developing critical thinking through questioning and …

DEVELOPING CRITICAL THINKING THROUGH QUESTIONING

AND ROLE PLAY AMONG ELEMENTARY STUDENTS

Sumaira Rashid

Registration No. 11161100011

PhD Education

DIVISION OF EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION, LAHORE

2017

- ii -

Developing Critical Thinking through Questioning and Role Play

among Elementary Students

Sumaira Rashid

Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of

PhD

DIVISION OF EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION, LAHORE

2017

- iii -

Author’s Declaration

I Sumaira Rashid hereby state that my PhD thesis titled “Developing Critical

Thinking through Questioning and Role Play among Elementary Students” is my

own work and has not been submitted previously by me for taking any degree from

this University of Education or anywhere else in the country/world

At any time if my statement is found to be incorrect even after my graduate the

University has the right to withdraw my PhD degree.

______________

Sumaira Rashid

- iv -

Plagiarism Undertaking

I solemnly declare that research work presented in the thesis titled

“Developing Critical Thinking through Questioning and Role Play among

Elementary Students” is solely my research work with no significant contribution

from any other person. Small contribution/help wherever taken has been duly

acknowledged and that complete thesis has been written by me.

I understand the zero tolerance policy of the HEC and University of Education

Lahore towards plagiarism. Therefore I as an Author of the above titled thesis

declare that no portion of my thesis has been plagiarized and any material used as

reference is properly referred/cited.

I undertake that if I am found guilty of any formal plagiarism in the above

titled thesis even after award of PhD degree, the University reserves the rights to

withdraw/revoke my PhD degree and that HEC and the University has the right to

publish my name on the HEC/University Website on which names of students are

placed who submitted plagiarized thesis.

______________

Sumaira Rashid

- v -

Certificate of Approval

This is to certify that the research work presented in this thesis, entitled “Developing

Critical Thinking through Questioning and Role Play among Elementary Students”

was conducted by Ms Sumaira Rashid under the supervision of Dr. Shahzada

Qaisar.

No part of this thesis has been submitted anywhere else for any other degree.

This thesis is submitted to the Division of Education, in partial fulfilment of the

requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Field of Education, Division

of Education, University of Education, Lahore.

Student Name: __________________ Signature: __________

Examination Committee:

a) External Examiner 1: Name Signature:___________

(Designation & Office Address)

…………………………………..

…………………………………..

b) External Examiner 2: Name Signature:___________


…………………………………..

…………………………………..

c) Internal Examiner: Name Signature:___________


…………………………………..

…………………………………..

Supervisor Name: Signature:____________

Name of Dean/HOD: Signature:_____________

- vi -

Acknowledgement

- vii -

Abstract

The purpose and the first focus of the study was to examine whether

questioning and role play are viable and potentially productive teaching strategies in

developing students’ critical thinking at upper primary level in Pakistan. The second

research focus was to explore the effect of intervention on attitudes of students. The

study was conducted in two classrooms of one Public school over one term in the

academic year 2014. In relation with first research focus, design based research was

used as key methodology over two cases studies. Evidence was collected in a usual

classroom context in the form of observation (audio video recordings),

questionnaires, and field notes. The purpose was to collect data in the classroom that

was as natural as possible.

The first research focus was evaluated through the indirect evidence of its

effects on critical thinking. The first of these were considered the extent to which

students were displaying either in weak or moderate or strong critical thinking. The

analysis was corroborated by questionnaire results and class room discourse. Paul's

intellectual standards were used for teaching and as an analytical tool in examining

change in student's critical thinking. The findings of the study showed that the level

of critical thinking of students was changed from weak to strong in the end of the

intervention that presents the success of the intervention.

In relation with second focus of the study, change of students’ attitude was

measured by mean score through pre- and post- critical thinking questionnaires

based on Paul's intellectual trait model. The significant change in critical thinking

attitude was an evidence of the productivity of the intervention. The researcher

suggests that questioning and role play as productive teaching strategies may be

practiced by the elementary teachers to have greater participation in class and

increase of the level of students’ critical thinking.

