Questioning for Classroom Discussion

Purposeful Speaking, Engaged Listening, Deep Thinking

Jackie Acree Walsh, Beth Dankert Sattes

• Publisher: ASCD
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN: 9781416620983
• eBook ISBN: 9781416621621
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

What type of questioning invigorates and sustains productive discussions? That's what Jackie Acree Walsh and Beth Dankert Sattes ask as they begin a passionate exploration of questioning as the beating heart of thoughtful discussions. Questioning and discussion are important components of classroom instruction that work in tandem to push learning forward and move students from passive participants to active meaning-makers. Walsh and Sattes argue that the skills students develop through questioning and discussion are critical to academic achievement, career success, and active citizenship in a democratic society. They also have great potential to engage students at the highest levels of thinking and learning. The extent to which this potential is realized, of course, depends on individual teachers who embrace these practices, make them their own, and realize that this process requires a true partnership with students. With that in mind, Questioning for Classroom Discussion presents and analyzes the DNA of productive discussions—teacher-guided, small-group, and student-driven.

---

Chapter 1

---

Quality Questioning: The Heart of Thoughtful Discussion

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

What type of questioning invigorates and sustains productive discussions?

Quality questioning is at the heart of skillful and thoughtful student discussion. Teachers who learn to ask quality questions, and teach their students to do the same, can transform typical classroom interactions by involving students in purposeful speaking, engaged listening, and deep thinking. Cognitive demand increases as students are expected to formulate their own questions—rather than wait for the teacher's—as they speak and listen to their peers, not just to the teacher. The practice of quality questioning empowers students to engage in challenging forms of discourse that require openness, respect for different points of view, and persistence to develop new understandings.

A well-conceived, stimulating question is a catalyst for the type of student thinking that leads to such purposeful speaking and listening. Follow-up comments or questions elicit evidence and surface reasoning to ensure rigor in thinking. Respect for "think time" enables students to go deeper in their own thinking and that of their classmates. Practices that support the thinking of all and scaffold students' participation ensure the expression of diverse points of view. Purposeful responses to students' comments can sustain their thinking.

A teacher's use of these questioning practices provides a structure that supports student thinking through discussion—and offers a model for students to follow as they assume increasing responsibility for managing discourses with their peers. When these practices occur within a culture that celebrates thinking, thoughtful and productive discussion results.

Distinguishing Between Questioning for Discussion and in Recitation

J. T. Dillon's Questioning and Teaching: A Manual of Practice (1988) has contributed greatly to our thinking about classroom questioning. Dillon draws a distinction between questioning practices that promote recitation, the usual form of classroom talk, and those that foster discussion, a type of interaction that rarely occurs in K–12 classrooms. Since the publication of his book in 1988, little has changed in U.S. classrooms: recitation, or what many researchers dub IRE (Initiate, Response, Evaluate) (Mehan, 1979), continues to be the dominant form of classroom talk. Gordon Wells (1993) refers to this back-and-forth talk between the teacher and one student at a time as IRF (Initiation, Response, Feedback). Given the current emphasis on formative assessment and feedback, IRF is perhaps a more accurate depiction of what happens in a productive classroom recitation.

Dillon's observations about the differences between questioning in recitation and questioning for discussion seem as relevant today as ever. Dillon distinguishes between the purposes of questioning in these two contexts and the characteristics of the questions themselves. Over the years, teachers with whom we work have affirmed the utility of this distinction, and we have deepened our understanding of these differences through our own explorations. Figure 1.1 presents several distinctions between the purposes of questioning in recitation and for discussion. As you review this information, you will likely infer that recitation is the setting in which teachers structure student mastery of core knowledge and fundamental skills, whereas discussion is the arena in which students think critically or creatively about that knowledge and have opportunities to integrate it more deeply into their mental frames.

---

Figure 1.1 | A Comparison of the Purposes of Questioning in Recitation and for Discussion

Purposes of Questioning

In Recitation

• To develop foundational knowledge and skills
• To provide drill and practice opportunities
• To check for understanding by generating formative feedback for teacher and student
• To build individual accountability*
• To encourage student self-assessment*
• To cue students on what's important to know
• To encourage student (not teacher) talk*

For Discussion

• To personalize meaning and connect to prior understandings
• To extend or deepen thinking
• To deepen understanding of concepts by questioning and making new connections
• To listen in order to understand and appreciate diverse points of view
• To learn how to disagree in a civil manner
• To reflect on one's own and others' beliefs
• To develop a life skill important for working in groups

* These characteristics apply to discussion and recitation.

If you arrived here from Chapter 4 and wish to return, please click here.

