EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

DINAMIKA ILMU
Vol. 19 No. 1, 2019
P-ISSN: 1411-3031; E-ISSN: 2442-9651
doi: http://doi.org/10.21093/di.v19i1.1545

EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning: Are Her Questions and

Strategies Effective?
Milawati
State Polythecnic of Madura, Sampang, East Java, Indonesia
e-mail: [email protected]

Nunung Suryati
Postgraduate Program, Malang, East Java, Indonesia
e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract
Evidence is mounting that teacher question can assist EFL students in various
purposes in teaching learning process. However, teacher’s lack of knowledge
about questioning taxonomy could become a failure in leading students’ learning.
This study investigates questioning strategies, the taxonomy of questions-type, and
their application by teacher in advanced prose class, to scaffold students’ learning.
Classroom observations, field notes and videotape recording, were employed to
collect the data. Findings indicate that among four types of questioning strategies,
redirecting was the most frequently used to initiate students’ responses and to
probe more into students’ understanding. Other findings show that low-cognitive
questions were common. Of those, knowledge-based questions were the most
frequently used to confirm students’ understanding of the materials they learnt,
but, the higher-level questions were rarely used. It was also found that teacher
employed questioning strategies ineffectively to manage the class; insufficient time
responded to a complex level of questions; the number of questions created
confusion. Some changes to create effective classroom questioning and a stronger
connection between the level of question and the questioning strategies are
discussed.

Keywords: questioning, probing, reinforcement, rephrasing, redirecting

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 37

Milawati & Nunung Suryati

A. Introduction
In classroom setting, e.g, teacher’s questioning strategy is defined as instructional
cues or stimuli that enable students to convey the material to be learned and directions for
what they should do and how they should do it. Theoretically, it is believed that theyb can
assist students to convey students’ review, to check on comprehension, to stimulate
critical thinking, to encourage creativity, to emphasize a point, to control classroom
activities, to help determines grade, and to encourage discussion (Blosser, 2000; Bond,
2007; Cotton, 2007). However, questioning c onsumes considerable teaching and learning
time. Indeed, past studies report teachers typically spend 40 to 50 per cent of their
instructional time asking questions (Ellis, 1997; Blosser, 2000; Creese, 2005; Bond, 2007;
Cotton, 2007). Asking a good question can encourage students to give a positive responds
toward the questions in appropriately. Conversely, to achieve such respond is not easy.
Teacher needs to consider not only on a good question which they have to deliver, but
also a strategy in asking question is needed. Further, it has been found that teacher’s lack
of knowledge about questioning taxonomies can have adverse effects on student learning.
Particularly, if many of the questions asked are of a low-cognitive level (Tan, 2007; Shen
and Yodkhumlue, 2010; Wong, R, 2010). Hence, whenever the teacher has given a
various of good questions to the students, it will not guarantee that the interactive
classroom will be created, unless the teacher knows how to manage their questions in the
right time (Wragg & Brown, 2001).
Such situation above seems to create a paradox: on the one hand, questions have
become a fundamental device in teaching learning process, but on the other hand, the
ineffective questioning strategies could make the failure in creating the interactive
classroom learning. This present study attempts to investigate in greater depth focusing
on some questioning strategies underlying the classroom questioning, namely ; rephrasing,
redirecting, probing and reinforcement as proposed by Goodwin et al (1992). In relation
to the four questioning strategies, this study also discusses the six levels of questions
which are proposed by Anderson & Krathwol (2001) namely remembering,
understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating and creating. The purpose of the study is to
analyse the reasons of the ineffective teacher’s questioning strategies and to give a
stronger connection between the level of question and the questioning strategies, which
the teacher employed.

B. Literature Review
1. Why do Teacher ask question?
Question is widely accepted to play a vital role in second language classroom.
Basically, questions is used as a device by which teacher could evaluate the specific
purposes of learning. Cotton (2007) in ―Classroom Questioning‖ cited that in classroom
setting, teacher questions are defined as instructional cues or stimuli that convey to
students the content elements to be learned and directions for what they are to do and
how they are to do it.
Past studies has revealed the reason underlying teacher need to ask to test students’
ability functions in classroom environment, fulfill the objectives of the classroom

38 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019

 EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

curriculum and provide practice in language production (Pica cited in Lynch (1991);
Freiberg & Driscoll (1992). Similarly, Morgan and Saxton in Brualdi (1998) in ―Classroom
Questions: Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation‖, mention several reasons why
teacher ask question to the students. First, the act of asking questions helps teacher keep
students actively involved in lessons. Second, while answering questions, students have
their opportunity to openly express their ideas and thoughts. Third, questioning students
enable other students to hear different explanations of the materials by their peers.
Fourth, asking questions help the teacher to pace their lessons and moderate students’
behavior. Last, questioning students help the teachers to evaluate students learning and
revise the lesson as necessary. In contrast, Recent studies has found that mainly teacher
asked question to elicit short, restrict student responses and therfore purposeless in
classroom setting (Eng Ho, 2005).