- viii -

Contents

Author’s Declaration ............................................................................................... iii

Plagiarism Undertaking .......................................................................................... iv

Certificate of Approval ............................................................................................. v

Acknowledgement .................................................................................................... vi

Abstract .................................................................................................................... vii

Contents .................................................................................................................. viii

List of Tables ........................................................................................................... xv

List of Figures ......................................................................................................... xvi

Chapter I .................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1

1.1. Context of the Study ................................................................................. 1

1.2. Rationale of the Study ............................................................................... 2

1.3. Purpose of the Study ................................................................................. 4

1.4. Statement of Problem ................................................................................ 5

1.5. Significance of the Study .......................................................................... 6

1.6. Research Questions ................................................................................... 8

1.7. Outline of the Study .................................................................................. 9

Chapter II ................................................................................................................ 11

2.1. Etymology of Critical Thinking .............................................................. 11

2.2. History of Critical Thinking .................................................................... 12

2.3. Frameworks of Critical Thinking ............................................................ 15

2.3.1. Five stage model. .................................................................. 15

2.3.2. Ennis’s framework. ............................................................... 16

2.3.3. Bailin’s framework................................................................ 17

2.3.4. Paul’s framework. ................................................................. 18

2.3.5. Theoretical framework. ......................................................... 19

2.4. Critical Thinking and Questioning .......................................................... 24

2.4.1. Functions of teacher questions. ............................................. 24

2.4.2. Classification of teacher's questions. .................................... 25

2.4.3. Paul questioning model. ........................................................ 27

2.5. Critical Thinking and Role Play .............................................................. 28

2.6. Assessment of Critical Thinking ............................................................. 33

2.6.1. Critical thinking dispositions, attitudes or habit of mind. ..... 34

2.6.2. The Delphi’s report. .............................................................. 35

- ix -

2.6.3. Ennis’s model. ....................................................................... 37

2.6.4. Paul’s model. ......................................................................... 38

2.6.5. Fisher’s model. ...................................................................... 41

2.6.6. Halpern’s model. ................................................................... 42

2.6.7. Kuhn’s model. ....................................................................... 44

2.7. Factors Influencing Students’ Critical Thinking ..................................... 45

2.7.1. Teacher’s role. ....................................................................... 46

2.7.2. Social context. ....................................................................... 50

Chapter III ............................................................................................................... 53

3.1. Research Design ...................................................................................... 53

3.1.1. Research approach. ............................................................... 53

3.1.2. Case study method. ............................................................... 54

3.1.3. Design based research. .......................................................... 56

3.2. Selection of Participants .......................................................................... 59

3.3. Piloting of Instruments. ........................................................................... 61

3.4. Data Collection........................................................................................ 62

3.4.1. Questionnaire. ....................................................................... 62

3.4.2. Observation. .......................................................................... 64

3.4.3. Field notes. ............................................................................ 66

3.5. Data Generation ...................................................................................... 67

3.5.1. Intervention. .......................................................................... 67

3.5.2. Generating the data. .............................................................. 70

3.6. Data analysis ........................................................................................... 70

3.6.1. Analysis of video data. .......................................................... 71

3.6.2. Analysis of questionnaire data. ............................................. 74

3.6.3. Inter coder reliability. ............................................................ 75

3.7. Trustworthiness ....................................................................................... 76

3.7.1. Credibility. ............................................................................ 76

3.7.1.1. Prolonged observation engagement. .............................. 76

3.7.1.2. Triangulation. ................................................................. 76

3.7.1.3. Iterative questioning. ...................................................... 77

3.7.1.4. Peer and debriefing expert. ............................................ 77

3.7.1.5. The researcher's reflection. ............................................ 78

3.7.1.6. Neutrality of the researcher............................................ 78

3.7.2. Conformability. ..................................................................... 78

- x -

3.7.3. Transferability. ...................................................................... 79

3.7.4. Dependability. ....................................................................... 79

3.8. Ethical Consideration .............................................................................. 80

3.8.1. Informed consent. .................................................................. 80

3.8.2. Anonymity of participants. ................................................... 80

3.8.3. Confidentiality. ..................................................................... 81

3.9. Summary ................................................................................................. 81

Chapter IV ............................................................................................................... 83

