A Qualitative-Content-Analytical Approach to the Quality of Primary Students’ Questions: Testing a Competence Level Model and Exploring Selected Influencing Factors
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Students’ Questions: Importance in Educational Contexts and Research Findings
1.2. Classification Systems for Assessing the Quality of (Students’) Questions
1.3. Brinkmann’s Competence Level Model for Analyzing the Level of Abstraction of Student’s Questions
1.4. Aim of the Study
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Research Design and Sample
2.2. Instruments and Data Analysis
- Prior knowledge [characteristics: not visible | visible]: Does the question reveal any prior knowledge that goes beyond everyday knowledge?
- Focus of attention [characteristics: narrow | broad]: Is the focus of attention narrow or broad in terms of the expected response? Does the question relate to a specific detail (narrow focus of attention) or is it necessary to explore many partial aspects to answer it (broad focus of attention)?
- Intention of conceptual understanding [characteristics: not visible | visible]: Does the question express the intention to fathom causes, discover connections, or understand modes of operation?
- Philosophical horizon [characteristics: not visible | visible]: Is there a clear answer for this question? Does it touch on topics whose answers cannot be obtained from largely established bodies of knowledge? Do we have to struggle for our interpretative reality?
3. Results
3.1. To What Extent Is Brinkmann’s Competence Level Model [26] Suitable for Analyzing Questions from a Different Sample? What Modifications Are Necessary? (RQ 1)
3.2. Are There Any Indications of Connections between the Identified Competence Levels of the Questions and the Students’ Grade Level? (RQ 2)
- Grade level 1 = 72 questions
- Grade level 2 = 53 questions
- Grade level 3 = 151 questions
- Grade level 4 = 158 questions
3.3. Are There Any Indications of Connections between the Identified Competence Levels of the Questions and the Subject Matter? (RQ 3)
- data set “Space_4-a” | grade level 4 | 0 questions
- data set “Space_4-b” | grade level 4 | 33 questions
- data set “Space_3” | grade level 3 | 67 questions
- Brinkmann’s data set [26] | grade level 3 | 137 questions
4. Discussion
4.1. To What Extent Is Brinkmann’s Competence Level Model [26] Suitable for Analyzing Questions from a Different Sample? What Modifications Are Necessary? (RQ 1)
4.2. Are There Any Indications of Connections between the Identified Competence Levels of the Questions and the Students’ Grade Level? (RQ 2)
4.3. Are There Any Indications of Connections between the Identified Competence Levels of the Questions and the Subject Matter? (RQ 3)
4.4. Further Aspects of Research Design and Methods
4.5. Implications
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Data Set | Subject Matter | Grade Level | Designation of the Data Set [*] | Number of Questions |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Space | 4 | Space_4-a | 0 |
2 | Human senses | 3 | Human senses_3 | 5 |
3 | Human skeleton | 3 | Human skeleton_3 | 6 |
4 | Water | 4 | Water_4 | 8 |
5 | Stick insects | 2 | Stick insects_2 | 11 |
6 | Hedgehogs | 1 | Hedgehogs_1-b | 13 |
7 | Christmas | 3 | Christmas_3 | 14 |
8 | Animals | 2 | Animals_2 | 14 |
9 | Birds | 2 | Birds_2 | 18 |
10 | Fire | 3 | Fire_3 | 23 |
11 | Animals | 3 | Animals_3 | 23 |
12 | Volcanoes | 4 | Volcanoes_4 | 25 |
13 | Bats | 3 | Bats_3 | 26 |
14 | Mobility | 2 | Mobility_2 | 28 |
15 | Hedgehogs | 1 | Hedgehogs_1-a | 28 |
16 | Rome | 4 | Rome_4 | 28 |
17 | Electricity | 4 | Electricity_4-b | 31 |
18 | Animals | 1 | Animals_1 | 33 |
19 | Space | 4 | Space_4-b | 33 |
20 | Electricity | 4 | Electricity_4-a | 43 |
21 | Space | 3 | Space_3 | 67 |
Nr. | Prior Knowledge | Focus of Attention | Intention of Conceptual Understanding | Philosophical Horizon |
---|---|---|---|---|
1.1 | Quartet questions to capture the diversity of the world in a certain system of order (e.g., “How big is the earth?“) | |||
not visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
