  |
|
|
|
|
||
|
                 |
|
|
2009 Day 3 Feedback:
1. Improving questioning and talk
Foundation Stage/Year 1
Worthing Teachers agreed that using talk partners encourages teachers to ask good questions. Open ended questions are better for getting children talking and thinking straight away. The ‘range of answers’ technique was found to be easily accessed by all achievement levels. Giving children deliberate wrong answers was also effective, as they loved to correct the teacher…One teacher/or puppet, read out words wrong, leading to children then explaining why the sounds were wrong and how to say it correctly. Teachers’ planning now includes an A4L questioning box as good questions need to be planned. For this age group, guided reading sessions provided scope for using different styles of questioning. The impact has been deeper understanding and accelerated learning. Teachers are more aware of children’s understanding as they have many opportunities to explain their thinking.
Herts Children are now articulating and explaining so teachers are able to fill more gaps in their understanding. The various open question techniques create a buzz of excitement and get children talking. Children love the teacher ‘doing it wrong’. They now listen out for that so listening has improved. Open questions mean that all can be involved (e.g. for how to make 5, one child said 4+1 and another 95-90). Children have a better understanding that there isn’t always one right answer and are not so worried about ‘having a go’.
Kettering Effective questioning had cleared up many misconceptions, both for teacher and child. This then led to more effective planning. Reception teachers were able to extend learning through appropriate questioning, assessing prior learning then taking children further or in some cases clarifying the level of understanding. Effective questions, linked with talk partner talk had impacted on learning through:
Lincoln Teachers had trained TAs and pre-school in effective questioning techniques. This had led to better questioning, more open questions and better quality of answer, aiding assessment. One example was ‘shapes out of a bag’, which showed what children already knew. Use of the 5 templates had led to children explaining their thinking:
Key questions used for APP had led to quality evidence. The ‘statement ‘template (e.g. all numbers are odd) worked well and ‘starting from the end’ was used to show the children a finished puppet. They attempted to make it, but realised what the steps should be after their first attempt.
Surrey Teachers from the SLD school were giving children more symbols to choose from when questions are asked, now including relevant and non-relevant answers. This has led to better planning for next steps. Reception children using the different questions made it clear that they knew the difference between a statement and a question. Y1 teachers had found the questions good for planning and had led to more talk and more understanding. Children were also asking more ‘Why?’ questions and more open ended questions (in ‘Show and Tell’ sessions for instance) and extending their explanations. Giving the answer and deciding what came before had led to cross curricular exploration.
Doncaster Teachers had focused on listening skills, training children to wait until their audience is ready before they speak, to have respect for the speaker etc. They also looked at helping children understand that the answer should be relevant to the question! One teacher used sound tins to train children to listen carefully. The impact has been enhanced speaking and listening skills, thinking skills and social skills. Children’s language has been extended and they have greater confidence. They better understand the language of questions.
Year 1/2
Worthing Teachers had used the various questioning templates and found that teachers had greater understanding of children’s level of achievement as a result. Where questions were planned, lessons were more effective. Talk partners have more to say if the question is more open ended. Children have become better at asking questions and more aware of what they have learnt.
Kettering Teachers were using the new questions to introduce work (e.g. to move these things you will need a heavy force - true or false?). This had highlighted misconceptions. Wrong answers and calculations had been used in mathematics, asking children how they knew they were wrong. Freeze framing and mind mapping had also been used, asking children what they thought the question might be and asking children to rephrase a question. Another idea was to have a ‘hidden teacher answer’ – children come up with their own answers, these are written up, the answers are discussed then children can change their minds.
Lincoln Teachers had mainly tried the 5 templates, which had led to them agreeing that they now thought more carefully about the quality of their questions. Children were now asking their own questions and an ethos of peer discussion had been created: less of the teacher and more talk by the children. Children were more prepared to ‘have a go’ in sharing their thoughts as they had less fear of failure. The questions provided instant assessment as misconceptions were revealed as well as understanding. When questions asked children to agree or disagree, children enjoyed arguing a point and justifying their opinions. In one class, a teacher went with some children on a light source hunt. She purposely pointed out something that was not, saying ‘Look there’s a light source’. The children then discussed whether it was or not and argued with the teacher, justifying their reasons. The questions and talk partners had led to moving away from hands up, making children really focus on inputs as they realize they could be chosen to answer a question at any time.
Surrey Teachers had tried the following questioning techniques: in RE, true or false statements, which had led to thought proving discussion; in history asking what people would be doing in 1666;in phonic work having sentences with one not making sense and in numeracy showing calculations and asking why one was wrong. The impact had been more focused discussion and a development of reasoning skills. Misconceptions were often eradicated. Children were using problem solving skills and higher level thinking. Children with language difficulty were still able to participate.