2. Teacher Questioning Strategies

It is therefore, not surprisingly that so much research has been paid to teacher
question. One of the most common way in scaffolding questions proposed by Wragg and
Brown (2001, p. 28-36) provide seven tactics in asking questions; structuring, Pitching and
putting clearly, Directing and distributing, Pausing and pacing, Prompting and probing,
Listening to replies and responding and Sequencing. Sadker and Sadker in Cooper (2010,
p.110) promotes seven habits of highly effective questioners; asking fewer questions,
asking better questions, questioning for breadth (use prompting and probing), using wait
time, selecting students and giving useful feedback. In line with this, Maybery and Hartle
(2003, p.94) define questioning strategies in term of an effective question which motivates
student engagement by providing the right words and enough response time for students
to compose a response. Fisher (2009, p.34-35) categorizes seven effective questioning
strategies such as sequencing set of questions, pitching appropriately, distributing question
around the class, prompting and probing, listening and responding in proactive way,
challenging right as well as wrong questions and using written question effectively.
In addition a wide range of research has also attempted to explore effective
teacher’s questioning in classroom learning which have been conducted in university level,
Cotton (2007), for instance, on her studies about ―Classroom Questioning‖ which used
experimental study which focused on the relationship between teachers' classroom
questioning behaviors and a variety of student outcomes, including achievement,
retention, and level of student participation. In different study, Cakmak (2009, p.666-675)
has conducted study on ―Pre-service teachers’ thoughts about teachers’ questions in
effective teaching process‖. In this case, the focused of the study is to investigate pre-
service teachers’ thoughts about teachers’ questions in effective teaching context. The
results of the study indicated that evaluation of learning is very important facility of
questioning according to pre-service teachers. In addition, subject knowledge was the
most stated factor which affects questioning and motivating students was the most
common pointed reason of the pre-service teachers to use questioning. Whereas,
Bonne & Pritchard (2009, p.133-142) on their studies of ―Teacher Researchers
Questioning their Practice‖. They focused on eight teacher researchers examined their

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 39

Milawati & Nunung Suryati

own practice to analyze their use of questioning in the context of numeracy, in

partnership with two researchers. Each teacher researcher devised their own question
categories, from which the research team then developed common categories. The
teacher researchers found that they had asked more questions than they expected,
and were surprised that they asked more questions of students working at higher strategy
stages.
Of the above-mentioned, there has been scarce research on teacher questioning
strategies, particularly, this present study attempts to investigate in greater depth focusing
on some questioning strategies underlying the classroom questioning, namely ; rephrasing,
redirecting, probing and reinforcement as proposed by Goodwin et al (1992).

3. Types of Questions
Questions, like students, have an important role to play in learning process. The
types of questions and the ways in which they are posed are critical to develop students’
abilities to process information at various levels of thought. The ―question Taxonomy‖
was developed by Bloom and revised by Anderson & Krathwol (2001). They proposed
classifying question into six complexity level; remembering, understanding, applying,
analyzing, evaluating and creating. Bloom’s framework has been adopted by Tan, (2007)
to evaluate classroom effectiveness of EFL teacher question taxonomy. Further, Shen and
Yodkhumlue (2010:44-53) on their proceeding entitles ―Teacher’s Questioning and
Students’ Critical Thinking in College EFL Reading Classroom‖ focused on the effects of
a teacher’s questions on the development of students’ critical thinking. The result showed
the teacher asked more lower-cognitive questions (79.2%) than higher ones
(20.8%). It revealed that excessive use of lower-cognitive questions could not facilitate
students’ critical thinking and identified the misuse of higher-cognitive questions by the
teacher. This study also adopted the six level of questions which is proposed by
Anderson & Krathwol (2001) namely remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing,
evaluating and creating. The purpose of the study is to analyse the reasons of the
ineffective teacher’s questioning strategies and to give a stronger connection between the
level of question and the questioning strategies, which the teacher employed.

C. Research Methodology
This study has employed qualitative case study approach as a research design
(Cresswell, 2012, p.465) which attempts to explore in detail of the level of questioning and
questioning strategies which teacher used in advanced prose class. The researcher
conducted five meeting on classroom observation. Each of which was observed through
videotaping and fieldnotes. It is employed to find out what is really going on in the
process of classroom questioning and to capture every single phenomenon of teacher
questioning strategies under investigation. The case study was more emphasized to gain a
thorough and in depth understanding of the theory and the concepts of teacher
questioning strategies in advanced prose class, and also to provide fruitful suggestions for
further research.

40 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019

 EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

A teacher and one advanced prose class in sixth semester were chosen as research
subject. She is one of experienced teachers, who has been teaching in Faculty of Social
and Cultural Sciences, English Department of State University in Madura, for about 6
years. She was nominated by the principals of the partner in her major although it was a
voluntary decision as to whether she wished to participate. She also frequently talks more
in her class. It can be seen on the way she teaches in her classroom, she explained more or
very often gives tutorial to the students. It means that in giving tutorial indirectly she also
asks more to the students. Researcher was as a non-participant observer, was chosen to
record notes without becoming involved in the activities of the participants.
The observation has been done in five meetings. A non-participant observer was
chosen to record notes without becoming involved in the activities of the participants.
Clearly, the data has taken in the form of utterances. This study has also applied mix
method; fieldnote and audiotape recording in collecting the data. Fieldnote is used to
notice non-verbal teacher’s behavior. It employed non-participant observation to gain the
data. In this case, there are two kinds of data; data get from the result of fieldnote and
audiotape recording. Purposefully, the non-participant observation has occasionally
conducted for about five meetings.
Generally, the data has been analyzed through some procedures proposed by Miles
and Huberman (1994, pp.10-12). The procedure consists of three current flows activity :
data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing/verification. In particular, some steps
have been conducted in analyzing the data which cover the following activities. (1)
Aggregating the data gathered, involving all of the information from the field. In this case,
the data obtained were processed by transcribing the teacher’s utterances gained by the
result of audiotape recording during the advanced prose class was conducted. (2)
Classifying the data gained by the result of recording transcription. Those were classified
in terms of questioning strategies proposed by Goodwin (1992) and the types of questions
based on Anderson & Krathwol (2001). The code of questioning strategies such as
rephrasing (Rp), redirecting (Rd), probing (P), reinforcement (Rf), while types of
questions e.g. remembering (R), understanding (U), applying (Ap), analyzing (An),
Evaluating (E) and creating (C). (3) Displaying the data which has been selected and
simplified in order to make it clearer and easier to be interpreted.(4) Interpreting the data
which analyzed descriptively; (5) Validating the data, the results of data analysis from
transcription were crosschecked out with the data from the result of fieldnotes to validate
the findings; (6) Reporting the result, making the conclusion, which were derived in regard
with the result of findings and discussions to answer research questions.