1.2 | Record questions to capture dimensions (superlatives) (e.g., “Which planet is the largest in the entire universe?”) | |||
not visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
1.3 | Questions about the geographical classification or spatial differentiation of one’s personal living environment (e.g., “Where are the airports in North Rhine-Westphalia?”) | |||
not visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
1.4 | Verification questions (e.g., “Is it possible to land on the sun?”) | |||
not visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
1.5 | Questions about names or linguistic derivations to expand knowledge of the world (e.g., “Why is the water called water?”) | |||
not visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
1.6 * | Questions on the reconstruction of foreign or historical living environments based on categories of one’s personal living environment (e.g., “How did the Romans live?”) | |||
not visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
1.7 * | Questions about (historical) events, personalities, facts or origins (e.g., “When was the war?”) | |||
not visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
1.8 * | Questions with the intention of being able to (visually) imagine a concept or phenomenon (e.g., “What does a volcano look like?”) | |||
not visible | narrow | not visible | not visible |
Nr. | Prior Knowledge | Focus of Attention | Intention of Conceptual Understanding | Philosophical Horizon |
---|---|---|---|---|
2.1 | Quartet questions for advanced learners (e.g., “How big are sunspots?”) | |||
visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
2.2 | Expert record questions (e.g., “What is the second most poisonous animal after the poison dart frog?”) | |||
visible | broad | not visible | not visible | |
2.3 | Verification questions (e.g., “Does Uranus has a ring?”) | |||
visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
2.4 | Comparison questions to differentiate prior knowledge by comparing two elements (e.g., “Is the sun further away from our earth than the moon?”) | |||
visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
2.5 | Decision questions to differentiate prior knowledge against the background of possible cases/scenarios (e.g., “Is the moon light or dark?”) | |||
visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
2.6 | Definition questions to understand terms (e.g., “What exactly is a sickle?”) | |||
visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
2.7 | Time-and-space questions to further develop the ability to orient oneself in time (e.g., “When did the Middle Ages begin?”) | |||
visible | narrow | not visible | not visible | |
2.8 | Collection questions to gather the most diverse and comprehensive information possible on an aspect (e.g., “What are all the rivers in North Rhine-Westphalia called?”) | |||
not visible | broad | not visible | not visible | |
2.9 * | Question about (historical) events, personalities, facts, or origins (e.g., “How was Caesar killed?”) | |||
visible | narrow | not visible | not visible |
Nr. | Prior Knowledge | Focus of Attention | Intention of Conceptual Understanding | Philosophical Horizon |
---|---|---|---|---|
3.1 | Why questions that have a generalizing character and are aimed at regularities (e.g., “Why does the moon always look different?”) | |||
not visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
3.2 | How questions to break down modalities and modes of operation (e.g., “How did the sun come into being and how did the moon and the earth come into being?”) | |||
not visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
3.3 | Questions about the nature of things (e.g., “What is the moon made of?”) | |||
not visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
3.4 | Question about consequences (e.g., “What is the gravitational pull like when you fly over a planet?”) | |||
not visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
3.5 | Verification questions (e.g., “Did the moon and the sun look different in the past?”) | |||
not visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
3.6 | Time-and-space questions to expand orientation knowledge (e.g., “What have people traded with in the past?”) | |||
