Claire Parry

FO#2 Dr. Hurlbut

Observing Teacher’s Use of Questions and Wait-Time – DATA SHEET

DIRECTIONS: Using the chart below, identify 20 questions that the teacher asks in the classroom
(questions do not have to be written). Write a 2-page reflection (double spaced) on your findings AND
attach the data.

NOTE: If you are not observing in a classroom that incorporates teacher questioning, make arrangements
to observe another classroom for this assignment. If your teacher (do not state teachers’ names) does not
ask 20 questions in a day, plan to observe more than one day.

GUIDELINES: Use the key on the second page as a guide for how to code each of the columns. I
suggest printing the key out to use while you gather the data. For example, in the first question the teacher
asks, write (shorthand is fine) the question, then under column A code the appropriate level of question
that the teacher asked. (i.e. a knowledge question would be coded with the number 1, an application
question 3, and so on). Then code in column B for question 1 the appropriate wait-time code. Follow the
same procedure for columns C and D, and repeat the procedure for each question.

Question A B C D
Cognitive Amount of Difficulty Teacher
Level Wait Time of Response
Question to Student
1. Why was Neil Simon’s show Rumors  1 1
popular for schools and community  4 1
theaters?
2. What is the message of this show? 4 1 1 1
3. What were some of the rumors in the  1 4 2 3
show?
4. What do you think is the genre of this  3 4 1 1
show?
5. Why do you say it is a dramedy? 4 3 1 1
6. Can you think of another example of a  1 1 1 1
show we’ve read or seen that is a 
dramedy?
7. What does Cookie’s character serve to  4 1 2 3
the plot?
8. Do you think there is a main character? 4 2 1 1
9. Does the dynamic change because  4 1 1 1
there is no main character?
10. How would the dynamic change if  4 1 1 2
there was main character?
11. How would this change the  4 1 1 1
audience’s perception of the play?
12. What is something positive about this 2 3 1 1
script?
13. What is something negative about the 2 3 1 1
script?
14. Do we need more of this type of  5 2 1 1
show?
15. What do you think would happen if  5 1 1 3
you ended the show without the final 
monologue?
16. If you could change the ending of the  4 1 1 1
show what would you do?
17. Who would you consider a likable  2 3 1 1
character?
18. Is there any character you could take  4 1 1 3
out of the play, and the plot remains 
relatively the same?
19. What does “each actor needs to match 4 1 2 3
each other’s energy” mean?
20. Why is that so important in this play? 4 1 1 1
Example Q1 - the teacher asked an application question (3) and paused for a few seconds (2) for an
answer. However, the student’s response was not accepted (2) by the teacher and the teacher responded to
the incorrect answer by allowing the student another opportunity (3) to correctly answer the question).
NOTE: Your reflection will not identify each individual question, but it will reflect the entire data that you
have gathered in assessing teacher questioning in the classroom.
 Claire Parry 
Dr. H FO#2
FO#2 Reflection

I was fortunate enough to observe a class period in which the class was discussing a 

comedic farce riddled with lies, deception, and lots of laughs. It was obvious the students 

enjoyed reading the play, but actually talking about it was a beast on its own. Ms. Kane began 

the Socratic seminar on Neil Simon’s comedic farce Rumors with immediate high expectations 

of the discussion that was to ensue. She begins with a fairly opinionated question to start off the 

discussion. The majority of her questioning consisted of the analyze level of Bloom’s taxonomy. 

She wanted her students to make conclusions regarding the play while challenging them to 

consider hypothetical scenarios. The majority of her questions were aimed at higher level 

thinking, analyzing the text in order to prove their point regarding their personal opinion. The 

nature of the discussion was based around a Socratic seminar, thus she had rules in regard to how

the students were expected to participate. This includes speaking at least three times in the 

discussion and only speak when they have been called on. Ms. Kane’s pattern consisted of 
asking a fairly opinionated question, then if the student did not give a sufficient enough answer, 

she probed them further in order help them expand their thinking. 

Ms. Kane was fairly consistent in terms of wait time given to each student. She would ask

the question and wait approximately 3 seconds before she called on any of her students. Though 

I do believe this began because many students were quite hesitant to speak up in the very 

beginning of the seminar. The same student was consistently raising his hand, almost as if it was 

a race. But Ms. Kane encouraged her students to raise their hands explaining that this grade is 

considered a project grade as a way to test their understanding of the play. Two different times 

she called on a student and then asked them a question simply because they were not 

contributing to the discussion. On the occurrence that a student was on their phone, she 

deliberately said their name and asked them to repeat the question that she asked beforehand. 

They were unable to do so, so she asked them to put their phone away and answer the next 

question. Any praise that was given was strictly an “okay, good” or “that’s an interesting point” 

she is not one for “gushy praise” during discussions. The few times she did not accept an answer 

was simply because the student was not addressing the question in a logical manner or did not 

have ample evidence from the text to back up their opinion. I was fortunate not to see Ms. Kane 

handle any seemingly inappropriate responses handled in an inappropriate manner. 

I must admit that I underestimated these students. Listening to them answer these 

questions in such an intelligent manner and expressing thoughts that I would never even had 

considered made my day. It was lovely to see so many students be so opinionated, whether they 
liked it or not, but the fact that they were so passionate in their opinions was commendable. 

Often times students are so complacent in discussions only participating for the points. While 

that may have been true for some students, the others contributed thoughts that seasoned theater 

goers wouldn’t understand. They understood the text and related to it in their own personal way. 

This observation was enlightening to see that when given the proper tools and encouragement, 

high school students deserve more credit where it is due. Similarly, Ms. Kane’s practice of not 

giving too much praise is an important practice, that each student’s opinion is equally valid 

during the discussion.