D. Findings
The findings show that there are four types of questioning strategies, which the
teacher has used in her classroom. They are rephrasing, redirecting, probing and
reinforcement. There are totally 69 extracts of five meeting class on teacher’s questioning
strategies. Every finding of the research questions shows that it has different frequency of
the presence. From those four types of questioning strategies found that redirecting and
reinforcement are found more frequently than rephrasing and probing.

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 41

Milawati & Nunung Suryati

Table 1. The Amount of Teacher’s Questioning Strategies

No Types of Questioning Strategies Frequency of Questions %
1 Rephrasing
a. Rephrasing 2 3
b. Providing additional information 5 7
c. Rewording 8 12
d. Breaking into more manageable 4 6
part
2 Redirecting
a. Asking another student to get 4 6
more information
b. Asking another students to get 1 1
more information and trying to
correct another student’s incorrect
statement
c. Getting more information 14 20
d. Getting more information and 1 1
trying to correct another student’s
incorrect statement
3 Probing 15 22
4. Reinforcement
a. Positive 15 22
b. Negative 0
Total 69 100

1. Rephrasing
Rephrasing is one of types of questioning strategies in which the teacher assists the
student to understand a question or to solicit a more correct response by rewording the
questions, providing additional information or breaking the questions into more
manageable parts. It is used when the students do not understand what is being asked by
the teacher. Then, the teacher may wish either to assist the students in understanding a
question or to solicit a more correct response.
The result of data analysis reveals that the teacher has rephrased her question in
various ways. Those are rephrasing or rewording the question, providing additional
information and breaking down the question. Commonly, they have occurred when the
teacher initiates a question, the students give no response or keep silent. Afterward, the
teacher asks the question for the second time in different way to make her question
clearer. The following situation has shown that the teacher has rephrased her question by
rephrasing certain phrase. This particularly happened when the students did not clearly
understand what was exactly being asked by the teacher. At this situation, the teacher
needs to ask again by rewording certain word in the previous question to make it clearer.

1. T : Okay, class what have you learnt for last week?

Ss : (silence)
42 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019
 EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

T : What have you learnt in our last meeting?

S4 : tone..

The rephrasing strategies, which are done in extract (1) seems that, firstly the
students have faced difficulties in understanding the teacher question. As in extract (1),
for instance, it could happen, probably because the students have not been ready to start
studying. They were busy talking each other and did not pay any attention on what has
been asked by the teacher. As a result, they were silent because fully they did not
understand the question. Briefly, the extract above has shown that in rephrasing her
question, the teacher frequently uses knowledge question. Occasionally, it is used to
encourage the students’ to remember the material, which they have learnt in previously
meeting.
Another result of the observation has also revealed that the teacher has rephrased
her question by providing additional information to solicit more correct response as it is
seen in extract (2).

2 T : sekarang ini feetnya (point out on her writing in the

whiteboard), meternya..ne polanya apa sih?
Ss : silence
T : Stressed, unstressed. Unstressed, stressed, polanya
apa?
Ss : triamic

The above extract describes the teacher wrote certain quotation on white board,
then, pointed it and initiate by asking ―ne polanya apa sih? (what is the pattern?)”. However,
the students gave no response. Then, the teacher rephrased her question by adding some
more information as “Stressed, unstressed, unstressed, stressed, polanya apa? (stressed,
unstressed, unstressed, stressed, what is the pattern?)”. Lastly, they can give a correct
response. It indicates that the students fully do not understand. They just keep silent.
Perhaps, it happens because they do not know where they should put the stress on certain
syllable. Therefore, they need more information to acquire the correct answer.

Differently from those previous situations, the result of the observation revealed that the
teacher has applied rephrasing strategy by breaking down her question into more
manageable part.
3 T : And then, what happened to the poor people when they watch
kind of his friend crying to enter the mall and sometimes they
are asked to leave, and then What happened to the to the poor
people watching the scene? Are they mad?
Ss : (silence)
T : Ok What happened with the sandals? And What are the
differences between the way how rich people and The way
the poor leaves.

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 43

Milawati & Nunung Suryati

S1 we // the poor pakek wine by the .. rich minumnya pakek whisky

The above extract shows the teacher illustrated certain situation stated in the novel,
she also asked the students to infer what happened behind the illustration by asking
―What happened to the poor people watching the scene? Are they mad?‖. However, the
students still kept silent. Therefore, the teacher tried to break her question into two more
specific parts, ―Ok, What happened with the sandals?‖ And ―What are the differences
between the way how rich people and The way the poor leaves?‖. The rephrasing strategy
in which the teacher uses by breaking down her questions into more manageable part as
in extract (3) can be inferred that before the teacher breaks her questions, the teacher has
already provided additional information firstly. It is hoped that the students will easily get
an appropriate answer. However, the facts shown that the students still keep silent. It
seems that they face difficulties in acquiring the answer, although the teacher has already
added some more information to lead them. This probably happens because the question
itself, perhaps considered as the higher level question. If it is a higher level question,
certainly, they need more time to think about the appropriate answer. In fact, the teacher
only gives a few second as their wait-time, absolutely it is a short time for them to think
about the answer.