---

Let us be clear: questioning in recitation is no less important to teaching and learning than questioning for discussion. The point that Dillon makes, and one with which we concur, is that they have very different purposes. Questioning in recitation serves the critically important purpose of checking for understanding. In this context, teachers pose questions for the purpose of formative assessment. Dylan Wiliam (2011) refers to these questions as "hinge-point questions" and suggests they should be part of an instructional sequence. The purpose of such questions is to determine if students are ready to move forward or if they require reteaching. Not only does questioning in recitation provide teachers with formative feedback, but, when properly managed, it also engages students in reflecting on the extent to which they know or understand facts and concepts. Student self-assessment is the most powerful type of formative assessment.

Whereas questioning in recitation checks for understanding, questioning for discussion helps to build and deepen understanding and oftentimes occurs after students have mastered core content. As teachers plan lessons, they need to establish a clear purpose for any discussion included in their unit design—and thus about the purposes of questioning in those particular lessons. Whatever the purpose of a specific discussion, however, a hallmark of teacher questioning for discussion is its intentionality in supporting students as they develop the skills and dispositions required for productive discussion.

Central to classroom questioning are the questions teachers frame to initiate and drive the process, whether the purpose is recitation or discussion. The characteristics of the questions teachers pose are key determinants of whether students engage in a recitation or discussion:

Although discussion resembles recitation in that students and teachers are talking back and forth, discussion is a process with characteristics of its own, entailing a characteristic use of questions to facilitate the process. Therefore, the use of questions appropriate to recitation promises only to foil discussion, turning it into something like a recitation. (Dillon, 1988, p. 119)

Figure 1.2, which draws heavily from Dillon's thinking, shows the contrasting characteristics of questions in these two contexts. Most teachers, when asked, say questions for discussion are open-ended and invite student thinking, whereas questions in recitation seek to determine if students know key facts and concepts. However, not all teachers recognize that one well-thought-out question for discussion can propel a discussion for an entire class period.

---

Figure 1.2 | A Comparison of Questions Used in Recitation and for Discussion

Characteristics of Questions

In Recitation

• What is in question is whether the students know the teacher's (or the "correct") answer.
• The teacher poses questions for which there are "right answers," which students have had the opportunity to learn.
• Questions prompt students to recall or remember and/or to demonstrate understanding.
• Questions are aligned with standards and learning targets.*
• The teacher usually poses many questions.

For Discussion

• Questions are "true" or authentic questions.
• Questions are open-ended and divergent—not convergent.
• Questions stimulate responses at higher cognitive levels (Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, Create).
• Questions engage students personally and emotionally.
• The teacher poses one question for discussion; other questions emerge from both the students and the teacher.

* This applies to both recitation and discussion.

---

Questioning to Promote Thoughtful Discussion

A thoughtful and productive classroom discussion is like a colorful, tightly woven tapestry, as its many threads intertwine in purposeful ways and result in discernable patterns. Like a fine tapestry, a productive discussion does not just happen; it results from planning and skilled craftsmanship. In the case of discussion, it is a teacher's and students' skills in quality questioning that underpin the successful outcome.

Ultimately, effective discussions depend on the knowledge and skills of those involved, which in classrooms are the students. However, most students do not come to school with the skills required for questioning and discussion. Therefore, teachers must plan for and model the use of questioning that leads to a productive discussion.

Entire books could be written about the art and science of asking quality questions. In fact, we've written a few ourselves! In those books, we define quality questioning as a process that includes preparation of questions as a part of lesson planning, presentation of questions in a manner that engages all students, prompting of student responses through the use of cues and probes, processing of student responses by providing feedback, and reflection on questioning practices (Walsh & Sattes, 2005, 2011).

In this book, however, we focus on ways teachers can draw from the following four practices associated with quality questioning as they plan for the meaningful engagement of their students in discussion:

• Framing focus questions that initiate and sustain student thinking and interactions.
• Promoting the equitable participation of everyone involved in the discussion.
• Scaffolding student responses to sustain and deepen thinking and understanding.
• Creating a culture that supports thoughtful and respectful discourse.

Each of these practices can be used for different purposes in different forms of discussion (e.g., teacher-guided, structured small-group, and student-driven). Like the beams on a loom, they form a structure on which students can weave a tapestry of ideas—in other words, a thoughtful discussion. When teachers consistently and intentionally put these beams into place as they plan and facilitate discussions, they also model for students how to build a discussion.

