Julia Mastripolito

110066420

Contemporary Practice in Education Research

Research Proposal
How extended Post-Teacher Question Wait-Time has a positive
impact in class discussions and questioning.

Introduction
Teachers ask up to 150 questions per hour (Gall, 1970), with so many questions
there are countless answers. Research suggests that students are generally not
given enough time to consider questions before being required to answer them,
therefore the quality of answers can be poor (Stahl, 1994). The information
processing model of learning indicates that in order to answer a question
effectively, students need to locate specific information from long term memory,
retrieve it into working memory, decide whether that information answers the
question and then verbally answer the question (Duell, 1994). This takes time,
but with the average time between a teacher asking a question and a student
responding being only 1.5 seconds, there is little chance of students being able
to properly process information needed to elicit an appropriate and considered
response (Stahl, 1994). Mary Budd Rowe (1986) was a pioneer in the field of
wait time and she encourages teachers to wait at least 3 seconds before
allowing students to respond to a question. Extending wait time to 3 seconds has
been found to be an optimal time to allow students to process information and
elicit a response (Rowe, 1986). Research suggests that extended wait time
results in many positive outcomes such as increased quality, length and
relevance of responses, increased volunteers sharing answers and decreased
frequency of answers such as I dont know (Tobin, 1987). Teachers also noticed
that invisible children were more willing to share answers and teachers began
to have higher expectations of their students (Stahl, 1994).
This research proposal focuses on Post-Teacher Question Wait-Time, which
refers to the period of uninterrupted silence between a teacher asking a question
and a student answering the question. The proposal will outline how 28, Year 4
students will be the sample, testing the effectiveness of a 3 second Post Teacher
Question Wait-Time compared to a 1 second Post Teacher Question Wait-Time.
Data will be collected in three different ways, an Observational Recording Sheet,
Student Written responses and a Reflective Journal.
This research is imperative to improving the practice of teachers allowing
students to provide more meaningful and insightful answers. Wait time is not
only immediately beneficial but is reflected in higher levels of academic
achievement. The aim of this research is to illustrate the positive outcomes of
extending Post-Teacher Question Wait-Time.

Aims and Focus

Julia Mastripolito

110066420

The purpose of this study is to discover how extended Post-Teacher Question

Wait-Time has a positive impact in class discussions and questioning. Previous
observations in a Year 1 classroom, showed that each time the teacher asked a
question, the same students would put their hands up to volunteer an answer.
Often these students hadnt thought through responses and did not actually have
an appropriate answer. Discussions with the teacher highlighted that this was a
common occurrence, and she would often pick children at random to answer
questions instead of asking the whole class. However, wait time literature
suggests that random selection of students is not an effective model of
questioning as it puts them on the spot (Stahl, 1982) and goes against the
information processing model of learning which states children need sufficient
time to process information before answering questions (Winne & Marx, 1983).
Therefore, waiting 3 or more seconds after asking a question allows students the
opportunity to process information and consider a response (Rowe, 1972). In
studies with extended wait times, positive results reflect the effectiveness of this
concept. Some examples include, increases in volunteers answering questions,
including students who rarely participate, increases in the quality and confidence
of answers and a decrease in incorrect answers (Rowe, 1972). Long term benefits
were also noticed in the improvement of test scores (Winne & Marx, 1983).
Given the effectiveness of wait time, it is an important concept for teachers to
employ, to better position students for classroom success. Having the time to
process teachers instructions and questioning allows students to feel confident
to participate in a more meaningful way. As wait time encourages more students
to participate in class questioning the teacher is able to gauge a more authentic
portrayal of the level of understanding of students. This information allows
teachers to use further questioning and instruction to assist or extend students.
The current research proposal will be used to guide the study of year 4 students
from a private school located in a middle class, metropolitan area in Adelaide.
The study will be based primarily on Mathematics classes with extended wait
times. Literature suggests that extended wait times will increase the quality of
answers, number of volunteers answering the teachers questions and decrease
the number of incorrect responses. It is hypothesised that an extended PostTeacher Question Wait-Time of 3 seconds will increase the quality of answers,
number of volunteers and decrease incorrect responses, when compared to a 1
second wait time.