not visible | broad | visible | not visible |
Nr. | Prior Knowledge | Focus of Attention | Intention of Conceptual Understanding | Philosophical Horizon |
---|---|---|---|---|
4.1 | Why questions that have a generalizing character (e.g., “Why does the earth revolve around itself?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
4.2 | Questions to break down modalities and modes of operation (e.g., “How did the urexplosion go?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
4.3 | Decision questions (e.g., “Where is the moon? Behind or in front of the earth?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
4.4 | Expert verification questions (e.g., “Is one half dark because the sun doesn’t shine on it?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
4.5 | Expert definition questions to understand complex terms or phenomena (e.g., “What does light years mean?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
4.6 | Time-and-space questions regarding a complex phenomenon in connection with a temporal structure (e.g., “When is there always a new moon?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
4.7 | Consequence questions for advanced learners to better understand the course of a particular scenario (e.g., “If the sun ever explodes, how will it explode?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | not visible |
Nr. | Prior Knowledge | Focus of Attention | Intention of Conceptual Understanding | Philosophical Horizon |
---|---|---|---|---|
5.1 | Questions based on understood technical terms requiring a complex conclusion to answer (e.g., “Why is oxygen only on Earth?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
5.2 | Questions about the meaning of the nature of the living environment that focus on the “why” of a phenomenon (e.g., “Why does a planet exist if you can’t stand on it?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | visible | |
5.3 | Questions from a particular perspective (future significance, evaluations, etc.) that seek clarity about connections or patterns of interpretation in order to understand and categorize processes (e.g., “What happens if the rainforest is destroyed?”) | |||
visible | broad | visible | not visible | |
5.4 | Questions about the whence and whither of humankind or of a philosophical nature (e.g., “Will people live on the other planets in the future?”) | |||
not visible | broad | visible | visible |
References
- Wu, L.; Liu, Y.; How, M.-L.; He, S. Investigating Student-Generated Questioning in a Technology-Enabled Elementary Science Classroom: A Case Study. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niegemann, H. Lernen und Fragen: Bilanz und Perspektiven der Forschung. Unterrichtswissenschaft 2004, 32, 345–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neber, H. Fragenstellen. In Handbuch Lernstrategien; Mandl, H., Friedrich, H.F., Eds.; Hogrefe: Göttingen, Germany, 2006; pp. 50–58. ISBN 978-3-8017-1813-8. [Google Scholar]
- Aflalo, E. Students generating questions as a way of learning. Act. Learn. High. Educ. 2021, 22, 63–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pallesen, H.; Hörnlein, M. Warum Schüler*innen keine Fragen stellen.: Unterricht zwischen Sozialisation zur Fraglosigkeit und Bildungsanspruch. In Kinderperspektiven im Unterricht: Zur Ambivalenz der Anschaulichkeit; Rumpf, D., Winter, S., Eds.; Springer VS: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2019; pp. 3–10. ISBN 978-3-658-22432-5. [Google Scholar]
- Kultusministerkonferenz. Empfehlungen zur Arbeit in der Grundschule. Available online: https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/pdf/PresseUndAktuelles/2015/Empfehlung_350_KMK_Arbeit_Grundschule_01.pdf (accessed on 29 May 2024).
- Department for Education. The National Curriculum in England: Key Stages 1 and 2 Framework Document. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a81a9abe5274a2e8ab55319/PRIMARY_national_curriculum.pdf (accessed on 29 May 2024).
- OECD. The Future of Education and Skills. Education. 2023. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/future-of-education-and-skills-2030.html (accessed on 29 May 2024).