Questioning Practice #1: Frame a Quality Focus Question

Quality questions are catalysts for the generation and exchange of ideas that thread a productive discussion. Such questions do not typically emerge without effort; rather, they are the products of teachers thinking in a focused, exacting manner about the content under study. An important part of this effort is to identify and unpack the central ideas of standards and related content in search of an issue that will stimulate curiosity, controversy, or creativity.

Identify an issue. Framing a question that is powerful enough to drive a thoughtful discussion requires three steps. The first step is to identify an issue that will form the nucleus of the focus question. In the search for a viable candidate, teachers can test how well an issue might engage student thinking by considering the extent to which students (1) possess the depth and breadth of knowledge needed to wrestle with the issue, and (2) will be vested in the issue due to its relevance, importance, or intrinsic interest. McCann (2014), addressing discussion in the English language arts classroom, observes, "the point of entry into inquiry is the raising of doubt about subjects and issues that the learners care about." McCann points to topics that adolescents, in particular, will "energetically tackle"—equality, justice, responsibility, freedom, compassion, and loyalty: topics "that Shakespeare and thousands of other writers have grappled with for generations" (p. 25). The issue around which the question is framed must hold to a "shared point of doubt" for the students who will engage in the discussion (Haroutunian-Gordon, 2014). All of this is to say that the central issue embedded in a question must be sufficiently relevant and provocative to engage students emotionally.

How to Frame a Quality Focus Question

• Identify an issue.
• Craft the question.
• Anticipate student responses.

Craft the question. The second step in framing a quality focus question is to craft the question, which requires decisions about wording and syntax. Strong focus questions share a number of important characteristics:

• Academic vocabulary that is appropriate to the age and grade level of the students.
• Strong verbs intentionally chosen to activate student thinking at a particular level.
• A simple and straightforward sentence structure.
• Delivery within a meaningful context (teachers might need to prepare a statement that provides focus or context before asking the question).

The following vignette describes how a team used these principles in their collaborative work to frame a question.

The Case of a Revised Question

Members of an 8th grade social studies team collaboratively drafted the following question for use in a discussion at the culmination of a unit on ancient Athens: Based on your knowledge of Athenian democracy, would implementing a direct democracy in our local government improve the quality of life? This question focused on the content standard and related to the students' community. Good start. Of course, most readers will immediately notice that this is a yes-or-no question and add the follow-up "Why?" or "Provide reasons for your response."

On second look, however, team members began to question the potential of their question to engage students emotionally or cognitively. They decided that even though the question asked students to relate ancient history to the 21st century, they were unlikely to connect to it personally or to vest much emotional energy in the proposed discussion. Further, they determined that the cognitive demand of the question was relatively weak; it was lacking in academic vocabulary, including a strong thinking verb. After considerable reflection, the team modified the question. They decided to give the question to students several days in advance of the discussion to provide time for research and thinking. They also informed students that they would end the discussion with a vote to determine what the majority of students thought after exploring the issue together. This is their revision:

Imagine that our state legislature offered our local municipality the opportunity to operate as a direct democracy similar to that of ancient Athens.

• Speculate as to the relative benefits and disadvantages of such a political structure for your and your family's quality of life—and for that of the community at large.
• Suggest how you might modify the system to make it more just.
• Support your ideas with cause-and-effect reasoning, specific examples, historical evidence, and other relevant information.

Team members believe that their revised question has much greater potential for engaging students in a vibrant and productive discussion than did the original. The teachers hope students will be more vested in thinking about the question, given its stipulation that they consider personal and community impacts. Further, the teachers believe that having time in advance to gather information and think critically will enable students to collect evidence for their points of view. Perhaps, most important, the team feels that their revised question represents a more demanding cognitive task that requires students to speculate and support those speculations with evidence and reasoning. In fact, they conclude that this question will afford students practice in the type of thinking associated with good citizenship in our "democratic" society.

Anticipate student responses. The third step in framing a quality question is to anticipate alternative pat...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction: Making the Case for Questioning for Discussion
• Chapter 1. Quality Questioning: The Heart of Thoughtful Discussion
• Chapter 2. The DNA of Productive Discussion: Social, Cognitive, and Use-of-Knowledge Skills and Companion Dispositions
• Chapter 3. Teacher-Guided Discussion: Teachers as Coaches During Five Stages of Discussion
• Chapter 4. Structured Small-Group Discussion: Using Protocols to Scaffold Skills for Discussion
• Chapter 5. Student-Driven Discussion: Putting Students in the Driver’s Seat
• Chapter 6. Questioning for Discussion: Creating Your Own Designs
• Appendix A: Skills Associated with Disciplined Discussion
• Appendix B: Template for Planning a Productive Discussion
• References
• Study Guide
• Related ASCD Resources
• About the Author
• Copyright