Melinda M. Leko, Mary T. Brownell University of Florida

1. The Use of Questioning in a Collaborative Professional Development Group on the Problem-Solving Skills and Knowledge Use of Special Education Teachers Providing Reading Instruction Contact information Melinda Leko leko@ufl.edu Melinda M. Leko, Mary T. Brownell University of Florida Overview of Project LLC Purpose/Research Questions Results: What types of questions are most prevalent? Project Literacy Learning Cohort (LLC) is a longitudinal, multi-faceted professional development project designed to improve special educators’ word study and fluency instruction 1. Special education teachers (both treatment and control) from Florida, Colorado, and California participate in a 2-day Training Institute (TI) designed to provide teachers with the knowledge and skills to teach word study and fluency from basic to advanced levels 2. Treatment teachers only are assigned to an ongoing collaborative structure entitled the Literacy Learning Cohort (LLC) that is designed to extend teachers’ learning beyond the TI, helping them to develop the procedural knowledge and support needed for implementation. This component includes on-going scaffolding through monthly meetings, an e-learning community, and observation/feedback The purpose of this study was to investigate how the use of questioning during a collaborative professional development group shapes special educators’ problem-solving skills and knowledge use. Research Questions: What questions increase problem-solving and knowledge use? How does questioning differ in face to face meetings compared to online discussions? What types of questions are most prevalent? Who are the predominant questioners? LLC Meetings The most common types of questions are yes/no. Both facilitators and teachers ask more yes/no questions compared to wh- questions (why, what). The most common responses are factual statements that describe what is or what was. E-community Facilitators ask more wh- questions. Teachers ask more yes/no questions. The most common responses are factual statements that describe what is or what was. Fewer questions elicited fewer responses. Methods Study Timeline Participants • A 4-member literacy coaching team (hereafter referred to as facilitators) • 4 special educators who taught reading to students with disabilities in grades 3-5 Data Sources • Transcripts of 2 videotaped LLC meetings • Electronic artifacts from the e-learning community discussion forums Data Analysis Discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2003) 1. Open coding of all transcripts and e-learning artifacts (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) 2. Identification of knowledge used in the question-response exchange 3. Categorization of speech functions as either questions or statements including: (a) statements of fact, (b) prediction statements, and (c) evaluations Years 1 & 2- Development phase in which we develop, pilot test, determine initial efficacy of, and revise the professional development model and instrumentation to be used in the experimental phase Years 3 & 4- Experimental phase in which we will fully implement the model twice and collect efficacy data of the LLC on students with LD and their teachers *A primary goal of years 3 and 4 is to determine if the LLC intervention holds potential for improving the student achievement of participating teachers with regard to word attack, word identification, and fluency abilities. *Additionally, we want to know if teachers participating in the LLC intervention, compared to teachers only receiving the 2-day Training Institute, demonstrate greater gains in overall practices in reading instruction, specific word study and fluency practices, and knowledge for teaching reading. Results: What questions increase problem-solving & knowledge use? Year 1 Discourse Analysis Study Results: Who are the questioners? For decades scholars have examined teachers’ use of questioning during classroom instruction (Bloom et al., 1956; Duffy & Roehler, 1986; Gall, 1970; Gillies & Boyle, 2008; Redfield & Rousseau, 1981; Tharp & Gallimore, 1988). Similar studies examining the use of questioning during professional development efforts and the impact of such questioning on teacher learning, however, are virtually nonexistent. For her dissertation, Williamson (2006) investigated how dialogue shaped teacher problem and response constructions during inclusion team meetings. Although the use of questioning was not her primary interest, Williamson found that productive dialogic features included: (a) asking questions highly related to teacher concerns and (b) requests for entire group participation. While Willamson’s findings shed some light on the use of questioning in teacher meetings, we know little about how questioning can facilitate or hinder teacher problem-solving and knowledge use during professional development efforts. Facilitators posed the most questions in the face to face LLC meetings and on the e-learning community. The total number of questions was higher in the LLC meetings compared to the e-learning community Discussion & Implications • It seems the types of questions and phrases that lead to greater problem-solving and knowledge use are: (a) directed to the whole group, (b) grounded in the teachers’ classroom experiences, (c) encourage teachers to think about hypothetical situations, and (d) couched in tentative language such as “I wonder”, “perhaps”, “maybe” etc. • Facilitators should be aware of the prevalent use of yes/no questions which do not seem to elicit rich, detailed responses. • While the use of an online discussion format seems to increase the number of wh- questions, fewer online questions elicit responses overall. This could be attributed to the asynchronous nature of discourse in online forums. Facilitators may need to follow-up with teachers more frequently when using an e-community.