This is my project from the recent Course in College Teaching held on campus in conjunction with the Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence.
Developing Critical Curiosity through Better Questioning Techniques
Suzanne C. Shaffer, Instructional Designer, Part-time College Reading Instructor
Introduction
Helping students to develop as lifelong learners has become an important goal in my college reading classroom since 2013. I began this work after the realization that students’ success (and failure) is impacted as much by what they do in the classroom as it is by the learner attributes that they bring with them to class (Shaffer, Eshbach, & Santiago-Blay, 2015). Since that time, I have designed the course to develop reading skills as well as lifelong learning attributes.
To set a benchmark and measure growth as lifelong learners over time, students take the Effective Lifelong Learning Inventory (ELLI; Deakin Crick, Broadfoot, & Claxton, 2004; Deakin Crick & Yu, 2008), a 72-item online survey, at the beginning and end of the semester. They get information about themselves in seven dimensions of lifelong learning: Learning Relationships, Strategic Awareness, Creativity, Meaning-Making, Resilience, Changing & Learning, and Critical Curiosity. Depending on the class results each semester, I pick several of the areas to develop using relevant readings and research to explore these areas while at the same time building students’ academic reading skills.
Since first using ELLI in 2013, some patterns in student scores have emerged. Students generally score lowest in three areas: Resilience, Creativity, and Critical Curiosity (Figure 1). In previous semesters, I have developed strategies and approaches to help students develop stronger Resilience and Creativity. This semester, the focus has been on helping students to become more curious.
Figure 1.
Background
Before developing lessons to target Critical Curiosity, I needed to gain a deeper understanding about this dimension of lifelong learning. Deakin Crick et al. (2004) describe learners who possess this quality as learners who: 1) are self-directed in their learning, 2) enjoy learning challenges, 3) ask good questions, 4) feel energized by learning, 5) think critically about new information, and 6) seek to understand topics in depth. Learners who are critically curious are not passive in their approach to learning. They do not simply accept information that is given to them, nor do they wait to be told what to do or think.
Kashdan et al. (2009) provide more insight into this dimension with their Curiosity and Exploration Inventory-II (CEI-II). Scores are based on two different aspects of curiosity: stretching – a person’s natural inclination to investigate new ideas and experiences, and embracing – one’s comfort level with the risk and uncertainty associated with exploring new ideas and experiences.
A third source that has been helpful in this inquiry has been the work by von Stumm, Hell, and Chamorro-Premuzic (2011) on the role of curiosity in academic performance. In this research, curiosity and effort combined were found to rival intelligence as factors predicting academic performance. This notion can be very motivating for students who have struggled in academic settings.
Because this is a college reading course, students explore these resources with several goals in mind: 1) to apply various reading strategies learned in class to the texts for greater comprehension, 2) to encourage a sense of importance and relevance to their situation in college, and 3) to develop a common understanding of the construct of curiosity (in this case). Developing a common language in the classroom around lifelong learning dimensions is an important aspect of the ELLI process (Deakin Crick et al., 2004). After students learned the “what” and “why” of critical curiosity and had time to consider their scores on ELLI and the CEI-II, it was time to learn a few strategies to help to develop this attribute.
Approach
Over the last several semesters, I have tried various approaches to developing Critical Curiosity. Each approach was meant to give students tools to not only help them grow as lifelong learners, but also to support their success academically. The key to learning any strategy is to understand not only how it works, but also under what circumstances to use it effectively. Students should feel empowered by having a larger toolbox from which to choose depending on the academic task at hand. A description of several previously used curiosity-building activities follows.
Educational gaming incorporates challenge through problem-solving and an energizing learning environment that is flexible enough to apply to almost any content area (Gee, 2007; Koster, 2005). We used gaming as a study tool for exams and also to show students how to generate their own interest in student-described “dry” subjects.
Socratic questioning techniques incorporate both the questioning aspect of curiosity as well as a critical thinking framework. Questions about purpose, significance, assumptions, conclusions, and perspective are asked and answered on student-generated topics of interest (Paul & Elder, 2006). The goal of this approach is to provide students with a critical thinking framework that can be used to more deeply explore any topic. Students are also encouraged to become aware of any new aspects of a topic that might come to light to help generate interest.
An easy-to-use strategy is called the What/Why approach. In this approach, a “what” question begins the process – “What is it about class presentations that make students so nervous?” Answers are followed by the question, “Why?” This answer is followed by another “Why?” and another, until they no longer serve a purpose. This becomes a fun and interesting activity which students can easily use in many settings.
One central quality is common to almost all of the curiosity-building work – learning to ask good questions, which in turn provides an opportunity for students to generate their own curiosity about topics that previously had seemed uninteresting. This semester, I decided to further investigate and incorporate additional strategies to help students develop better questions themselves, and through the process to strengthen their ELLI scores in the area of Critical Curiosity.
Asking Good Questions
Berger’s 2014 book, A More Beautiful Question: The Power of Inquiry to Spark Breakthrough Ideas, helped me to consider this area more fully. In the book, Berger refers to a process called QFT – Question Formulation Technique.
References
Berger, W. (2014). A more beautiful question: The power of inquiry to spark breakthrough ideas. Bloomsbury USA, New York.
Kashdan, T. B., Gallagher, M. W., Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Breen, W. E., Terhar, D., & Steger, M. F. (2009). The curiosity and exploration inventory-II. Development, factor structure, and psychometrics. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 987-998.
Deakin Crick, R., Broadfoot, P., & Claxton, G. (2004). Developing an Effective Lifelong Learning Inventory: The ELLI project. Assessment in Education, 11(3), 247-272. doi:10.1080/0969594042000304582
Deakin Crick, R., & Yu, G. (2008). Assessing learning dispositions: Is the Effective Lifelong Learning Inventory valid and reliable as a measurement tool? Educational Research, 50(4), 387-402. doi:10.1080/00131880802499886
Gee, J. P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Palgrave Macmillan. New York.
Koster, R. (2005). A theory of fun for game design. Paraglyph Press. Scottsdale, AZ.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Rothstein, D. & Santana L. (2011). Make just one change: Teach students to ask their own questions. Harvard Education Press: Cambridge, MA.
Shaffer, S. C., Eshbach, B. E., & Santiago-Blay, J. A. (2015). A dual approach to fostering under-prepared student success: Focusing on doing and becoming. Insight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching. 10, 79-91.
von Stumm, S., Hell, B., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2011). The hungry mind: Intellectual curiosity is the third pillar of academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(6), 574-588. doi:10.1177/1745691611421204