Doncaster One teacher had used Robert Fisher’s ‘stories for thinking’ which had encouraged thinking, reflection and philosophy. The five templates had led to children seeing that there is not necessarily always a right or a wrong answer and that this can lead to further independent research. Children’s speaking and listening skills had improved and their questioning skills. Teachers felt that the questions had refocused the way they teach and facilitate learning.
Year 3/4
Worthing Teachers had experimented with the ‘range of answers’ and found it revealed children’s misconceptions. Children were encouraged to say why an answer was correct or why it was incorrect. This strategy had been used at beginnings of science topics to stimulate discussion. It had allowed children to debate. The ‘statement’ device had encouraged discussion and children were becoming more articulate and able to explain their thinking. The questions were good assessment tools. One teacher had given children a rectangle shaded as follows with a statement:
This shape is not split into equal parts therefore a half is not coloured in. Children had a great discussion where they explained to each other how a half had actually been coloured in. The teacher said that she would have previously demonstrated her one way of showing the equal parts, yet the children came up with many different ways of describing the halves.
Herts Teachers agreed that questions need to be planned and that they need to stop asking recall questions. ‘Statements’ had been used as a starter activity as children came into the class, such as ‘Little Red Riding Hood was foolish’. The ‘range of answers’ had also been used, with some correct answers and some obscure. One teacher had used the strategy in assembly, giving children 5 things they might need to do to achieve their goals, for them to discuss. Children have been encouraged to set their own questions for a topic and are more able to do this because of the questioning techniques used. The impact of using more effective questioning is that children’s thinking is more creative and they have to justify their opinions. Confidence is increased and children then are more able to take risks and ask questions
Kettering Questions had been used during the mental starter time in mathematics and all children were engaged. Open ended questions had led to extended planning, with children leading the learning and having more ownership over the lesson or topic. There is a more positive atmosphere in the classroom and children are more enthusiastic. Teachers saw a link with the growth mindset, as all children now feel that they can contribute and are more confident speakers.
Lincoln Teachers had found it difficult to completely move away from recall questions, and had realised that quality questions have to be planned. Key questions were being used as the starting point for a lesson, often philosophical questions which have no right or wrong answer. ‘Right and wrong’ questions were very effective for pupil generated success criteria and the ‘range of answers’ was good for addressing misconceptions. For PSHE/Citizenship, statements were used to provide the basis of discussions. The impact of these techniques has been that children have a greater stake in their learning, they encourage higher order responses and lessons are more engaging and exciting for teachers and pupils.
Surrey Teachers had used Bloom’s Taxonomy in guided reading sessions, which had led to improved dialogue with children. De Bono’s thinking hats had helped children to focus their thinking. Teachers had modelled discussional language, showing that, for instance, it is OK to disagree with someone. True/false or right/wrong statements had been used which had led to a good demonstration of children’s discussion skills. The ‘range of answers’ had been successful in numeracy lessons, leading to instant reasoning and discussion. One school held a ‘Brain week’ in which different teachers taught different sessions and children chose where to go and then which question to choose to work with, aiming to get 20 points. Questions had been planned as follows: Knowledge: 1 point It was agreed that good questions have to be planned. Children are coming to their conclusions more independently, lessons are paceier and children are asking fewer, better questions.
Doncaster It has been a difficult task for teachers to move away from closed questions. ‘True/false questions had enabled children to reason and argue and allowed them opportunities to ask their own questions. One teacher read her class ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ and asked the children to assume that the wolf was innocent. Now, whenever any story is read to the class, they leap to the defence of all the traditional bad characters! Children have shown a marked improvement in their vocabulary as a result of these techniques.
Year 5/6
Worthing Teachers agreed that they now plan questions, ensuring that they are open-ended, but this had taken time to embed. Using a good question at the end of a lesson was often useful as an assessment tool, so that children’s responses fed into future planning. Some teachers found that they needed to be prepared with questions for all points of the lesson. Questions had been used for both extending and supporting. The impact had been that higher achievers were being challenged, those with a fixed mindset were being challenged, children were progressing faster and they were developing greater empathy.
Herts Teachers agreed that it takes time for teachers to move away from recall questions. Using De Bono’s thinking hats had enabled children to pose their own questions and take their understanding to a higher level. It was also a useful tool for summative assessment. Teachers have found that higher achievers have been challenged by better questions and that overall there is less passive learning.
