Cited by 75Science Education and PedagogyCommunication in Education and HealthcareInnovative Teaching Methods

Interaction of wait time feedback and questioning instruction on middle school science teaching

Swift, J. Nathan, Gooding, C. Thomas·1983·Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Abstract

Wait time, the duration of teacher pauses after questions, is an important variable in research on science teaching. This project investigated the effects of increasing teacher's wait times on general questioning skills in science teaching. In previous research, the influence of wait time training has been confounded with instruction in general questioning skills, making it difficult to test the hypothesis that increasing the wait time will by itself improve classroom discussions. In this project, these variables were separated through the use of four treatment groups made up of science teachers. One group received instruction in wait time using a newly developed electronic feedback device that monitors the duration of teacher and student pauses; a second group received instruction in general questioning skills; a third group received both types of instruction; a comparison group received no instruction of either type. The tape recordings were coded and analyzed for classroom interaction data. Comparisons were made using discriminant analysis, analyses of variance, and correlational relationships. The wait time feedback devices facilitated the production of wait time means consistently superior to baseline performance, albeit slightly below the 3‐second criterion sought. Regardless, the feedback groups did produce a large number of the hypothesized changes. Significant effects were found from a comparison of the discriminant function scores. Effects consistently favored the g…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/tea.3660200803

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Increased wait time, to a threshold of three seconds or more, gives students more time to think about the questions and is associated with positive changes in classroom interaction patterns, including increased number and length of student utterances.

    “Studies later found that an increased wait time, to a threshold of three seconds or more, gives students more time to think about the questions and is associated with positive changes in the classroom interaction patterns, including increased number and length of student utterances (Swift & Gooding, 1983) and student answers being”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Swift, J. N., & Gooding, C. T.
Affiliations
State University of New York at Oswego (US)
Venue
Journal of Research in Science Teaching
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1983-01
Volume
20
Issue
8
Pages
721-730
ISSN
  • 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2736
OpenAlex
W2055103072
Cited by
75
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7
FWCI
19.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Research in Science Teaching (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Communication in Education and Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
Keywords
waiting time, classroom discussion, middle school science teaching, teacher questioning skills, student contributions, student discourse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review