4.1. Questionnaire .......................................................................................... 83

4.1.1. Analysis of questionnaire in questioning classroom. ............ 85

4.1.2. Descriptive analysis. ............................................................. 85

4.2. Analysis of Role Play Classroom ............................................................ 88

4.2.1. Descriptive analysis. ............................................................. 88

4.2.2. Non-parametric analysis........................................................ 89

Chapter V ................................................................................................................. 92

5.1. Analytical Framework ............................................................................. 92

5.2. Initial Analysis ........................................................................................ 95

5.2.1. Part A: Initial analysis of questioning classroom. ................ 96

5.2.2. Results of case I: Questioning classroom.............................. 97

5.2.2.1. Episode-1 (weak). ......................................................... 100

5.2.2.2. Episode-2 (Weak). ........................................................ 103

5.2.2.3. Episode-6 (Weak). ........................................................ 105

5.2.2.4. Episode-8 (Weak). ........................................................ 107

5.2.2.5. Episode-10 (Fair). ........................................................ 110

5.2.2.6. Episode-12 (Moderate). ................................................ 112



5.2.2.9. Episode- 18(Moderate). ................................................ 117

5.2.2.10. Episode-20 (Moderate). .............................................. 118





5.2.2.15. Episode-30 (Strong). .................................................. 127

5.2.3. Part B: Initial analysis of role play classroom. ................... 130

- xi -

5.2.4. Results of case II: Role play classroom. ............................. 132

5.2.4.1. Episode 1 (Weak). ......................................................... 134

5.2.4.2. Episode 3 (Moderate). .................................................. 136




5.2.4.6. Episode 11 (Moderate). ................................................ 141

5.2.4.7. Episode 13 (moderate). ................................................ 142

5.2.4.8. Episode 15 (moderate) ................................................. 143

5.2.4.9. Episode 17 (moderate). ................................................ 143

5.2.4.10. Episode 19 (Strong). ................................................... 144

5.2.4.11. Episode 21 (Strong). ................................................... 145

5.2.4.12. Episode 23 (Strong). ................................................... 146

5.2.4.13. Episode 25 (Strong). ................................................... 147

5.2.4.14. Episode 27 (Strong). ................................................... 148

5.2.4.15. Episode 29 (Strong). ................................................... 149

5.3. Deep Analysis ....................................................................................... 150

5.4. Deep Analysis: Evidence from Questioning Classroom ....................... 152

5.4.1. Turn by turn analysis of episode 2. ..................................... 152

5.4.2. Turn by turn analysis episode 28. ....................................... 153

5.4.3. Turn by turn analysis of episode 30 .................................... 155

5.4.4. Comparison of episode-2, episode-28 and episode-30. ...... 157

5.5. Deep Analysis: Evidence from Role Play Classroom ........................... 162

5.5.1. Episode-1. ........................................................................... 162

5.5.2. Episode-7. ........................................................................... 163

5.5.3. Episode-29 .......................................................................... 165

5.5.4. Comparison of episode-1, episode-7 and episode-29. ........ 167

5.6. Factors Influencing Critical Thinking ................................................... 170

5.6.1. Teacher's role. ..................................................................... 170

5.6.1.1. Teachers’ scaffolding through probing questions. ....... 170

5.6.1.2. Teacher intervenes to manage the classroom

situation. .............................................................................. 173

5.6.1.3. Teacher helps students in subject matter...................... 176

5.6.1.4. The Teacher initiate reciprocal question. .................... 177

5.6.2. Social context. ..................................................................... 178

- xii -

5.6.3. Comparison social context in questioning and role play

classroom. .................................................................................... 188