- Lombardi, L.; Mednick, F.J.; Backer, F.D.; Lombaerts, K. Fostering Critical Thinking across the Primary School’s Curriculum in the European Schools System. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spencer, A.G.; Causey, C.B.; Ernest, J.M.; Barnes, G.F. Using Student Generated Questions to Foster Twenty-First Century Learning: International Collaboration in Uganda. Excell. Educ. J. 2020, 9, 57–84. [Google Scholar]
- Chin, C.; Osborne, J. Students’ questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science. Stud. Sci. Educ. 2008, 44, 1–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, S.; Brinkmann, V. SchülerInnenfragen im Mittelpunkt des Sachunterrichts. In Sachunterricht in der Grundschule entwickeln—Gestalten—Reflektieren; Gläser, E., Schönknecht, G., Eds.; Grundschulverband: Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 2013; pp. 226–241. ISBN 9783941649095. [Google Scholar]
- Schilling, Y.; Kuckuck, M. Das Anregen und Berücksichtigen von Schüler * innenfragen im Sachunterricht: Impulse für eine vielperspektivische Professionalisierungsgelegenheit im Studium. Widerstreit Sachunterricht 2024, 28, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmeinck, D.; Kidman, G. The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary Schools. In Teaching Primary Geography: Setting the Foundation; Kidman, G., Schmeinck, D., Eds.; Springer Nature AG: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 15–27. ISBN 978-3-030-99970-4. [Google Scholar]
- Schomaker, C.; Tänzer, S. Sachunterrichtsdidaktik: Bestandsaufnahme und Forschungsperspektiven. In Lernen im Fach und über das Fach hinaus: Bestandsaufnahmen und Forschungsperspektiven aus 17 Fachdidaktiken im Vergleich, 2nd ed.; Rothgangel, M., Abraham, U., Bayrhuber, H., Frederking, V., Jank, W., Vollmer, H.J., Eds.; Waxmann: Münster, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 2021; pp. 363–390. ISBN 9783830993070. [Google Scholar]
- Meschede, N.; Hartinger, A.; Möller, K. Sachunterricht in der Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung: Rahmenbedingungen, Befunde und Perspektiven. In Handbuch Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung; Cramer, C., König, J., Rothland, M., Blömeke, S., Eds.; Verlag Julius Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn, Germany, 2020; pp. 541–548. ISBN 9783838554730. [Google Scholar]
- Gesellschaft für Didaktik des Sachunterrichts. Perspektivrahmen Sachunterricht, 2nd ed.; Verlag Julius Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn, Germany, 2013; ISBN 978-3-7815-1992-3. [Google Scholar]
- Schilling, Y.; Beudels, M.; Kuckuck, M.; Preisfeld, A. Sachunterrichtsbezogene Teilstudiengänge aus NRW auf dem Prüfstand: Eine Dokumentenanalyse der Bachelor-und Masterprüfungsordnungen. Herausford. Lehr. *Innenbildung 2021, 4, 178–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beudels, M.M.; Damerau, K.; Preisfeld, A. Effects of an Interdisciplinary Course on Pre-Service Primary Teachers’ Content Knowledge and Academic Self-Concepts in Science and Technology–A Quantitative Longitudinal Study. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kahlert, J.; Fölling-Albers, M.; Götz, M.; Hartinger, A.; Miller, S.; Wittkowske, S. (Eds.) Handbuch Didaktik des Sachunterrichts, 3rd ed.; Verlag Julius Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn, Germany, 2022; ISBN 978-3-8385-8801-8. [Google Scholar]
- Peschel, M.; Mammes, I. Der Sachunterricht und die Didaktik des Sachunterrichts als besondere Herausforderung für die Professionalisierung von Grundschullehrkräften. In Professionalisierung von Grundschullehrkräften: Kontext, Bedingungen und Herausforderungen; Mammes, I., Rotter, C., Eds.; Verlag Julius Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn, Germany, 2022; pp. 188–203. ISBN 978-3-7815-5949-3. [Google Scholar]
- Schröer, F.; Tenberge, C. Theorien und Konzeptionen inklusiven Sachunterrichts. In Inklusive (Fach-)Didaktik in der Primarstufe: Ein Lehrbuch; Dexel, T., Ed.; Waxmann: Münster, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 2022; pp. 158–185. ISBN 9783838556864. [Google Scholar]
- Simon, T. Vielperspektivität und Partizipation als interdependente und konstitutive Merkmale einer inklusionsorientierten Sachunterrichtsdidaktik. In Ich und Welt verknüpfen: Allgemeinbildung, Vielperspektivität, Partizipation und Inklusion im Sachunterricht; Siebach, M., Simon, J., Simon, T., Eds.; Schneider Verlag Hohengehren GmbH: Baltmannsweiler, Germany, 2019; pp. 66–76. ISBN 9783834019516. [Google Scholar]