2. Redirecting
Redirecting deals with the use of questioning strategies in which the teacher asks
another student to comment on the statement or get more information on the topic from
another student. It is used to allow a student to correct another student’s incorrect
statement or respond to another student’s question. Commonly, it occurs when there is a
student gets stuck on an initial question, the teacher will ask another student or the whole
class to give a response on that question.
The result of the observation has found that the teacher has frequently redirected
her questions either only to a particular student or to the whole class. It is aimed to get
more information on the topic from another student and to correct another student’s
incorrect statement. The following situation shows that the teacher has redirected her
question either to a particular student or to the whole class.
5 T : (laughing) so, what happen with those three characters? I mean,
uhhmm, // in your opinion the focus of main conflict is?
S1 : Poverty
T : Poverty, okay. Another opinion beside poverty?
S2 : human right
T : human right, okay thank you, and then?
S3 : society problem
6 T : How do masters treat their servants?
S7 : memukul kakinya, memukul kepalanya
T : no, but.
S4 : masih memperhatikan si pembantunya, kayak tempat tidurnya
dia kan jadi satu sama .. Sapa ..

44 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019

 EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

Ss : masih memperhatikan
S4 : kalau memang buruk, dia kenapa kakinya, dipukul
kepalanya ..

From the result of observation reveals in extract (5) and (6) can be infer that the
teacher redirect a question under different purposes. In this case, redirecting which
occurs as in extract (5) seems that wanted another student to give additional information.
It is supported that the first student’ answer is not fully completed. The student only
mentions a single answer. In fact, there are still another missing information which have
not been answered yet. As a result, the lecture needs to redirect her question to the whole
class in order to get more information in acquiring a complete answer. Meanwhile, in the
extract (6) mainly the teacher redirected her question in order to correct an initial
student’s answer. Once, one of the students tried to answer, but unfortunately, the answer
was incorrect. This situation made the teacher to evaluate the answer by saying “no”
automatically. Despite the incorrect answer, here, the teacher do not directly correct it by
her self. In this situation, the teacher let another student to correct the answer by saying
“but”. In other words, the word “but” can be implied that the teacher wants to redirect her
questions to the whole class in order another student can correct the previous answer.

3. Probing
Probing refers to kinds of questioning strategies in which teacher probe initial
student answers which may be superficial and encourage to think more deeply to the
answer of the previous questions. It is used when there is an initial student’s response
considered as superficial. Then the teacher needs to probe the response by asking the
student explanatory question to explore initial comment.
Based on the result of the observation, has found that the teacher, somehow, probe
the question while the teaching learning conducted. Mainly, the student gives a response
toward the teacher’s question. However, his / her response is superficial. Therefore, the
teacher probes the student’s response in order the student can give a detailed response
toward the teacher’s question.
7 T : Apakah para servant terima gitu aja? Ha? Iya apa ndak?
Ss : iya
T : Iya? Kenapa? Ada kaitannya dengan Mr.Pup? tentang
ayam? yang lagi .. Terima. Apakah mereka mengiyakan
seperti di Mr.Pup?
SS : (silence)
T : Apa sih Mr.Pup itu? Filosofinya?
S2 : .. mereka tu, nerima aja ..
T : Terus apa ada kaitannya dengan mindset? Pola pikir?
S2 : kayaknya iya.
T : Ha? kayaknya iya gimana?
S2 : .. keluarga mereka, jadi kalo mereka ..
T : Apakah hanya itu? Ayo? ehm?

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 45

Milawati & Nunung Suryati

The extract above describes that the teacher initiates a question and direct it to the
whole class. As consequent, the students answer it. However, their answer was superficial.
The teacher probes the students by asking ―Iya? Kenapa? Ada kaitannya dengan Mr.Pup?
tentang ayam? yang lagi .. Terima. Apakah mereka mengiyakan seperti di Mr.Pup? (Yes, but why?
Is there any relationship with Mr.Pup? About the chicken which was being.. accepted. Do
they agree as Mr.Pup?)‖. However, the students kept silent. Then the teacher continued
asking “Apa sih Mr.Pup itu? Filosofinya? (What is Mr.Pup? The philosophy?)‖. Then, one of
the students answered that question. However, the answer was not deeply. The teacher
probed for the second time by asking ―Terus apa ada kaitannya dengan mindset? Pola pikir?
(then, is here any relationship with the mindset?)‖. Then, the same student answered that
question. Unfortunately, it seemed that the answer was not really fulfilled the required
answer. At last, the teacher asked ―Apakah hanya itu? Ayo? ehm? (is that only? Come
on?ehm?)‖ .
Probing will run smoothly as if the teacher can manage her question and maintain
the students to keep focus on the discussion. However, it will pretend as a barrier if the
class was silent. As in extract (7) shows at the early, the students give no response. They
are only silent. Perhaps, it occurs because the teacher’s question is considered as a higher -
level question which make them to think more deeply. Basically, a higher-level question
requires much wait-time. By allowing wait-time will be easier for the students as if the
question was difficult for them. They will have more chances to think deeply in acquiring
the required answer. Besides, the teacher needed to arrange her questions before she
started asking to the students. In this case, the teacher frequently asking many questions at
the same time e.g “Iya? Kenapa? Ada kaitannya dengan Mr.Pup? tentang ayam? yang lagi ..
Terima. Apakah mereka mengiyakan seperti di Mr.Pup?”. Those questions make the students
getting confused. They do not know which question they have to answer firstly.
Consequently, the teacher did not apply the teacher’s questioning strategies as effectively.