Underpinning Literature
Wait time is defined as a period of uninterrupted silence by the teacher and
students to encourage reflection and processing of information, before selecting
an appropriate response (Dhindsa, 2010; Stahl, 1994). The pioneer of wait time,
Mary Budd Rowe highlighted two main types for wait time. Wait time 1, which is
the period of uninterrupted silence preceding teacher questioning, and wait time
2, referring to the period of silence preceding the students response (Rowe
1986). These silences allow teachers and students to process the question and
the response before allowing another response (Rowe 1986). According to Stahl
(1994) there are eight types of periods of silence but for the purpose of the
2

Julia Mastripolito

110066420

current research only Post-Teacher Question Wait-Time will be focused on. This
is the period of silence, 3 seconds after a teacher has asked a question, before
continuing to talk or allowing students to respond (Stahl, 1994).
With research conducted from reception to Year 12 in a wide variety of subject
areas, it has been found that in certain classes approximately 150 questions are
asked in an hour with 1.5 seconds being the average time between questions
and answers (Gall, 1970; Tobin, 1987). The literature states that extending wait
time to 3 seconds or more has a number of positive outcomes for both students
and teachers (Stahl, 1994). Many teachers responses in studies stated that they
noticed students who would not normally contribute to classroom discussions or
questioning, were more inclined to participate when wait time was extended
(Tobin 1987). These invisible children, who rarely participate in group
discussions, benefit a great deal from the implementation of extended PostTeacher Question Wait-Time as reflected in the variety of students voluntarily
participating because they are given the chance to process information and
consider answers. For students who are conscious of responding with the wrong
answer, having this time to process information is valuable as it allows them to
choose an answer they feel confident in sharing. A significant number of studies
conducted on wait time have found one of the main advantages of Post-Teacher
Question Wait-Time is the increase in volunteers willing to answer the teachers
question e.g. Rowe (1972); Fagan, Hassler and Szabos (1981); Tobin (1986);
Stahl (1994). Additionally students responses were of much better quality as
indicated in the increased correctness and length of their responses (Stahl,
1994). While failure to respond and the incidence of I dont know responses
decreased during class questioning (Stahl, 1994; Rowe, 1986). Also
significantly improved by wait time are written cognitively complex tasks (Tobin,
1987), especially in mathematics which will be the focus area for this study.
The benefits of wait time for students are widely documented in the literature,
but there are also many advantages for teachers. During the 3 second period of
silence, teachers are able to consider preceding questions causing an increase in
the variety and quality of questioning strategies. Ultimately, teachers ask fewer
questions but they are of higher quality and demand higher order information
processing and thinking from the students (Stahl, 1994; Rowe, 1986). Teachers
also found they began to have higher expectations of the invisible students
who rarely participated in class discussions (Rowe, 1986).
The majority of studies conducted on wait time used tape recordings, reflections
and observational recordings to collect data, measuring wait times then
transcribed the recording to analyse the responses elicited (e.g. Rowe, 1986;
Tobin, 1987; Stahl, 1982). These measures have been considered when planning
the data collection for the current research.

Methods and Analysis

Research will be conducted in a Year 4 class (28 students) from a private school
in the Adelaide metropolitan area. This class has a wide range of ability levels,
3

Julia Mastripolito

110066420

with 2 EALD (English as additional language or dialect) students. According to

NAPLAN results, students from this school have performed above the Australian
schools average as well as other contextually similar schools. The classroom
teacher describes her students as generally eager to learn and well behaved with
the exception of a small number of children. Some students in the class are quite
shy and do not participate in group discussion.
Action
Research will be conducted during Mathematics class on Wednesdays and
Thursdays as these particular maths lessons will be dedicated to problem solving
and inquiry, therefore using wait time throughout this lesson will enhance
opportunities for students to cognitively process complex information. During
instructional time on Wednesday I will pause for 3 seconds after asking the whole
class a question. Once the uninterrupted 3 seconds of silence has passed, I will
choose 2 or 3 different students to share their answers. The questions asked will
be recorded and students will also record their own answers, which I will collect
at the end of instructional time. On Thursday, these methods will be replicated
however, pauses will only be 1 second. The results from the 1 second pause, will
be used as a control to compare results from the extended 3 second pause. The
1 second pause will be tested on the second lesson because students will have
more knowledge of the topics after the lesson on Wednesday.
Data Collection
For each Mathematics lesson (2 p/w for 5 weeks), data will be collected using
three different techniques.
-

Observational Recording Sheet (Refer to appendix 1 and 2)

As the mentor teacher will be observing all lessons, observational
recording sheets have been created for the teacher to collect data from
Maths lessons on Wednesdays and Thursdays. The recording sheets will
provide an overview of the number of questions asked using a tally.
Students who voluntarily raise their hand will be recorded, and students
who rarely participate in class discussions will be also be noted. The
quality, relevance and length of responses will be commented on by the
mentor teacher.