- Praetorius, A.-K.; Martens, M.; Brinkmann, M. Unterrichtsqualität aus Sicht der quantitativen und qualitativen Unterrichtsforschung. In Handbuch Schulforschung; Hascher, T., Idel, T.-S., Helsper, W., Eds.; Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2020; pp. 1–20. ISBN 978-3-658-24734-8. [Google Scholar]
- Wuttke, E. Unterrichtskommunikation und Wissenserwerb: Zum Einfluss von Kommunikation auf den Prozess der Wissensgenerierung; Lang: Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 2005; ISBN 3-631-53832-4. [Google Scholar]
- Brinkmann, V. Fragen Stellen an die Welt: Eine Untersuchung zur Kompetenzentwicklung in Einem an den Schülerfragen Orientierten Sachunterricht; Schneider Verlag Hohengehren: Baltmannsweiler, Germany, 2019; ISBN 9783834019233. [Google Scholar]
- Chin, C.; Brown, D.E.; Bruce, B.C. Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2002, 24, 521–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van der Meij, H.; Karabenick, S.A. The great divide between teacher and student questioning. In Strategic Help Seeking: Implications for Learning and Teaching; Karabenick, S.A., Ed.; L. Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1998; pp. 195–218. ISBN 9780805823844. [Google Scholar]
- Levin, A. Lernen durch Fragen: Wirkung von strukturierenden Hilfen auf das Generieren von Studierendenfragen als Begleitende Lernstrategie; Waxmann: Münster, Germany, 2005; ISBN 9783830914730. [Google Scholar]
- Otero, J.; Graesser, A.C. PREG: Elements of a Model of Question Asking. Cogn. Instr. 2001, 19, 143–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levin, A.; Arnold, K.-H. Aktives Fragenstellen im Hochschulunterricht: Effekte des Vorwissens auf den Lernerfolg. Unterrichtswissenschaft 2004, 32, 295–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aguiar, O.G.; Mortimer, E.F.; Scott, P. Learning from and responding to students’ questions: The authoritative and dialogic tension. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2010, 47, 174–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ritz-Fröhlich, G. Kinderfragen im Unterricht; Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn, Germany, 1992; ISBN 3781507114. [Google Scholar]
- Graesser, A.C.; Person, N.K. Question Asking During Tutoring. Am. Educ. Res. J. 1994, 31, 104–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moore, S.; Nguyen, H.A.; Bier, N.; Domadia, T.; Stamper, J. Assessing the Quality of Student-Generated Short Answer Questions Using GPT-3. In Educating for a New Future: Making Sense of Technology-Enhanced Learning Adoption; Hilliger, I., Muñoz-Merino, P.J., Laet, T.d., Ortega-Arranz, A., Farrell, T., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 243–257. ISBN 978-3-031-16289-3. [Google Scholar]
- Niegemann, H.; Stadler, S. Hat noch jemand eine Frage? Systematische Unterrichtsbeobachtung zu Häufigkeit und kognitivem Niveau von Fragen im Unterricht. Unterrichtswissenschaft 2001, 29, 171–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graesser, A.C.; Person, N.K.; Huber, J. Mechanisms that Generate Questions. In Questions and Information Systems; Lauer, T.W., Peacock, E., Graesser, A.C., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1992; pp. 167–187. ISBN 9780805810189. [Google Scholar]
- Scardamalia, M.; Bereiter, C. Text-Based and Knowledge-Based Questioning by Children. Cogn. Instr. 1992, 9, 177–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marton, F.; Booth, S. Learning and Awareness; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 1997; ISBN 9780805824551. [Google Scholar]
- Creswell, J.W. Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 3rd ed.; SAGE: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2009; ISBN 9781412965569. [Google Scholar]
- Pajo, B. Introduction to Research Methods: A Hands-on Approach, 2nd ed.; SAGE: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2018; ISBN 9781483386959. [Google Scholar]
- Statistisches Bundesamt. Statistischer Bericht. Allgemeinbildende Schulen. Available online: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bildung-Forschung-Kultur/Schulen/Publikationen/Downloads-Schulen/statistischer-bericht-allgemeinbildende-schulen-2110100237005.xlsx?__blob=publicationFile (accessed on 29 May 2024).
