UWS BA ePDPs

Broad themes from the reading.
What is the main aim of the chapter?
– Develop a wider understand of the need for questioning
– Understand the various types of questioning and why it is used
– How questions can be influenced
– Understand how questions are presented and the impact this has
Identify three or four key themes within the chapter.
– Questioning Importance
– Questioning Structure
– Types of Questions

Claims and evidence
Can you identify any claims made in the chapter? What evidence is used to substantiate the claims – discuss one example.
– The chapter claimed that children do not answer questions in class due to the fear that their classmates will react negatively. This was followed by an example and US Study. This showed that as children grow older they feel less comfortable to ask or answer questions in the classroom. However males, whites, higher-income groups, those with higher self-esteem and those who felt accepted by their peers all felt more at ease to do so.

Analysis and evaluation
Pick one thing you might disagree with; what evidence can you use to defend this stance?
– I personally disagree with questions always being more important than the answer. I understand and agree that the question asked will help to guide the answer, however the answer can tell a lot about the individual. The chapter quotes Voltaire who states, “Judge a man not by his answers, but by his questions”. Questions can help to guide however an individual can still manipulate an answer to suit them, therefore telling us a lot about them and their morals. For example, within a court room with a suspect, they are likely to avoid the truth, showing they were guilty.

Knowledge and understanding
Identify words you are unsure of and find out what they mean
– Inapposite
– Meaning out of place or inappropriate
What theories or concepts are mentioned in the chapter?
“Funnel Sequence”
The Funnel Sequence is when questions asked are open: “What do you do at the weekends”. This allows the response to have many possible answers, then allowing questioner to gain understanding of the subject’s interests, needs and wants. As the conversation goes on, it gradually progresses to closed questions: “Where were you at 8pm last night”. The answer should then have only one real answer. This then looks like a funnel as it starts of wide, then gradually becomes more narrow.

 

‘Finding out about others: the skill of questioning’, in Hargie, O. (2011) Skilled Interpersonal Communication: Research, Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London: Routledge.

The Skill of Questioning – Hargie O.

The main aim of this passage is to stress the importance and relevance of questioning (in all forms) in our lives and communication skills.
It discusses the purpose of questioning, different types of questioning (closed, open, leading and recall to name a few) and when we might use them, and that asking questions can relate to having power i.e. if you’re a doctor or teacher as in the classroom it is the teacher who is asking the majority of the questions and doctors must ask questions to conclude a diagnosis.
The author uses lots of evidence to back up their statements, this was shown when they talked about how children with disabilities are subject to giving untrue and wrong answers when presented with leading questions. The author backed up this statement by having three other texts being referenced too. This means that what they are saying has been looked into and hypothesised by others. They have also backed up their evidence with diagrams of conversations, to emphasise the points they are making.
Waterman et al. (2001) claims that children become less accurate when they are asked closed questions, this is because when asked opened questions they will keep talking with all details they can remember with the odd prompt, whereas closed questions result in children responding with less detailed answers as they respond with what they have interpreted from the question. They also can get confused with yes or no questions because they may respond with no if they don’t understand the question or disagree rather than that being their actual response.

‘Finding out about others: the skill of questioning’, in Hargie, O. (2011) Skilled Interpersonal Communication: Research, Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London: Routledge.

 

This is a post-session task given after an input on Communicating in Schools, where we were asked to write a post reviewing the chapter of a book we were asked to read entitled “Finding out about others: the skill of questioning” (Hargie, 2011)

The main aim of the chapter is to inform about the diverse range of questioning techniques that are available, and how the answers can vary greatly depending on the mode of questioning method used.  This can be used to influence an individual’s opinions and responses to questions.  The key themes of the chapter are: communicative behaviours, communication in questioning and goals associated with this, getting what information is required, or not required, from questioning.

An interesting claim made was that of, when you want someone to respond in a particular way (subtle leads), by using carefully chosen wording, the example given “How tall was the basketball player?” the respondent guessed 79 inches. When asked “How short was the basketball player?” respondent guessed 69m inches (Harris, 1973). This would qualify the statement that say that if you want someone to answer a question in order to confirm your own belief, ask it with the wording biased to your own belief.

The idea of the social psychology of questioning in communication skills and the need to elicit as much information on the way people think and behave is an argument presented; people may answer differently when asked questions in a variety of ways depending on what answer they may think is being looked for.

One part of the chapter I did not agree with was regarding leading questions on children in the Orkney Satanic Abuse inquiry.  The responses by the child contradicts what is being asserted about leading questions, although the social worker did undoubtedly do this, she did not achieve what she set out to do as the child refused to agree with her.

Some theories and concepts in the chapter included:

Social interaction: the skill of being able to behave a certain way in a certain context, behaving differently with one group than in another group.

Recovered memory: where an event has been buried in memory and has resurfaced, possibly through therapy.

False memory: recalling of events (normally from childhood) that did not occur.

References

Hargie, O. (2011) Skilled Interpersonal Communication: Research, Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London: Routledge.

 

 

 

Group and leadership

We all brought different qualities to the group however, those who were familiar and confident with outdoor activities naturally fell into a leadership position within the group.

Those who acted as group leaders were not formally elected into this position, others just looked to them for assistance. E.g. confirming with the male group members that the structure would stand alone as they have previous den building experience.