Students Recorded Responses

Preceding the 3 second (or 1 second) wait time, students will be asked to
write their responses down on paper and from here some students will be
required to verbalise their answers with the class. These written
responses will be collected and analysed, focusing on the quality of the
answer, the length and how the answers differ from other students
responses. This analysis of responses can determine the effectiveness of
wait time by reflecting how students use this time. The responses from the
3 second wait time and 1 second wait time will be compared to make
comparisons about the length, quality and variety.

Julia Mastripolito
-

110066420

Reflective Journal
After each Maths lesson, a reflection will be written expressing attitudes,
beliefs, emotions and thoughts regarding questioning strategies and the
responses of the students. Journals create a record of what occurred as
well as accompanying feelings, reactions and thoughts throughout the
research process (Grundy, 1995). The importance of teacher reflections is
emphasised by Le Cornue and Peters (2005) to promote better teaching
practices. The journal reflections will be completed in conjunction with
discussions with the mentor teacher or other pre-service teachers to
promote personal development and professional learning. This is based on
Freiman-Nemsers (2001) theory that reflective discussions are also a
powerful reflective tool.

Data Analysis
Collection and analysis of observational and reflective data provides concrete
evidence to support the effectiveness of techniques that can be implemented to
improve teaching practice. The effectiveness of Post-Teacher Question Wait-Time
will be analysed by comparing the length of wait time with the quality of
answers. If the quality of written responses and number and variety of students
answering questions increases, while responses such as I dont know or failures
to respond decreases, this will support the effectiveness of Post-Teacher
Question Wait-Time. If this is the case, the hypothesis that extended PostTeacher Question Wait-Time of 3 seconds will increase the quality of answers,
number of volunteers and decrease incorrect responses, when compared to a 1
second wait time will be supported.
The data collected through the use of the observational recording sheet will be
collated and determine whether there was a difference in the responses
between a 1 second and 3 second wait time. The focus of this data analysis will
be on the varying number of students volunteering to share an answer, between
the 1 and 3 second wait times. Based on the literature, this quantitative data
should correlate a longer wait time with an increased number of volunteers.
The written responses from students will assist in analysing how effective PostTeacher Question Wait-Time is, in regards to length, quality and relevance of
responses. Students responses elicited from the 1 second wait time will be
compared to the same students responses from the 3 second wait time. Again,
a clear correlation should be found between the length of wait time and quality
of response.
The reflective journal will be analysed to focus on the feelings and attitudes
regarding the action research implementation and effectiveness. It will be
important to focus on how easy it was to implement wait time and how the
students seemed to respond. The journal will also highlight any discrepancies
that could skew the results.
Ethical Considerations
5

Julia Mastripolito

110066420

Confidentiality throughout this study will be maintained to provide anonymity to

students so that the teachers are not biased toward any particular student.
Students names will not be used in the Observational Recording Sheet,
Reflective Journal or for the written student responses. Instead, numbers will be
used to identify each child. Students will be told they are involved in a study that
will be used as part of a University assignment however, they will not be aware
what the study relates to, eliminating the risk of a placebo effect. Students will
be given the option to participate, if they do not feel comfortable being part of
the study, they will not be given a sheet to record their answers and will not be
included in data obtained from the Observational Recording Sheet. Students will
also be told they may withdraw from the study at any time if they do not feel
comfortable. Once the study has been completed, students will be told what the
study entailed and results will be discussed. They will be made aware that they
can seek support from their teacher or pre-service teacher to discuss the study
further.