- Döring, N. Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial-und Humanwissenschaften, 6th ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; ISBN 978-3-662-64762-2. [Google Scholar]
- Ministerium für Schule und Bildung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. Die Grundschule in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Informationen für Eltern. Available online: https://broschuerenservice.nrw.de/msb-duesseldorf/files?download_page=0&product_id=293&files=3/a/3a2910637f9ff37401346e40aea0aa5b.pdf (accessed on 29 May 2024).
- Flick, U. (Ed.) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Design; SAGE Publications Limited: London, UK, 2022; ISBN 9781529766943. [Google Scholar]
- Kuckartz, U.; Rädiker, S. Qualitative Content Analysis: Methods, Practice and Software, 2nd ed.; SAGE: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2023; ISBN 978-1-5296-0913-4. [Google Scholar]
- Mayring, P. Einführung in die Qualitative Sozialforschung: Eine Anleitung zu Qualitativem Denken, 7th ed.; Beltz: Weinheim, Germany; Basel, Switzerland, 2023; ISBN 9783407296016. [Google Scholar]
- Wirtz, M.A.; Caspar, F. Beurteilerübereinstimmung und Beurteilerreliabilität: Methoden zur Bestimmung und Verbesserung der Zuverlässigkeit von Einschätzungen mittels Kategoriensystemen und Ratingskalen; Hogrefe: Göttingen, Germany; Bern, Switzerland; Toronto, ON, Canada; Seattle, DC, USA, 2002; ISBN 3801716465. [Google Scholar]
- Landis, J.R.; Koch, G.G. The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics 1977, 33, 159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vogl, S. Quantifizierung. Köln Z Soziol 2017, 69, 287–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuckartz, U. Mixed Methods: Methodologie, Forschungsdesigns und Analyseverfahren; Springer VS: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2014; ISBN 978-3-531-93267-5. [Google Scholar]
- Kelle, U.; Erzberger, C. Qualitative und quantitative Methoden: Kein Gegensatz. In Qualitative Forschung: Ein Handbuch, 14th ed.; Flick, U., Kardorff, E., von Steinke, I., Eds.; Rowohlts Enzyklopädie im Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag: Reinbek bei Hamburg, Germany, 2022; pp. 299–309. ISBN 9783499556289. [Google Scholar]
- Kaptein, M.; van den Heuvel, E. Statistics for Data Scientists: An Introduction to Probability, Statistics, and Data Analysis; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; ISBN 978-3-030-10531-0. [Google Scholar]
- Raithel, J. Quantitative Forschung: Ein Praxiskurs, 2nd ed.; VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2008; ISBN 978-3-531-91148-9. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 1992, 1, 98–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schilling, Y.; Molitor, A.-L.; Ritter, R.; Schellenbach-Zell, J. Anregung von Wissensvernetzung bei Lehramtsstudierenden mithilfe von Core Practices. In Vernetzung von Wissen bei Lehramtsstudierenden—Eine Black-Box für die Professionalisierungsforschung? Wehner, A., Masanek, N., Hellmann, K., Grospietsch, F., Heinz, T., Glowinski, I., Eds.; Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn, Germany, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Krauss, S. Expertise-Paradigma in der Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung. In Handbuch Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung; Cramer, C., König, J., Rothland, M., Blömeke, S., Eds.; Verlag Julius Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn, Germany, 2020; pp. 154–162. ISBN 9783838554730. [Google Scholar]
- Gruber, H.; Stöger, H. Experten-Novizen-Paradigma. In Unterrichtsgestaltung als Gegenstand der Wissenschaft; Kiel, E., Ed.; Schneider Hohengehren: Baltmannsweiler, Germany, 2011; pp. 247–264. ISBN 9783834008923. [Google Scholar]