4. Reinforcement
Reinforcement is one of questioning strategies in which the teacher reinforce, by
making positive statements or by using positive nonverbal communication such as
smiling, nodding and maintaining eye contact. It is used to motivate the student to
become actively involve in the discussion. It is also to strengthen students’ knowledge.
Basically, reinforcement requires the teacher to react toward students’ answer. It is either
positive or negative reinforcement. Positive reinforcement requires the teacher to react
either verbal or non-verbal communication. That could encourage the students to
participate in classroom questioning. However, when the teacher ignored toward the
student’s answer, means that the teacher gives a negative reinforcement.
The result of the observation has revealed that the teacher very often reinforces the
student by uttering positive statement. Besides, the teacher once gives something as
present to the student, as it is seen in extract (8) and (9).
8 S15 : melamar
T : Okay, good (giving a present, candy) siapa namanya?

46 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019

 EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

9 S3 : …di kesehatan disini eee juga ternyata kekurangan gizi dan tidak
ada jaminan kesehatan khususnya kaum wanita.
T : Okay thank you very good, okay.

The extract (8) and (9) has revealed that the teacher has applied positive reinforcement
almost in every student response. Extract (8) for instance, a positive reinforcement is
delivered to those who can answer the teacher’s question correctly. In this case, she
reinforced by saying “okay, good” and giving a candy as a present to those who can answer
her question. While in the extract (9) is the one, which the teacher almost delivers to every
single student comment. In this case, the teacher gave positive reinforcement whenever
the student gave a comment on what was being discussed by saying “Okay, thank you very
good”.

5. Types of Questions
Based on the result of the observation, it is found that the six domains have been
adopted by the teacher in her class. It is adapted from Anderson & Krathwol (2001).
Generally, those domains have differently thinking outcomes that range from simple to
complex. Particularly, the types of questions, which used by the teacher has found totally
90 questions. The amount of each type of questions is varying. From those six level
categories divide into two sub categories. First, low level category consists of
remembering, understanding and applying. Based on the analysis, this low level of
category is more frequently used when the teacher employing rephrasing strategies in
which mainly the teacher focuses on encouraging the students to remember the previous
materials, which they have learnt. Meanwhile, the higher-level questions are analyzing,
evaluating and creating. This higher level questions is used by the teacher when the
teacher probe an initial student’s answer, especially when the answer is considered as
superficial. In a brief, it can be concluded that the number of higher level of questions is
more frequently than the low level of questions. They are described respectively as the
following.

Table 2. The amount of Types of Teacher Question

No Types of Questions Frequency of Questions %

1. Remembering
a. Knowledge specific 8 9
b. Knowledge of ways and means of 5 6
dealing with specifics
c. Knowledge of universals and abstraction 1 1
in a field
2 Understanding
a. translation 1 1
b. interpretation 23 26
c. extrapolation 1 1

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 47

Milawati & Nunung Suryati

3 Applying 4 4
4 Analyzing
a. analysis of element 17 19
b. analysis of relationship 5 6
c. analysis of organizational principle 3 3
5 Evaluating
a. judgment in terms of internal evidence 5 6
b. judgment in terms of external evidence 2 2
6 Creating
a. production of a unique communication 4 4
b. production of a plan 1 1
c. production of a set of abstract relations 10 11
Total 90 100

6. Remembering
This level is the lowest level in which the students are required to recognize or recall
information. The student is not asked to manipulate information, but merely to remember
previously learned material or a factual observation. Generally, the teacher uses this
questions under expectation that her students tell when, how many, who or where they
are using knowledge. Specifically this kind of question is used by the teacher when the
teacher employing rephrasing strategies. The following situation has shown that
remembering question when the teacher wants to ask about their knowledge of specific
as in extract (6) and (7).
6 ada berapa character?
7 Okay, so what is, eeee, do you still remember first question on
your mid test?

The extract (6) and (7) show that the teacher asks about specific knowledge. In
extract (6) for instance, the teacher used the word ―how many‖ as her question’s word in
order that her students mentioned the number of the character in the story which was
being discussed. In completely she asked by saying ―ada berapa character?(how many
characters)”. Further, in extract (7) the teacher used the Wh- question ―what‖ firstly, then
she revised her question into yes-no question “do” in completely she asked ―do you still
remember first question on your mid test?”.
Those questions are considered as the lowest level. In the extract (6) and (7) indicate
the teacher only asks the students about the specific knowledge. Extract (6) shows the
teacher asks about the number of characters mentioned in the story which is being
discussed by using the question word ―how many‖. This kind of question only requires
short answer or one exactly correct answer. The students tend to answer by mentioning
the total number of the characters in the story. Meanwhile, in the extract (7) seems that
the teacher was in confused. It can be seen from the way she uses question words, firstly
she asked by using ―what‖ but after a second, she has rearranged her question into yes-no
question ―do‖. Such kind of situation implies that the teacher wants to rearrange her
question from the simple to complex by asking yes-no question previously like ―do you still

48 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019

 EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

remember first question on your mid test?”. Probably, she intends to ask further question like
asking the student to mention what it is.