Kettering Teachers agreed that they are now using higher order questions and children are now doing more talking than the teacher. The questions generate more discussion than before. Children in one school are asking more open questions in letters they are writing to a partner school in Italy since using these techniques. Incorrect calculations given in numeracy have led to children being able to extend their explanation skills. One teacher had children writing questions about a book studied in guided reading time for other children to answer. This led to finding ways of children improving their questions. Another teacher found that giving children some ideas with a question so that they had some starting points to discuss was useful. ‘Starting from the end’ had been successful (e.g. the answer is: rubber would be good because it is waterproof. What might the question be?) The ‘range of answers’ was also successful (e.g. what makes a good insulator? Plastic/cotton/wool/tinfoil/paper)
Y6 One teacher’s Year 6 class thought that De Bono’s hats were rather silly, so simply colour - coded the questions. Giving children an answer and getting them to come up with possible questions led to children having to think carefully about the question. One example was ‘abdomen’ as the answer, which they found very challenging. Another was ‘Two pairs of wings’. The ‘opposing standpoint’ question was also trialled (e.g. would it be OK to kill a bee if you thought it was going to sting you?’) Teachers enjoyed using Fisher’s Stories for Thinking.
Lincoln Teachers had used De Bono’s thinking hats which had led to in depth discussion about one concept. It supported lower achievers. One teacher started with blue hat thinking then moved on through the hats. The ‘range of answers’ device had been used in mathematics which had led to children articulating why something is wrong. ‘Right and wrong’ had been used in science. This techniques links with success criteria as children have to identify the elements which make up the learning objective (e.g. an effective science conclusion). ‘Starting from the end’ had encouraged children to think ‘outside the box’ and take risks. Teachers felt there was a link with SEAL objectives. One teacher stated that ‘girls are cleverer than boys’ which led to interesting opinions and attitudes (e.g. boys thought this was true, mainly because of behavioural differences). Another asked what different people might think about a hotel development in St.Lucia and found that children were surprised at the depth of analysis reached during the plenary of the lesson. Teachers have recognised that thinking creatively emphasises positive or negative views and outlooks. The techniques have enabled children to better stand up for what they believe in.
Surrey One school had used Bloom’s Taxonomy successfully during a project on Africa. The teacher had created tasks which related to the different levels of Bloom which children then selected. Children enjoyed having the choice and aimed for higher levels of thinking. ‘Starting from the end’ and the ‘range of answers’ techniques had revealed children’s prior knowledge. The ‘statement’ technique was much enjoyed by children and encouraged discussion. Children believed their learning was better and felt more independent. Teachers felt that there was now greater learning with fewer questions. Two teachers had used Fisher’s Stories for Thinking and found them very effective (one story about cheating and another about an unhappy playtime). Because the stories were about other children, the distance created enabled children to thoroughly discuss the issues.
Doncaster Teachers believed that children’s level of thinking was deeper as a result of more effective questioning. There was also an opportunity to address misconceptions. More discussion had led to more effective cooperative learning. Social skills had also improved as a result of more explanation and proving answers and children had gained confidence. Questions were now being planned and Bloom’s taxonomy was being used in guided reading, which had led to improvement in reading levels in one school. Bloom’s had also been linked to TASC (Belle Wallace). The impact has been higher order thinking skills, group cooperation, negotiation and ‘out of the box’ thinking. Children are now asking more quality questions without being prompted. One teacher has an ‘Ask it basket’. Children write on Post-it notes a science question which is later picked out by a group for their discussion. Children had become more aware of closed and open questioning and were analysing their own questions more. The 5 templates had been used, with some difficulty over the ‘opposing standpoint’. The overall impact had been greater quality of answers, detailed explanation, quality talk, surprising answers and deeper levels of thinking. Children are enthusiastic and continue learning out of school. Quiet children develop more confidence as they see there is not always a correct answer. Teachers better understand children’s thinking. Quotes by children: ‘I like the questions with choices – they give me a starting point.’
Secondary
Worthing Teachers had been experimenting with the ‘range of answers’ and had found it effective. Discussion was lasting longer and was of more depth and had increased student awareness of how complex issues are. The ‘I don’t know’ response was removed. One teacher looked at a GCSE poem from different points of view (a civilian, a war photographer, a mother, an American soldier, a Vietnamese soldier etc.) Students were able to inference and ask critical questions to form their thinking.
Herts One teacher found that making untrue statements to prompt effective questions from students had been successful. Students were more engaged, even SEN students. Visual stimulus was equally successful (e.g. showing a bad posture for balance and asking students if this was right.) One teacher’s thoughts: Since introducing talk partners there has been an impact on my planning and teaching as I am making sure that the questions I ask justify the time I give the students (e.g. I have reframed questions from simply ‘What are the two tenses we can see in the text?’ to ‘How can we tell the difference between the two tenses in the text?’ Giving students a right and a wrong example and asking why one is right and the other wrong produces much more meaningful discussion than a recall question. ‘Starting from the end’ (e.g. showing students a complex sentence that an examiner would love and asking ‘What elements of this sentences make it complex?’) have led to increased higher order discussion and thinking.
|
 |
