity. Probing is the best way

to develop critical thinking skills among students.

4. Wait time or the amount of time teachers wait after asking a question or more. It is the time teachers spend in waiting for

students to respond.