PProbing Biology Teachers’ Characteristics Regarding the Verbal Question-Answer Process

Öz

Because science begins by asking questions and then seeking answers, asking, and answering questions has always had a pivotal role in science learning and teaching. The purpose of this study is to probe biology teachers’ characteristics regarding the five aspects of the question-answer process (the source of questions, the taxonomy of questions, respondents of questions, teacher feedback, and authority of answers). Twenty-one biology teachers from different high schools participated in this study, with the data being gathered through interviews and observations using the Instrument of the Question-Answer Process (IQAP). Our findings reveal the majority of participants assumed the source of questions to be students. The frequencies for the dimensions of remembering and understanding were found to be far higher than the other query forms concerning the taxonomy of questions. Biology teachers stated choosing volunteer students mainly to answer their questions; however, they tried to select non-volunteer students, thinking these students may sometimes be shy. Regarding teacher feedback, biology teachers tend to tell students immediately whether their responses are correct or not when providing feedback; however, they also claim to encourage other students to incorporate new ideas. The participants indicated that the instructor/teacher and students together agree on the correct response and best solution concerning the authority of questions. This study can provide a portrait of the process of asking and answering verbal questions in biology class. Making observations in more biology teachers’ classrooms is suggested for being able to interpret the results in more detail.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• verbal question-answer process
• biology teachers
• instrument of question-answer process

Biyoloji Öğretmenlerinin Sözel Soru-Cevap Sürecine İlişkin Özelliklerinin İncelenmesi

Öz

Bilim soru sormakla ve sonra cevapları aramakla başladığından, soru sorma ve cevaplamanın fen öğrenimi ve öğretiminde her zaman önemli bir rolü olmuştur. Bu çalışmanın amacı, biyoloji öğretmenlerinin soru-cevap sürecinin beş boyutuna (soruların kaynağı, soruların taksonomisi ve soruları cevaplayanlar, öğretmen geribildirimi ve cevap yetkisi) ilişkin özelliklerini incelemektir. Araştırmaya Türkiye’nin batısında bulunan bir ildeki farklı liselerde görev yapan yirmi bir biyoloji öğretmeni katılmıştır. Veriler, Soru-Cevap Süreci Aracı (SCSA) kullanılarak yapılan yapılandırılmış görüşmeler ve gözlemler yoluyla toplanmıştır. Bulgular, katılımcıların çoğunluğunun soruların kaynağının öğrenciler olduğunu düşündüğünü göstermiştir. Soruların taksonomisine ilişkin olarak ise, “hatırlama” ve “anlama” boyutlarının frekansları diğer soru türlerinden çok daha yüksek olarak bulunmuştur. Biyoloji öğretmenleri çoğunlukla gönüllü öğrencilerin sorularını cevaplamasına karar verdiklerini belirtmiş; ancak, bazen utangaç davranabileceklerini düşünerek gönüllü olmayan öğrencileri de seçmeye çalıştıklarını eklemişlerdir. Öğretmen geribildirimi ile ilgili olarak ise, biyoloji öğretmenleri öğrencilere geribildirim verirken cevaplarının doğru mu yanlış mı olduğunu söylemeyi anında söylemeyi tercih etmişlerdir; ancak, diğer öğrencileri yeni fikirler eklemeye teşvik ettiklerini de belirtmişlerdir. Cevap yetkisine ilişkin olarak ise, katılımcılar öğretmenin veya öğretmen ve öğrencilerin birlikte doğru cevaba ya da en iyi çözüme karar verdiğini belirtmişlerdir. Bu çalışma, biyoloji dersinde sözel soru sorma ve cevaplama sürecinin bir portresini elde etmeyi sağlayabilir. Sonuçları daha ayrıntılı yorumlayabilmek için daha fazla biyoloji öğretmeninin sınıfında gözlem yapılması önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sözel soru-cevap süreci
• biyoloji öğretmenleri
• soru-cevap süreci aracı (SCSA)

Kaynakça

1. Albergaria-Almeida, P. (2010). Classroom questioning: Teachers’ perceptions and practices. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 305–309. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.015
2. Bektaş, E. & Şahin, A. E. (2007). An analysis of fifth grade elementary school teachers’ questioning behaviors. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 28(7), 19-29. doi: 10.17051/ilkonline.2018.466389
3. Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148. doi: 10.1177/003172171009200119
4. Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
5. Blosser, P.E. (1995). How to ask the right questions. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
6. Çalık, B., & Aksu, M. (2018). A Systematic Review of Teachers’ Questioning in Turkey between 2000-2018. Elementary Education Online, 17(3). http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr/index.php/io/article/view/2801 adresinden erişilmiştir.
7. Chappius, S., & Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Classroom assessment for learning. Educational Leadership, 60(1), 40–43. http://hssdnewteachers.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/50394085/classroom.assessment.for.learning.chappuis.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
8. Chin, C. (2006) Classroom Interaction in Science: Teacher questioning and feedback to students’ responses, International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1315-1346, doi: 10.1080/09500690600621100, 907–928

9. Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815-843. doi: 10.1002/tea.20171
10. Chin, C., & Brown, D.E. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science, International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 521 549, doi: 10.1080/09500690110095249
11. Chin, C., & Kayalvizhi, G. (2002). Posing problems for open investigations: What questions do pupils ask? Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(2), 269–287. doi: 10.1080/0263514022000030499
12. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students' questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1–39. doi: 10.1080/03057260701828101
13. Dillon, J. T. (1988). The remedial status of student questioning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20, 197–210. doi: 10.1080/0022027880200301
14. Döş, B., Bay, E., Aslansoy, C., Tiryaki, B., Çetin, N., & Duman, C. (2016). An analysis of teachers’ questioning strategies. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(22), 2065. doi: 10.5897/ERR2016.3014
15. Erdogan, I., & Campbell, T. (2008). Teacher questioning and interaction patterns in classrooms facilitated with differing levels of constructivist teaching practices. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1891–1914. doi:10.1080/09500690701587028
16. Furtak, E.M. (2006). The problem with answers: An exploration of guided science inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90, 453–467. doi: 10.1002/sce.20130
17. Gai, L., Zheng,C., Lederman, N.G., Lederman, J.S.& Jiao, H. (2019) Development of the instrument of question-answer process (IQAP) and its application in examining salient characteristics between pre- and in-service teachers in senior high school chemistry class. International Journal of Science Education, 41 (9), 1228-1245, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2019.1597995
18. Gilbert, A., & Byers, C. C. (2017). Wonder as a tool to engage preservice elementary teachers in science learning and teaching. Science Education, 101(6), 907–928. doi: 10.1002/sce.21300
19. Graesser, A. & Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 104-137. doi: 10.3102/00028312031001104
20. Hannel, I. (2009). Insufficient questioning. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(3), 65–69. doi: 10.1177/003172170909100314
21. Herranen, J. , & Aksela, M. (2019). Student-question-based inquiry in science education. Studies in Science Education, 55(1), 1–36. doi: 10.1080/03057267.2019.1658059
22. Huang, X., Lederman, N. G., & Cai, C. J. (2017). Improving Chinese junior high school students’ ability to ask critical questions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54, 1–25. doi: 10.1002/tea.21390
23. Jiang, Y. (2014). Exploring teacher questioning as a formative assessment strategy. RELC Journal, 45(3), 287- 304. doi: 10.1177/0033688214546962
24. Karamustafaoğlu, O , Bacanak, A , Karamustafaoğlu, S , Deği̇rmenci̇, S . (2011). Fen Öğretiminde Bilgi Haritası Kullanımı: Ekosistem Örneği. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17, 133-145.
25. Lee, Y. &Kinzie, M. B. (2012). Teacher question and student response with regard to cognition and language use. Instructional Science, 40(6), 857-874. doi: 10.1007/sl 1251-01 1-9193-2
26. Lin, A. M. (2007). What’s the use of “triadic dialogue”?: Activity theory, conversation analysis, and analysis of pedagogical practices. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 2(2), 77–94. doi:10.1080/15544800701343943.
27. Levin, T. & Long, R. (1981). Effective instruction. Washington, D. C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
28. Marbach-Ad, G., & Sokolove, P.G. (2000). Can undergraduate biology students learn to ask higher level questions? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 854–870. doi: 10.1002/1098- 2736(200010)37:8<854::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-5
29. Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
30. Merriam, S. B. (2013). Nitel araştırma: Desen ve uygulama için bir rehber (3. Baskıdan Çeviri, Çeviri Editörü: S. Turan). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
31. Miyake, N., & Norman, D.A. (1979). To ask a question, one must know enough to know what is not known. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 357 - 364. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90200-7
32. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: The National Academy Press.
33. Peterson, D. S., & Taylor, B. M. (2012). Using higher order questioning to accelerate students’ growth in reading. The Reading Teacher, 65(5), 295. doi: 10.1002/TRTR.01045
34. Phillips, A. M., Watkins, J. , & Hammer, D. (2018). Beyond “asking questions”: problematizing as a disciplinary activity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55 (7), 982–998. doi: 10.1002/tea.21477
35. Ragawanti, D. T. (2009). Questions and questioning techniques: A view of Indonesian students’ preferences. K@ta: A Biannual Publication on the Study of Languages and Literature, 11(2), 155- 170. doi: 10.9744/kata.11.2.155-170
36. Roehrig, G.H., & Luft, J.A. (2004). Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in implementing scientific inquiry lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 3–24. doi: 10.1080/0950069022000070261
37. Schinkel, A. The Educational Importance of Deep Wonder. J. Philos. Educ. 2017, 51, 538–553. doi: 10.1111/1467-9752.12233
38. Shepardson, D. P., & Pizzini, E. L. (1991). Questioning levels of junior high school science textbooks and their implications for learning textual information. Science Education, 75, 673–682. doi: 10.1002/sce.3730750607
39. Smart, J., & Marshall, J. (2013). Interactions between Classroom Discourse, Teacher Questioning, and Student Cognitive Engagement in Middle School Science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 249-267. doi: 10.1007/s10972-012-9297-9
40. Smith, E. L., Blakeslee, T. D., & Anderson, C. W. (1993). Teaching strategies associated with conceptual change learning in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(2), 111-126. doi:10.1002/tea.3660300202
41. Song, D. (2016). Student-generated questioning and quality questions: A literature review. Research Journal of Educational Studies and Review, 2(5), 58–70. http://pearlresearchjournals.org/journals/rjesr/archive/2016/Nov/pdf/Donggil.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
42. Stronge, J. H. (2007). Qualities of effective teachers. USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
43. Vale R. D. (2013). The value of asking questions. Molecular Biology of the Cell, 24(6), 680–682. doi:10.1091/mbc.E12-09-0660
44. Wangru, C. (2016). The research on strategies of college English teachers classroom questioning. International Education Studies, 9(8), 144-158. doi: :10.5539/ies.v9n8p144
45. Wilen, W. W. (2001). Exploring myths about teacher questioning in the social studies classroom. The Social Studies, 92(1), 23-26. doi: 10.1080/00377990109603972
46. Woodward, C. (1992) Raising and answering questions in primary science: some considerations. Evaluation and Research in Education, 6, 145–153.doi: 10.1080/09500799209533324
47. Yin, R.K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48. Yip, D.Y. (2004). Questioning skills for conceptual change in science instruction. Journal of Biological Education, 38(2), 76–83. doi: 10.1080/00219266.2004.9655905