- Helmke, A. Unterrichtsqualität und Professionalisierung: Diagnostik von Lehr-Lern-Prozessen und evidenzbasierte Unterrichtsentwicklung; Klett Kallmeyer: Hannover, Germany, 2022; ISBN 9783772716850. [Google Scholar]
- Prengel, A. Didaktische Diagnostik als Element alltäglicher Lehrarbeit—“Formatives Assessment” im inklusiven Unterricht. In Diagnostik im Kontext inklusiver Bildung: Theorien, Ambivalenzen, Akteure, Konzepte; Amrhein, B., Ed.; Verlag Julius Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn, Germany, 2016; pp. 49–63. ISBN 9783781554610. [Google Scholar]
- Ernst, K. Den Fragen der Kinder nachgehen. Die Grund. 1996, 98, 7–11. [Google Scholar]
- Brinkmann, V. “Werden die Pflanzen trotzdem angebaut, auch wenn es der Umwelt schadet, sie zu pflegen?”—Schülerfragen zum Thema Landwirtschaft. In Landwirtschaft im Sachunterricht: Mehr als ein Ausflug auf den Bauernhof?! Schneider, K., Queisser, U., Eds.; wbv Media GmbH & Co. KG: Bielefeld, Germany, 2022; pp. 53–73. ISBN 9783763967209. [Google Scholar]
- Mueller, R.G.W. Making Them Fit: Examining Teacher Support for Student Questioning. Soc. Stud. Res. Pract. 2016, 11, 40–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rothstein, D.; Santana, L. Make Just One Change: Teach Students to Ask Their Own Questions; Harvard Education Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011; ISBN 9781612500997. [Google Scholar]
- Godinho, S.; Wilson, J. Helping Your Pupils to Ask Questions; Routledge: London, UK, 2016; ISBN 9780415447270. [Google Scholar]
Question | “How Many Spines Do Hedgehogs Get?” | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Distinguishing Criteria | Characteristic | |||||
Prior knowledge | ☒ not visible | ☐ visible | ||||
Focus of attention | ☒ narrow | ☐ broad | ||||
Intention of conceptual understanding | ☒ not visible | ☐ visible | ||||
Philosophical horizon | ☒ not visible | ☐ visible | ||||
Competence level | ☐ 0 | ☒ 1 | ☐ 2 | ☐ 3 | ☐ 4 | ☐ 5 |
Question type | 1.1: Quartet questions to capture the diversity of the world in a certain system of order |
Question | “What Is a Faraday Cage?” | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Distinguishing Criteria | Characteristic | |||||
Prior knowledge | ☐ not visible | ☒ visible | ||||
Focus of attention | ☐ narrow | ☒ broad | ||||
Intention of conceptual understanding | ☐ not visible | ☒ visible | ||||
Philosophical horizon | ☒ not visible | ☐ visible | ||||
Competence level | ☐ 0 | ☐ 1 | ☐ 2 | ☐ 3 | ☒ 4 | ☐ 5 |
Question type | 4.5: Expert definition questions to understand complex terms or phenomena |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Schilling, Y.; Hillebrand, L.; Kuckuck, M. A Qualitative-Content-Analytical Approach to the Quality of Primary Students’ Questions: Testing a Competence Level Model and Exploring Selected Influencing Factors. Educ. Sci. 2024, 14, 1003. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14091003
Schilling Y, Hillebrand L, Kuckuck M. A Qualitative-Content-Analytical Approach to the Quality of Primary Students’ Questions: Testing a Competence Level Model and Exploring Selected Influencing Factors. Education Sciences. 2024; 14(9):1003. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14091003
Chicago/Turabian StyleSchilling, Yannick, Leonie Hillebrand, and Miriam Kuckuck. 2024. "A Qualitative-Content-Analytical Approach to the Quality of Primary Students’ Questions: Testing a Competence Level Model and Exploring Selected Influencing Factors" Education Sciences 14, no. 9: 1003. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14091003