Paired Questioning/Review

	Text Citation or Link	Rationale for Choosing	Text Frame(s)	Strategies Used and Resource
Engagement Example	Viewpoint: Out of Touch, But Not Out of Sync	This article compares two different models of similar motion in Biology (cilia, flagella) and Physics (pendulum). This article discusses the idea of how cilia and flagella work.	Compare/Contrast Cause/Effect	Paired questioning/reviews (McLaughlin and Buehl)

Paired questioning or paired reviews is a very useful strategy for students to learn and use especially with more difficult or challenging texts. The premise behind paired questioning/review is that students take pauses while reading in order to generate questions and dialogue during reading. Often reading is a multi-step comprehension process where pauses in the reading allow for clarifications, reflections, and understanding.

Paired questioning/review can be done in different ways that suit the teacher or the classroom, but still follow a general guide. The teacher breaks the text into chunks that are more manageable and allow for breaks. The teacher can time the breaks so that the students are focused on certain details or play it by ear and let the discussions play through. The teacher can also guide the students about what to discuss by giving questions after each section or allow the students the freedom to go wherever their discussion leads. This is what makes paired questioning/review such a powerful tool, the ability to be modified so easily.

For this article I had enlisted the help of my reluctant younger brother who is a senior in high school and taking Physics and Biology. This makes him the perfect target audience for this article and guinea pig for testing out this literacy strategy. I modeled what we did after what I would do with a class. I started off with an introduction to the strategy about what it is and why it is important to read texts this way. Because the text was long and challenging I split the text into four sections that are two paragraphs each. We both read the section and then, to experience different versions, I modified how each post section reflection was done. For the first section, I was person A and my brother was person B. My role was to summarize the main points of the section and relay it to person B. Person’s B role is to ask questions or clarification to check their own understanding and to reinforce my own. This method was very useful because hearing another person’s take on a section allows me to add on to my own to further my understanding. This can also be further modified where person A can also ask questions about things they were confused about.

For section two and three, I modeled paired questioning/review as reflection. For the first round we swapped roles so I was now person B. In this case, person A comes up with questions based upon the text and person B answers them. For round two, the roles switch so that person B comes up with questions and person A answers the posed questions. Similar to the first method, this modification allows for questions to be asked for clarification. I was not a fan of this method and neither was my brother because we both felt that it was too restrictive to limit the discussion to just questions.

For the last section, it was the least instructive modification to peer questioning/review. After reading the section, we could discuss anything or ask any question we wanted. This was the preferable modification for both of us because we prefer the freedom to let the conversation go wherever it goes. In this article, because it covers a topic that is not solved completely we were able to have a debate on whether or not we think that this solution answers the question or if we thought that there is probably something else that explains it better. This modification lets the students go where they feel they need the reflection to go. If students feel they need to understand the article better they can discuss what they just read whereas if they understand the article, but want to discuss it further on a deeper level they can debate or throw in opinions.

Overall I like this literacy strategy that guides students. The fact that it is easy to modify and gets students to slow down while they read to make sure they understand is beneficial to both teachers and students. Teachers can benefit because as they walk around listening in on conversations, they can assess to see how the class understands as a whole. Students benefit beyond the ways discussed earlier such as being able to work with partners (or groups if the teacher wishes) and to talk. Students tend to like reading more when they feel engaged and this strategy kept me and my brother engaged because we slowed down to have conversations throughout the article.

References

Buehl, D., (2014) Classroom Strategies for Interactive Learning, 4^th ed. International Reading Association.

McLaughlin, M., (2015).  Content Area Reading:  Teaching and Learning for College and Career Readiness. Boston:  Pearson.