The Art of Asking Good Questions in the Classroom: A Phenomenographic Study of Teacher Educators’ Recommendations

IF 2.7 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ECNU Review of Education Pub Date : 2023-11-05 DOI:10.1177/20965311231210008
Yilmaz Soysal, Somayyeh Soysal
{"title":"The Art of Asking Good Questions in the Classroom: A Phenomenographic Study of Teacher Educators’ Recommendations","authors":"Yilmaz Soysal, Somayyeh Soysal","doi":"10.1177/20965311231210008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This study has two objectives. The first is to describe the conceptual diversification embedded in reported documentation of teacher educators regarding the conception/phenomenon of good question-asking. Second, based on systematically observed and qualitatively analyzed diversifications, this study aims to portray the conceptual sophistication of participants’ experience-based awareness of good question-asking by constructing a hierarchical illustration. Design/Approach/Methods A total of 56 participants were selected based on a maximum variation strategy to capture more diversified conceptions of good question-asking. Qualitative data were collected through one-on-one phenomenographic interviews. Inductive data analysis was conducted in three phases: open coding (extracting ways of experiencing), axial coding (collapsing categories of descriptions), and diagrammatizing (establishing an outcome space). Findings Seven conceptual meaning clusters were gathered around four hierarchically sophisticated themes: monological (level-1 sophistication, “lowest”) (diagnostic tool), declarative (level-2 sophistication) (cognitive-emotional, pre-organizer), dialogical (level-3 sophistication) (structural qualities, typological qualities, multivocality, negotiation, internalization), and metacognitive (level-4 sophistication, “highest”) (pedagogical content knowledge of question-asking and teachers’ meta-noticing regarding question-asking). Originality/Value Participants’ conceptions of good question-asking showed monological and dialogical dimensions in addition to transitional (declarative) and metacognitive comprehensions. Educational recommendations are offered, especially for developing teacher educators’ question-asking noticing.","PeriodicalId":33103,"journal":{"name":"ECNU Review of Education","volume":"90 9","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ECNU Review of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311231210008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study has two objectives. The first is to describe the conceptual diversification embedded in reported documentation of teacher educators regarding the conception/phenomenon of good question-asking. Second, based on systematically observed and qualitatively analyzed diversifications, this study aims to portray the conceptual sophistication of participants’ experience-based awareness of good question-asking by constructing a hierarchical illustration. Design/Approach/Methods A total of 56 participants were selected based on a maximum variation strategy to capture more diversified conceptions of good question-asking. Qualitative data were collected through one-on-one phenomenographic interviews. Inductive data analysis was conducted in three phases: open coding (extracting ways of experiencing), axial coding (collapsing categories of descriptions), and diagrammatizing (establishing an outcome space). Findings Seven conceptual meaning clusters were gathered around four hierarchically sophisticated themes: monological (level-1 sophistication, “lowest”) (diagnostic tool), declarative (level-2 sophistication) (cognitive-emotional, pre-organizer), dialogical (level-3 sophistication) (structural qualities, typological qualities, multivocality, negotiation, internalization), and metacognitive (level-4 sophistication, “highest”) (pedagogical content knowledge of question-asking and teachers’ meta-noticing regarding question-asking). Originality/Value Participants’ conceptions of good question-asking showed monological and dialogical dimensions in addition to transitional (declarative) and metacognitive comprehensions. Educational recommendations are offered, especially for developing teacher educators’ question-asking noticing.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
课堂提问的艺术:教师教育工作者推荐的现象学研究
本研究有两个目的。首先是描述教师教育工作者关于良好提问的概念/现象的报告文献中嵌入的概念多样化。其次,在系统观察和定性分析多元化的基础上,本研究旨在通过构建分层图解来描绘参与者基于经验的好提问意识的概念复杂性。设计/方法/方法根据最大变异策略选择了56名参与者,以获取更多样化的好提问概念。通过一对一的现象访谈收集定性数据。归纳数据分析分为三个阶段:开放编码(提取体验方式)、轴向编码(折叠描述类别)和图解(建立结果空间)。七个概念意义集群围绕四个层次复杂的主题聚集在一起:单一性(1级复杂,“最低”)(诊断工具)、陈述性(2级复杂)(认知-情感、预组织者)、对话性(3级复杂)(结构品质、类型品质、多声性、协商、内化)和元认知性(4级复杂,“最高”)(提问的教学内容知识和教师关于提问的元注意)。除了过渡性(陈述性)和元认知理解外,参与者对良好提问的概念还表现出独白和对话的维度。提出了教育建议,特别是培养教师教育工作者的提问注意力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ECNU Review of Education
ECNU Review of Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Educational Improvement Science: The Art of the Improving Organization Artificial Intelligence and Robotics for Young Children: Redeveloping the Five Big Ideas Framework Extending the Comparisons of Shadow Education and Its Nexus With Schooling Toward a High-Quality System: A Critique of Chinese Special Education Policy Development and the Guidelines for the Evaluation of the Quality of Special Education Schools China's Policy Actions to Lead Teacher Development With Evaluation Reform
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1