7. Understanding
This level of question requires the students to grasp the meaning of information, to
interpret ideas and to predict using knowledge. They are also asked to translate their
knowledge into their own words. Basically, it is used when the students are asked why or
to explain, or to summarize. Specifically this kind of question is used by the teacher when
the teacher employing rephrasing strategies. The result of the observation has revealed
that the teacher has applied this understanding question in three ways; asking the student
to translate, to interpret and to extrapolate. The following situation shows that the teacher
uses understanding question when the teacher wants the students to translate their
knowledge into their own words as in extract (8).
8 I always .. he did this education by? Dia mendapatkan
pendidikannya dengan? Menguping, dengan menguping dia
mengatakan bahwa, please open page thirty nine. Thirty nine,
the words in the parantheses, says I am not original speaker, but I
am on original listener, Apa artinya?

The extract above has illustrated the situation in which the teacher has applied knowledge
question. In this way, the teacher state certain quotation from the novel, then asked the
students to translate “the words in the parantheses, says I am not original speaker, but I am on
original listener, Apa artinya?(what is meant?)”. It is implied that teacher wants them to explain
what the statement meant, by using their knowledge and their own words. Although in
the extract, the teacher does not directly ask them to translate into their own words.

8. Applying
This level of question requires the students to use previously learned knowledge in
new and concrete situation, to use information and to do something with knowledge. In
short, the students apply previously learned information to reach an answer to a problem.
Occasionally, this kind of question is used by the teacher when the teacher employing
rephrasing strategies. The result of the observation has revealed that the teacher has
applied the appliying question in her class. In this case, the teacher asks the students to
apply what they have already known as in extract (9) and (10).
9 okey, kalo disini (point out the slide). Untuk yang
juliusCaesar ini apakah ada ritmenya?
10 stress, unstresss.unstress, stress, polanya apa?

The extract (9) and (10) describe the use of application in classroom questioning. In
extract (9) the teacher has previously taught the students about rhythm, then she gave
certain exercise and asked them to find whether or not there was any rhythm in that
exercise “Untuk yang JuliusCaesar ini apakah ada ritmenya? (is there any ryhtm in JuliusCaesar,?)”.
Whereas in extract (10) the teacher has also reviously taught the students about meter,

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 49

Milawati & Nunung Suryati

then she gave certain exercise and asked them to find about the pattern of meter “stress,
unstresss.unstress, stress, polanya apa?( what is the pattern?)”.
Further, the extracts above can be inferred that to do applying questions, requires
the teacher to teach firstly the topic which then will be discussed in application question.
Therefore, the teacher will also get the benefit of it. By applying the application question
in her class, perhaps the teacher could clarify whether or not the students has already
understood about the previous knowledge they learned.

9. Analyzing
This level of question is frequently used by the teacher when the teacher wants to
probe initial student’s answer. In this case, the teacher requires the students to think
critically and in depth. They also have to break something into its constituent parts. They
are asked to organize, to clarify, to identify reasons, uncover evidence and reach
conclusion. This process of analysis helps the students understand ―big ideas‖ and the
relationship of parts. The result of the observation reveals that the teacher has applied
analyzing question in three ways. They are analysis of elements, analysis of relationships
and analysis of organizational principles. Those are described respectively as the
following. Based on the result of the observation, the teacher used analysis of element
when the teacher asks the students to break something into its constituent part as in (11)
and (12).

11 T ok aaaa ada yang baru menganggap pegawai sebagai keluarga

: seperti di buku ini, “ they often say we are part of family?” Tapi
apakah, Apa artinya itu? bagian dari keluarga, mengapa mereka
mengucapkannya // Sorry ketika .. menganggap dan .. Apa maksud
dari kalimat itu? Apakah appropriate dikatakan? Apa maunya? Mengapa itu
yang berkali-kali diucapkan?
12 T: Kalo biji itu apa? Yaitu pan tadi kan? Okey, Ada adegan ketika si… brush,
brush, speed, speed. Apa maksud dari kalimat itu, Gosok gigi?kemudian?
Buang,buang gitu kan? Itu menimbulkan apa? Apa yang dia brush, apa
yang dia speed sebenarnya?

The extract (11) and (12) describe the analyzing question of element, done by the
teacher in classroom questioning. Extract (11) illustrates the teacher firstly mention a
piece of quotation from the novel ―We are part of family.‖. Then the teacher asked the
students into several parts such as “Apa maksud dari kalimat itu?(what does it mean?)”,
“Apakah appropriate dikatakan?(is it appropriate?)”, “Apa maunya?(what he wants?)” and
“Mengapa itu yang berkali-kali diucapkan?(why he often says repeatedly?)”. In similar extract (12)
also illustrates that the teacher firstly mention a piece of quotation from the novel “Brush,
Brush, Speed, Speed.”. Then the teacher asked the students into several parts such as “Apa
maksud dari kalimat itu (what does the sentence mean)”, “itu menimbulkan apa? (what is the result of
it?)”, “Apa yang dia brush?(what does he brush?)”, and “apa yang dia speed sebenarnya?(what does he
speed?)”.

50 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019

 EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

The analyzing questions as in extract (11) and (12) shows that the teacher wants to
break the questions into several parts. It is aimed in order they have easier to think about
the answer. However, it can be considered as ineffective question since the teacher
delivers too much questions at the same time without any pause. As a result, perhaps the
students get confused which one they have to answer firstly, because probably they have
forget the first question and they have clearly understood only on the last questions.
Instead of considering the analysis question, the teacher has also pay attention on the way
she has to deliver her questions.