Outcomes
If the hypothesis is supported in the research that follows, it will encourage the
implementation of extended wait time in classroom practice. Having to apply a
pause of 3 seconds when questioning during the data collection phase of
research, will hopefully allow one to feel more comfortable having a period of
silence after questioning that can be applied in different subject areas. During
the data collection phase, different techniques will be tested to time the 3
second pauses, such as counting in ones head or having a timer. The most
comfortable method will be used in future implementation of wait time. Stahl
(1994) discusses how during a 3 second wait time, teachers are able to consider
follow up questions more thoughtfully creating better quality questions for
students to explore. Therefore, at the end of the data collection phase, hopefully
effective questions and discussion techniques will be employed and become
more natural. Rowe (1986) describes the difficulty in implementing extended
wait times as teachers can be overly eager in wanting students to respond. One
needs to be conscious of allowing wait time to be effective by not using this time
to repeat questions but just sitting in silence, letting students consider the
question.
It will be interesting to note the effects that wait time has on behaviour, having
extended wait times may benefit most children however, for those who can be
disruptive during class discussions, extended wait time may increase unwanted
behaviour. Behaviour management strategies may need to be implemented to
decrease the effects that it has on the class, as disruptive behaviour may reduce
the ability of students in the class to produce better quality answers.
The results of this study rely heavily on the observations of the mentor teacher,
the problem that arises with this is that classrooms are often not a perfect
environment. There may be things happening that distract the mentor teacher
which will affect the accuracy of the results. This is especially difficult as the
class is situated in an open classroom with another class nearby. To counter this
6

Julia Mastripolito

110066420

problem, it will be attempted to schedule these Maths lessons when the other
class is participating in activities that take them away from the classroom. This
will also help the students to not be distracted by the other class.
It is hoped that the implementation of wait time in the classroom will encourage
students to become more confident in their answers and be more willing to share
and participate in class discussions. If Post-Teacher Question Wait-Time is
successful in producing increased length, quality and relevance of answers, the
classroom teacher may see the importance in implementing extended wait time
in their teaching practice in the future.

Julia Mastripolito

110066420

References
Dhindsa, HS 2010, Teacher communication in Bruneian secondary science
classes: Wait time, Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, Vol.
25, pp. 7388.
Duell, O.K 1994, 'Extended wait time and university student
achievement', American Educational Research Journal, vol. 31, no. 2, pp.
397-414.
Fagan, E. R, Hassler, D. M, & Szabo, M 1981, Evaluation of questioning
strategies in language arts instruction, Research in the Teaching of
English, vol. 15, pp. 267-273.
Freiman-Nemser S 2001, From preparation to practice: Designing a
continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching, Teachers College Record,
vol. 103, no. 6, pp. 1013-1055.
Grundy, S 1995, Action Research as Professional Development, Occasional
Paper 1 for the Innovative Links Project, Murdoch University, Perth.
Le Conrnu, R & Peters, J 2005, Towards constructivist classrooms: The role
of the reflective teacher, Journal of Educational Enquiry, vol. 6, no. 1, pp.
50-64.
Rowe, M. B 1972, Wait time and rewards as instructional variables, their
influence in language, logic and fate control, Paper presented at the
National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Chicago, IL.
Rowe, MB 1986, Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up,
American Educator, vol. 47, no. 11, pp.38-43.
Stahl, R. J 1982, How humans process information: A way of viewing how
individuals think and learn, Tempe: Arizona State University.
Stahl, RJ 1994, Using Think-Time and Wait-Time skilfully in the
classroom, ERIC Digest, Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science
Education, Bloomington, Indiana, pp. 1-6.
Tobin, K 1987, The role of wait-time in higher cognitive level learning,
Review of Educational Research, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 69-95.
Tobin, K. G 1986, Effects of teacher wait time on discourse characteristics
in mathematics and language arts classes, American Educational
Research Journal, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 191-200.
Winne, P. H, & Marx, R. W 1983, Students cognitive processes while
learning from teaching: Summary of findings (Occasional paper).
8

Julia Mastripolito

110066420

Burnaby, Canada: Simon Fraser University, Instructional Psychology

Research Group.

Observational Recording Sheet 1 Secon

Lesson Number

Number of Questions

Tally of students who

raised their hand
voluntarily to
respond to each
question

Number of s
who would n
normally rais
hands

Lesson 1

Lesson 2

Lesson 3

Lesson 4

Lesson 5

Julia Mastripolito

110066420

Appendix 1

Observational Recording Sheet 3 Secon

Lesson Number

Number of Questions

Tally of students who

raised their hand
voluntarily to
respond to each
question

Number of s
who would n
normally rais
hands

Lesson 1

Lesson 2

Lesson 3

Lesson 4

Lesson 5

Appendix

10

Julia Mastripolito

110066420

11