Questioning and Thinking in Science

1. Questioning and Thinking in Science Prof. Lynn Newton (Professor of Primary Education) School of Education Leazes Road Durham DH1 1TA L.D.Newton@durham.ac.uk

2. Context • Questioning in educational contexts has a long history. • The past century has seen the development of a number of ways to categorise and use questions. • Questioning for purpose has been less well considered.  Why do we (teachers) do it? • This is part of a larger study to explore this issue with over 500 primary children (Y1 to Y6). • Data are interpreted in the light of developments in cognitive psychology, particularly mental model theory.

3. Focus Three strands to this seminar: 1) Questioning as a strategy 2) Primary Science 3) Pedagogical Purpose  Understanding and Productive Thinking How does teachers’ questioning in primary science lessons support the construction of understanding and productive thinking?

4. Questioning: Socrates

5. Questioning: Catechismic teaching

6. Questioning: Object lessons in science

7. Questioning: Taxonomies

8. Questioning: Problems with Taxonomies Dillon (1980s)  compared questioning strategies in different contexts Walberg (1984)  compared effectiveness of different instructional variables, including higher order questioning Morgan & Saxton (1991)  added the emotional dimension and context to the study of questioning

9. Questioning: Walberg’s findings

10. Questioning: the research so far - North American / Canadian / Australian in origin - Focus on secondary schools or beyond - Use the Carroll model as a research model INPUT Black box  OUTPUT • Not science  Open the black box: What purpose does questioning in science serve?

11. Questioning in Primary Science National Curriculum: questioning to … “develop awareness of …” “know that …” “understand …” Teacher as questioning role model Ofsted and “asking effective questions”

12. Questioning: Stage 1 First step: survey of current practice  self-report questionnaire  sample of 52 primary teachers  observation of half teaching science lessons  analysis of schemes of work Found: Situation here no different to other countries

13. Teachers claimed to plan their questions and their use of both lower and higher order questions ….

14. Teachers dominate the classroom talk ….

15. …. And questions dominate the teacher talk

16. Many of the questions were factual recall questions

17. Surrogate Teachers: texts and schemes

18. Questioning: Stage 2 Next step  explore children’s ability to handle different types of question: Factual Singly Comprehension or in Combination Analysis / Synthesis Working with nearly 600 primary children (Y1 to Y6) using a controlled experiment (torchlight). How can teachers’ questions be more effective?

19. Questioning: A theoretical framework Research in Cognitive Psychology  ~ beginning to explain the processes inside the black box: INPUT   OUTPUT Teacher asks Pupil answers question question What happens in between? Constructing Understanding ~ mental model theory (Johnson-Laird, 1983)

20. So what are mental models? 1. Representations of reality based on: - our perceptions (e.g. real models and experiences) or imaginary constructions (e.g. abstractions, like a clock as a model for the rotation of the Earth). 2. We use mental models to think and reason with: - manipulate our ideas in a purpose-related way. 3. When we encounter and new situation or event and represent it like this we say we understand: - when you understand you have a mental model of the idea, situation or event. 4. The idea of mental models can be used as a guide to effective questioning in science: - framework for question purpose

21. INPUT OUTPUT Teacher What is happening Pupil answers asks question in the working memory question

22. Questioning: the Framework Declarative & Rules for Procedural Inferencing REFORMULATION ARTICULATION Situation Situation Progenerative Generated to be Models State State Understood COMPARISON

23. Questioning: Stage 3 • Second controlled experiment, again with the 600 pupils • Comparison of two types of questions: Factual (F) and Mental Model (MM) • With to approaches: Full information (Full) and Problem Solving (PS) • Therefore, the 600 children randomly assigned to four different experimental groups: F & Full F & PS MM & Full MM & PS • Context: causal situation that requires the pupils to construct an explanatory mental model: Torchlight

24. Considered: The effect of each variable in turn in the children’s respnses: [a] kind of question (Factual or Mental Model) [b] approach (full exposition or problem solving) [c] age of pupils (3 groups: Y1+2; Y3+4; Y5+6) [d] quality of response (SOLO taxonomy classification of keywords for causal explanations scored 0/1/2/3)

26. Questioning: Stage 4 Final stage  different types of understanding require different types of mental models in science: • Descriptive mental models of situations  common in biological sciences (2) Explanatory mental models of cause and effect situations  common in physical sciences Returned to textual materials for KS1 / LKS2 / UKS2 and chose 2 topics: Feeding Relationships & Gravity Tested the children again with and without questions for: (a) effect of questions (w / w-o) (b) quality of response (understanding)

30. Finally … Current work … …in science and across the primary curriculum Teaching for understanding Strategies that support understanding (including scientific enquiry / problem solving / using analogy / )pupils’ questioning) Q-U-E-ing (questioning for understanding & explanation Teaching for creative thinking Contact … L.D.Newton@durham.ac.uk