10. Evaluating
This level of questions is also used by the teacher when the teacher employing
probing strategies. In this case, it requires the students to put some parts together. They
are asked to produce original communications, to form a whole or combination that is
unique for the learner. In addition, this question does not require a single answer but
instead allow a variety of creative answer. Based on the result of the observation reveals
that the teacher has applied Evaluating questions when the teacher asks the students to
produce a plan and a set of abstract relations. The following situation shows that the
teacher has revealed the Evaluating question when the teacher asks the students to
produce a plan.
13 setelah ketidakpercayaan, ya kan, kalau dia percaya, // dia,
uuhmm, mempunyai kepercayaan bahwa sampai seseorang itu
mampu tanpa saling meragukan. Menurut anda gimana? apakah
konflik itu akan terjadi? Kisah itu akan terjadi?

The extract above shows that the teacher firstly gave an overview dealing with
trustworthiness “mempunyai kepercayaan bahwa sampai seseorang itu mampu tanpa saling
meragukan (..belief that they will not feel in doubt on each other)”. Afterward, the teacher provided
a problem “Menurut anda gimana? apakah konflik itu akan terjadi?(what do you think, will it
probably happen?)”. It also indicates that the teacher asks the students to predict or a plan
on something which is probably could happen. Here, by giving the overview in the earlier
helps the students to think about the probability which could lead them to acquire the
answer.

11. Creating
This is the higher level question in which the teacher sometimes uses to probe the
student’s answer. Basically, the students are required to judge the merits of idea, a solution
to problem or ask the students to offer an opinion on an issue. They also have to give the
defensible opinions with criteria for their judgment. In similar to the Evaluating question,
this question also does not need a single correct answer as well.
Based on the result of the observation reveals that the teacher applied this higher
level of question in two contexts. They are judgement in terms of internal evidence and
external evidence. Internal evidence means that the students use the evidence which is

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 51

Milawati & Nunung Suryati

stated in the novel itself to support their judgement. However, the external evidence, they
have to use the external evidence which is unstated in the novel.
The first context shows that the teacher has asked the student to produce their own
judgement by providing the internal evidence to support their judgement. It can be seen
in extract (14) and (15).
14 T it is competition, it is fine to pretend about .. What do you think about
: this action? The way his struggles ya? During this day and during this
position as second .. what do you think of this struggle? struggle To
become first .. is it okay for him? Is it acceptable?
15 T: okey .. okey // How do, how is your opinion about the election and
the law?

The extract (14) and (15) have described the implementation creating questions in
classroom. In extract (14) illustrates the teacher told about the struggle which occurred in
the novel, then the teacher asked the students to give their opinion toward the struggles.
“…What do you think about this action? The way his struggles ya?”.Further, the teacher asked“is it
okay for him? Is it acceptable?”. In similar, the extract (15) has also described that the teacher
ask the students’ opinion dealing with the election and the law described in the novel,
“how is your opinion about the election and the law?”.
By asking creating questions, the students have a chance to give their own judgment
freely. However, they have to find the evidence which is stated in the novel to support
their arguments. Commonly, the teacher asks by using yes no question like ―“is it okay for
him? Is it acceptable?”. Instead of requiring a short answer, this questions indirectly also
require the students to give a long answer in which they have to give a judgment, then
followed by some evidences to support their judgment. The same thing also occurs when
the teacher asks the students to give their opinion about the election and the law. To
answer such kind of question, they need to find the evidence, which is stated in the story
because the election and the law occur in the story, not in reality. Therefore, they have to
find the evidence from the novel itself to support their argument.

E. Discussion
The study shows that classroom questionings are able to run smoothly, if the
teacher could deliver a various types of question from simple to complex level. As it is
cited by Bloom’s taxonomy level which is revised and adapted from Anderson &
Krathwol (2001). She also has employed rephrasing, redirecting, probing and
reinforcement in her questioning. It is also supported by the Goodwin et al (1992).
However, in employing questioning strategies, the teacher sometimes fails in delivering
her question. Probing, for instance, will run smoothly as if the teacher can manage her
question and maintain the students to keep focus on the discussion. It will pretend as a
barrier if the class was silent. Perhaps, it occurs because the teacher’s question is
considered as higher - level questions, which make them to think more deeply. In
addition, the teacher asks more frequently many high levels of questions at the same time.
Theoretically, the teacher should consider the amount of time which the students’ needed

