Critical Analysis of Questioning Strategy in the Classroom

Dear readers,

almost 3 years ago, I did my teaching practice at one private school at Jakarta. One of the key indicator of our successful at this teaching practice (also known as School Experience Program) is analyzing the Questioning Strategy in the teaching activities. I observed one of my partner in her teaching activities and analyzing the questioning strategy that she used at that time.

There were some impressions of the students that I got from that session. First, I found that the classroom condition was crowded and students gave a less attention to the materials. I assumed that this situation is caused by the time allocation, since that session was the last two hours of that day. Second, most of the students were less motivated with their learning activity. It is shown when the teacher delivered the materials and they were just having their own conversation with others. I assumed that the reason is the sitting position. The sitting position made a separation between students who did not pay attention to the materials and students who gave attention. Last, I found that the students have a lack of basic concepts of the materials. Below is the evidence:

Teacher: “… sama dengan B per sin B sama dengan C per sin C. Ini yang dinamakan aturan sinus. Ada yang bingung?” (“… equal with B over sine B and equal with C over sine C. This one is called by sine rule. Anyone still get confused?”)

Students: “Engga bisa Miss, ini apa, dapetin rumus sinusnya…” (I cannot do that, Miss. This one, how to get the sine rule…”)

Students’ response about how to find the sine is quite shocking, since they had already generalized the concept of sine rule first. This situation really influenced the questioning strategy and classroom condition. As a teacher, we need to accommodate students’ needs in learning. In this situation, they really need to get extra help about the basic of the materials. Then, teacher must make some improvisation on her plan to accommodate those needs.

Actually, my partner has a well-structured plan of questioning strategy. Information from me, who had already taught that class before, was really helpful for her. I found many questions that suitable with students’ response, e.g.:

Teacher: “Hari ini kita mau ngelanjutin pelajaran yang kemarin. Kemarin udah sampai mana?” (“Today, we will continue tomorrow’s lesson. Until which part that you covered?”)

Students: “(Beberapa siswa berdiskusi sambil mengingat-ngingat pelajaran kemarin) Grafik!” (“(Some students are discussing and trying to remember their previous lesson) Graph!”)

Teacher: “Grafik apa?” (“Which graph?”)

Students: “Grafik sin, cos, tan” (“Graph of sine, cosine, and tangent”)

Both questions above have a purpose to determine whether students still remember the previous material or not. The responses showed that there is no problem with the previous materials. Then, the teacher can continue the learning activity. Another example of the conversation:

Teacher: “Jadi ini kelilingnya? 6 + 8 + 10. Sekarang kalau 10 nya gaada, cara nyari ini nya gimana? Kalau ini 3 ini 4, ini berapa?” (“So, what is the perimeter? 6+8+10. Now, if we don’t have this 10, how to find this one? If this one is 3, and the other one is 4, how about this one?”)

Students: “5 Miss.”

Teacher: “Kenapa 5?” (“Why must 5?”)

Students: “Pythagoras, Miss.”

Teacher: “Gimana caranya?” (“How to find that?”)

Students: “Jadi itu 3 kuadrat ditambah 4 kuadrat terus hasilnya 25 di akarin kak. Rumus Pythagoras.” (“So, it’s a 3square added by 4square. Then, the result is the root of 25. Pythagorean theorem.”)

The purpose of the first and second question above was to measure students’ understanding through a modified question. The purpose of the third question was to determine their understanding of Pythagorean Theorem by elaborating their ideas. All of the responses were suitable with the purpose of the questions. This condition is important for the teacher to keep the learning activity in the class still on the right track.

Unfortunately, there were also some questions that not suitable with the purpose of the question. Below is the example of the conversation:

Teacher: “Kelilingnya berapa?” (“What is the perimeter?”)

Students: “24”

Teacher: “Kenapa 24?” (“Why must 24?”)

Students: “Pythagoras, Miss.”

The purpose of the second question was to make students analyze the perimeter (as the response of the first question). In fact, students’ response was only about remembering (Pythagorean Theorem). There were no other answers from the students toward this question. The teacher has no options but continue the materials. Another example of the conversation:

Teacher: “Kalau kakak punya segitiganya ini, cara nyari kelilingnya bagaimana hayo?” (“If I have this triangle, how can we find the perimeter?”)

Students: “Cari jumlah sudutnya dulu” (“We find the sum of the angles, first.”)

The purpose of the question above was only to recall their prior knowledge about ways to find perimeter. In fact, students’ response was an answer that different with the expected answer. I saw this condition as a benefit for the teacher, because she can use it to begin a discussion. The answer was suitable with the topic of that session and it can be used as a leading question for the discussion. Then, further questions that delivered by the teacher were developed naturally at that time. In this condition, students’ further responses also played an important role. Mostly, their responses were a short answer without having a deep thinking process first. This condition made the teacher proposed some closed-ended questions to overcome the ambiguity of the short answers. The teacher was also successfully lead students to generate the result of the discussion. Result is crucial for the discussion to strengthen students’ concept of the material. This condition also can be used as a proof for not being worried whenever students’ response is not suitable with our purpose of the questions.

As the observer, I have several tricks that can be applied whenever I taught them in order to make a better learning activity. First, I will rearrange the sitting position and create a mix combination of students. A mix combination of students with low and high motivation in their learning is needed in that class. I expect that students with higher motivation can influence the other students to learn mathematics better. It will be easier for me to implement my questioning strategy if my students’ motivation is increased. Second, I will use more variety of close-ended and open-ended questions. This variety of close-ended and open-ended is depended on our purpose of the questions and students’ response. Purpose of the question is a part that we can control in this variety of questions, but students’ response is another part that we cannot control. That fact leads into my third tricks, i.e. have a backup plan. Planning is important to keep the classroom situation on the track. It is also needed as my guide to teach them through questioning. The last trick is being realistic. I really need to know and understand of my students’ capability. It will help me in determining bloom’s questions that I will give to them. In this real situation, students’ capability is not good enough to answer creating and evaluating questions. So, I will keep focus on the first four stages at bloom’s question, but there is still a possibility to cover the last two stages at bloom’s question. Those four tricks are related with each other and its combination could be a strong factor that influences the questioning strategy on the classroom.