The task felt informal which made it enjoyable and easy for everyone to work together. As it was informal, it was easy to speak to and build relationships with people I don’t normally work with.

All participants within the group had a role they were capable of, and comfortable with.

The whole group participated effectively and had a say in the process. We listened to each other and deliberated if certain structures would withstand the wind. Everyone was happy with the outcome and took responsibility for different elements of the den.

Explaining

The fact we were outside did not affect the clarity of the group’s explanation.  If any members found ideas complicated, we attempted to simplify it down for each other. E.g. I didn’t understand the structure, therefore Calum physically showed me (with materials) how they were going to build the side. I was still unsure why, therefore Evan explained the purpose of building it a certain way.

I think explanations were clear as all members had the same vision of what out den should have looked like.

In my opinion, we missed out “Planning”. We started building without assessing what the den would turn out like. In result there were a few issues. E.g. We didn’t notice we didn’t have enough sticks for the structure to be as strong as we wanted. If we had planned for this , we could have looked for other materials to use.

Environment

The environment changes how formal a situation feels. For example, communicating outdoors is informal and friendly. It is more enjoyable, in my opinion.

You have to make changes as communicating outdoors is more physical. You move about more and demonstrate things you are not able to in a classroom. You also have to project your voice due to background noise.

Communicating outside wasn’t a problem for our group. However, as a developing student teacher, I understand it is easier to communicate with children by standing against a wall for protection against noise (means they don’t have any other distractions too). Voice projection, body language etc are also important when communicating elsewhere.

The environment did distract me slightly as there were other things going on. Therefore, carrying out tasks in enclosed or quieter outdoor environments may prevent distraction and promote better listening.

Negotiation

Our negotiations were unsuccessful as we were unable to persuade a member of another group to join ours. In my opinion we were not prepared enough to persuade someone else to join our group. Other individuals also worked hard to build a good den, therefore were not very willing to join us.

Challenges

Other groups didn’t understand our vision- they were interested in their own group and den.

We weren’t prepared to negotiate from the start of the task, therefore we didn’t have a valid explanation as to why someone should join our group.

We had a lack of time so weren’t able to convince very well.

Yes, there was a group leader, this leader was not chosen. The leader stepped up and took control of the situation. The leader started conversations on what ideas the group had and allowed all members of the group equal time to share thoughts and ideas insuring that all members of the group felt included. This resulted in a positive ethos for the group as they all knew what goal they were working towards and the group members were working for each other. For me the most challenging thing about working in the group was at the start group members all had different ideas and when dismissing and choosing someone else’s ideas I was conscious and aware that someone else may feel unvalued and may feel their ideas were not listened to, but through conversations and reassurance as a group, we were able to make all team members feel valued. I think the group could have explained a little more clearly as they never discussed the planning stage of their den. However, I think communication would have been different if this was in a classroom and not to your friends and peers. I feel that as I was outside my communication was much more laid back and informal. Changes that I made when explaining could be my body language and how much I showed rather than said. Fortunately, the environment wasn’t to noise however if this was the case you may wait for that noise to pass or use strategies, so you are not competing against the noise. To avoid the environment distracting you can strategically place children where you are the focus or where there is little else to look at. The most challenging part of the negotiations was the impact it had on the former team as

On Tuesday, our workshop task was to go outside and build a den with a group of people who we would not normally work with to enhance our communication skills and to work better as a team.

There was no group leader, however, my group and I were able to agree or disagree on resources that we required and the structure of our den.  I personally feel that there were no challenges when working with my group as we all worked together and helped each other.

A few  “Purposes of Explaining” that I feel my group achieved would be “to simplify a complex idea” because we thought carefully and decided as a team where we would use certain materials to create our den and chose a location that would be easy to work with. Another purpose that was achieved would be “to express opinions regarding particular attitudes, facts or values” as all members of my team and I were able to contribute our opinions about our den.

The only challenge with working outside was that it was a bit windy sometimes, so we had to make sure our den was as strong as we could make it! There were also moments where we could not hear one another properly as there was chatter from groups nearby us.

We did not negotiate with the other groups as we had collected most of the resources available to us at the beginning of the task and were keen to use all of them!

From Hargie, O. (2011) Skilled Interpersonal Communication. 5th Edition. London: Routlege

In todays session (21/01/20) of Situated Communication we were outdoors creating dens. This post will be a reflection on the communication challenges.

Group and Leadership

• Our group didn’t have one person who was a group leader. Everyone within the group had an input into discussion in regards to what materials we needed, where to put our den and how to structure it so that we could all fit inside.
• Therefore, I believe that everyone in the group was able to contribute and no one felt excluded as everyone was doing something for example, some of use would collect materials while others stayed to build the den.

Explaining

• When creating the den I believe what was to be done was explained clear to myself.
• This was because the tasks to be completed were simple and if one person did not understand then we broke it down so the instruction was clearer.

Environment

• I felt that we didn’t need to talk as loud. This is because we were in an open environment and not a workshop setting where we might have had to speak over others so we could be heard.
• When discussions were happening as a whole group, keeping the group close together meant that we could hear what our instructions were making communication stronger.

Negotiation

• As a group we made little negotiations as we felt quite protective of our den and every element of it was important. We had some spare parts but very few groups were interested in them.