52 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019

 EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

to answer this such question. In fact, the teacher did not give a sufficient time for students
to answer the questions. As a result, the students get confused because of the amount of
questions which she delivers at same time, and indeed, they keep silent because of they
fully do not understand and needed time to think about the answer. In other word, in
employing questioning strategies, the teacher still could not apply them in effectively. It is
in line with one of causes the teacher uses ineffective question which is proposed by
Wragg & Brown (2001: 28) on the extent of teachers fail in doing questioning strategies.
In brief, both two elements cannot be separated each other in creating an interactive
classroom questioning.
Based on the above phenomena, basically, a higher-level question will require much
wait-time. Therefore, by allowing wait-time will be easier for the students as if the
question was difficult for them. They will have more chances to think deeply in acquiring
the required answer. Moreover, the teacher also needs to arrange her questions from the
easier to the complex level, before she started asking to the students. Hence, the teacher
will get the benefit by applying her questioning strategies in her class, perhaps the teacher
could clarify whether or not the students has already understood about the previous
knowledge they learned. Besides, the teacher is also able to predict or a plan on something
which is probably could happen. On the other side, teacher also helps the students to give
their own judgment freely and think about the probability which could lead them to
acquire the answer (Blosser, 2000; Bond 2007; Cotton, 2007).
There also found a correlation between the level of question and the strategies in
which the teacher employ. In this case, the teacher tends to apply rephrasing strategies
more frequently in asking a lower level of questions e.g. knowledge question. It is in line
with Tan, (2007) ; Shen and Yodkhumlue (2010, p.44-53); Wong, R (2010). Occasionally,
it is used to encourage the students’ to remember the material, which they have learnt in
previously meeting. Meanwhile, the teacher will probe her questions when she asks the
higher level of questions. It is aimed to direct the students to think more deeply about
his/her initial answer, to express him/her self more clearly, and develop their critical
awareness as well, Brown (1975:107). In a brief, the more low–level of questions the
teacher asks, the more frequent the teacher will rephrase her question. It is also in line
with the amount of higher-level of questions the teacher asks, the more probing strategies
the teacher applies.

F. Conclusion
Shortly, the implementation of questioning strategies has been investigated in this
study. Clearly, this present study revealed that excessive use of lower-level questions could
not facilitate students’ critical thinking. Furthermore, the results also identified the
ineffective questioning strategies by the teacher. The need of waiting time is becoming a
crucial factor for the teacher to be consideration in delivering a higher level of questions.
Besides, the arrangement of delivering a various types of question from simple to
complex level needs also be considered in effective classroom questioning. Therefore, by
considering those things, teacher could minimize the extent of teachers fail in doing
questioning strategies.

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 53

Milawati & Nunung Suryati

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and
Assessing, a Bridged Edition. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bloom, B.S. (Ed). (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I Cognitive Domain.
New York: David McKay Company.
Blosser, Patricia. (2000). How to Ask the Right Questions. USA: National Science Teacher
Association.
Bond, Nathan. (2007). Questioning Strategies That Minimize Classroom Management Problem.
Kappa Delta PI Record.
Bonne, R. & Pritchard, L. (2009). ―Teacher Researchers Questioning their Practice‖.
Mathematics: Essential Research, Essential Practice — Volume 1.Pp. 133-142.
Brown, G. (1975). Micro Teaching a Programme of Teaching Skills. London: Methuen Co Ltd.
Brualdi, A. C. (1998). ―Classroom Questions: Practical Assessment, Research &
Evaluation‖. Available at http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=6&n=6. Retrieved on
July 25, 2012
Cakmak, M. (2009). ―Pre-Service Teachers’ Thoughts about Teachers’ Questions in
Effective Teaching Process‖. Elementary Education Online, 8(3), Pp. 666-675.
http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr
Cotton, Kathleen. (2007). ―Classroom Questioning‖. Paper presented in North West
Regional Education laboratory, Kansas.
Creese, Angela. (2005). Teacher Collaboration and Talk in Multilingual Classroom. Canada :
Cromwells Ltd.
Cresswell, J.W. (2012). Educational Research; Planning, Conducting, Evaluating Quantitative and
Qualities Research 4th ed. London: Pearson Education Inc.
Ellis, Rod. (1997). Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.
Eng Ho, D.G. (2005). ―Why Do Teachers Ask The Questions They Ask?‖. RELC Journal
Vol 36 (3). Retrieved on November 11, 2005.
http://rel.sagepub.com/content/36/3/297
Fisher, R. (2009). Creative Dialogue: Talk for Thinking in the Classroom. Newyork: Routledge.
Freiberg, H. J & Driscoll A. (1992). Universal Teaching Strategies. London: Allyn and Bacon.
Goodwin, S.S., sharp, G.W., Cloutier, E.F., Diamond, N.A., and Dalgaard, K.A. (1992).
Effective Classroom Questioning. University of Illinois-Urbana: Office of Instructional
and Management Services.
Lynch, T. (1991). ―Questioning Roles in The Classroom”. ELT Journal, 45(3) July 1991.
Pp. 201 -210.
Maybery, Sally C & Hartle, Lynn. (2003). Teacher’s Guide to Frequently Asked Question.
Oxford: The Scarecrow Press Inc.
Miles, M.B and Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis 2nd Ed. London : Sage
Publication.
Sadker, D & Sadker, M. (2010).―Questioning Skills in Classroom Teaching Skills‖. In
Cooper, JamesM (Ed). Classroom Teaching Skill 9thed. Boston: Houghton NIFFLIN
Company.

54 Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019

 EFL Teacher’s Oral Questioning

Shen, P and Yodkhumlue, B. (2010). ―Teacher’s Questioning and Students’ Critical

Thinking in College EFL Reading Classroom‖. Paper presented on the 8th
International Postgraduate Research Colloquium: Interdisciplinary Approach for
Enhancing Quality of Life IPRC Proceedings, Pp. 44-53.
Tan, Z.T. (2007). ―Questioning in Chinese University EL Classrooms : what lies
Beyond It?‖. RELC Journal, 38(1). Pp.87-103.
Wong, R. (2010). ―Classifying Teacher Questions In EFL Classroom: Question
Types And Their Proper Use‖. TESOL in Context, 20(1). Pp.37-57.
Wragg, E. C & Brown, G. (2001). Questioning in the Secondary School. New York:
Routledge.

Dinamika Ilmu, Volume 19(1), 2019 55