Garbage In, Garbage OutIf you ask the wrong question, you might not get the answer you are hoping for…

Aim:To understand the practicality of incorporating ”Questioning Circles” (QC) into my teaching practice in order to question well

Inquiry Questions: In order to improve my practice I would like to find out:

1. How might using “Questioning Circles” (QC) stimulate my learners’ critical thinking in an OSCE process?

2. How do I feel about using “Questioning Circles” (QC) as a questioning strategy?

• Other practical considerations could have influenced the learners’ responses to my use of QC

• Unable to revisit and reflect on instances where factors such as my body language, facial expressions etc. might have

affected learners’ responses as there was no video recording

Context:Two Stage 2 clinical skills revision sessions involving 2 learners per session. Revision sessions were chosen intentionally,

as this meant that the learners would have already attended previous clinical sessions on the topic and should have

acquired sufficient factual knowledge.

ReferencesChristenbury L and Kelly P. Questioning: A Path to Critical Thinking. Urbana: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills and the National Council of Teachers of English; 1983Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process. New York, D.C. Health & Co.S. K. Ferrett, Peak Performance: Success in College and Beyond. McGraw-Hill Higher Education,1997.

Ethical approval was obtained prior to this inquiry, with verbal informed consent from Emma McAllister (Session lead) and

each student involved. Students involved were given the opportunity to review the audio-tape recording after each session.

“He who learns but does not think is lost…”Confucius

The impetus for this inquiry is at an individual teacher level. I believe ‘to question well, is to teach well’; as it is a pedagogical tool that can scaffold and socially construct learning. This belief stemmed from my experience as a learner, where questions on “how” and “why” in teaching sessions have stimulated my thought process to link and group ideas in a new way – allowing for a serious and consecutive consideration; a subtle reflective inquiry almost. However, I have often found myself struggling in questioning my learners, unsure if the type of questions asked stimulate them to think critically. Critical thinking to me, is crucial as thinking well, and knowing why we believe what we believe, allows for one to monitor their own thought processes and how to recognise when their reasoning is faulty.

I feel this fits well within the context of medical education, as the shift of the medical profession being one that is; publicly accountable; evidenced-based; and requires justifications of actions undertaken, confronts one with an overflow of information which they are expected to manage. This overflow of information can be confronted in a productive way, according to Dewey (1933), by training ourselves into mastering the art of thinking, and channelling our natural curiosity.

Therefore, as an educator I would like to use this opportunity to develop a resilient, insight-driven manner of

questioning that can stimulate my learners’ critical thought.

Design

Ethical Considerations

Limitations

Discussion

Findings

Aim and Inquiry Questions

Theory and Approach

1. Showing curiosity (asking questions, finding out solutions etc.)2. Flexible (to adjust opinions when new facts are found etc.)3. Open-minded (respect others’ views, suspend judgement and able to admit a lack of understanding etc.)4. Evidence based (weigh assumptions against facts etc.)5. Reflective (examine beliefs, challenge assumptions etc.)

As I was aware that “Critical Thinking” has no set definition, I recognised that it would be difficult for me to notice if my

learners displayed critical thought in response to my use of QC. Thus, as a more pragmatic approach, I had constructed

five overarching themes from Ferrett’s 14 characteristics of critical thinkers (1997) as a foundation the observation of

learners’ critical thinking on. These are presented below:

To answer inquiry question 1, I have tabulated the findings based on the pre-set themes (Table 1) along with a valuable,

additional theme that was drawn out from the data:

Data analysis:

Taking all the above on board, I feel that using QC has shown me that I have managed to stimulate some aspects of critical

thought in my learners, whilst also highlighting the challenges “reluctance” in a learner can bring. In addition to that, I feel it

has also instilled a great deal of critical thinking in myself, as prior to this I have had instances of merely engaging in ‘ordinary-

noticing’; where I would most likely observe instances in a session, but was unable to draw much from it. Hardly was I ever

doubting or questioning myself in an un-defensive manner, “why did that happen”, “how could I have avoided it?” etc., as in

the words of John Dewey (1933):

“To maintain the state of doubt and to carry on systematic and protracted inquiry — these are the essentials of thinking”

With regards to my personal feelings around using QC: as the themes from my self-reflection showed using QC was a largely

positive experience for myself, I would be eager to continue using QC to further improve my ability to help foster critical

thought in my learners. Therefore, as an implication for future practice, I would like to explore the relation of the above

mentioned factors to the critical thinking of learners in response to QC.

Data collection:

54967

Conclusions and Implications

In line with the above, Christenbury and Kelly’s (1983) “Questioning Circles” (QC) strategy is flexible in that

there is freedom to go around in circles; easily shifting the discussion to important overlooked areas and thus

making it suitable for the contingent and social nature of learning.

Using QC, questions were suitably modified to fit within context, using the 3 different domains (Self, World,

Facts) (Figure 1) and can be viewed as exploring categories that are:

This would allow facilitation of a discussion around my learners’ responses, providing a relational framework

for constructing fruitful linkages, by hopefully leading them from discussions that are:

Figure 1. The relationship between the domains

Which supports Dewey’s idea that active, persistent and careful consideration of one’s beliefs/knowledge

founded upon reason, would foster critical thinking of which “eagerness to know” is driven by the

overwhelming thirst of knowledge (Dewey, 1933). This, eagerness, is the initial spark to light the fire.

(NB* The boxes in yellow will be explored in the discussion)

Table 1. Presence of instances that correlate with the pre-set themes of critical thinking

To answer inquiry question 2, themes have been drawn out from my self-reflection:

Review Audio-tape

I have constructed this visual representation of how “reluctance” fits into the journey from “I think so” to “I know so”.

However, these are not linear steps that can be “completed” to foster critical thought. It is merely a way I have used to

illustrate the notion that Dewey (1933) puts forth about the need to establish relationships between such characteristics (i.e.

the 5 themes) that involves neither random diffuseness nor fixed rigidity. This instead, requires a balance of facility, fertility,

and depth in promoting continuity of thought.

In this context, “Reluctance” was observed at the beginning of each session in a particular learner. With the learner from

session 1, I feel that I managed to bring her out of her state of “reluctance” using QC as the session went on, however, in

session 2, I feel I was less successful. Keeping with what Dewey (1933) touched on in terms of needing to achieve a “balance”,

there is a host of factors that could contribute to a learners’ “reluctance”. Some of these overlap with the themes I have

drawn from my self-reflection such as “environment-dependent, learning style-dependent” etc.

That being said, I have also come to realise that there are other practical considerations that need to be considered when

questioning takes place. Such examples are: my body language, tone, thinking time after a question is posed etc. These are

important to bear in mind, as although the use of QC could have indeed helped foster critical thinking, but if my body

language was telling the learners’ otherwise; this in-coherency or mixed-message signals could render them confused which

may also result in “reluctance” to participate.

Moving on, the reality of a teaching session is that occasionally learners can be difficult to engage. This “reluctance” was a

valuable additional theme that was drawn out from both my peer and self-observations. “Reluctance”, is parallel to what

Dewey (1933) states as the unwillingness to “embrace uncertainty” and “endure a condition of mental unrest and disturbance”

by the willingness to accept things at face value. This “reluctance” acts as a barrier to the initial spark of eagerness (curiosity)

required for fostering critical thinking thus leaving the learners in the “I think so” phase (Figure 2).

Starting with the apparent discrepancy of data:

Figure 2. Visual representation of reluctance and pre-set themes on a spectrum

Review Audio-tape