Chapter VI ............................................................................................................. 189

6.1. Critical Thinking Attitude Questionnaire.............................................. 189

6.2. Questionnaire Analysis - Questioning Classroom ................................ 191

6.2.1. Descriptive analysis. ........................................................... 191

6.2.2. Non-parametric test analysis. .............................................. 192

6.3. Questionnaire Analysis - Role Play Classroom .................................... 194

6.3.1. Descriptive analysis. ........................................................ 195

6.3.2. Non-parametric analysis. ................................................. 195

Chapter VII ........................................................................................................... 198

7.1. Impact of Intervention ........................................................................... 199

7.2. A Discussion on Episode Analysis ....................................................... 201

7.3. Section A: Questioning Classroom ....................................................... 202

7.3.1. A discussion on episode 2. .................................................. 202

7.3.1.1. Poor background of English. ........................................ 202

7.3.1.2. Scaffolding. ................................................................... 204

7.3.1.3. Take more time in comprehension of ideas. ................. 205

7.3.2. A discussion on episode 29. ................................................ 207

7.3.2.1. Improves autonomy and self-worth. ............................. 207

7.3.2.2. Application of knowledge in real context. .................... 208

7.3.2.3. Improves decision making power. ................................ 208

7.3.2.4. Develop positive attitudes. ........................................... 209

7.3.2.5. Debriefing. .................................................................... 209

7.3.2.6. Role of teacher. ............................................................. 210

7.3.2.7. Supporting student meaning making. ........................... 210


7.3.3.1. Probing questioning. .................................................... 211

7.3.3.2. Improves sequence of time through long interaction

of questioning. ..................................................................... 213


7.3.4.1. Wait time/Pausing. ....................................................... 214

7.3.4.2. Supportive environment. ............................................... 215

7.3.4.3. Premeditated and long process of critical thinking

to establish. ......................................................................... 216

7.3.5. A discussion on comparison of epi-2, epi-28 & epi-30. ..... 217

- xiii -

7.4. Section B: Role Play Classroom .......................................................... 219



7.4.2.1. Collaboration of students. ............................................ 221

7.4.2.2. Learning through mistakes. .......................................... 223

7.4.2.3. Enhance empathy skills. ............................................... 224

7.4.2.4. Enhance motivation. ..................................................... 225

7.4.2.5. Improves social learning experience. ........................... 226

7.4.2.6. Debriefings. .................................................................. 227

7.4.3. A discussion on the comparison of epi-1, epi-7 and epi-

29. ............................................................................................. 227

7.5. A Discussion on Quantitative Analysis................................................. 228

7.6. A Discussion on Students’ Attitude ...................................................... 232

7.7. A Discussion on the Factors Influencing Critical Thinking ................. 234

7.7.1. Teacher's role. ..................................................................... 234

7.7.1.1. Scaffolding through probing. ....................................... 235

7.7.1.2. Teacher as a manager. ................................................. 238

7.7.1.3. Teacher helps in content. .............................................. 239

7.7.1.4. Summary. ...................................................................... 241

7.7.2. Social context. ..................................................................... 241

Chapter VIII .......................................................................................................... 244

Conclusions and Implications ........................................................................ 244

Limitations. ........................................................................................... 251

References .............................................................................................................. 253

Appendices Questioning Classroom Episodes .................................................... 277

Appendix 1, Episode 1 (Discipline) ............................................................... 277

Appendix 2, Episode 2 (Shopping) ................................................................ 280



Appendix 5, Episode 10 (Cleanliness) ........................................................... 289

Appendix 6, Episode 12 (Grand, pa's garden) ............................................... 291

Appendix 7, Episode 14 (Earth Day) ............................................................. 294

Appendix 8, Episode 16 (My Country) .......................................................... 297

Episode 18, (My Country).............................................................................. 299

Appendix 9, Episode 20 (Aeroplane) ............................................................. 301

Appendix 10, Episode 22 (Safety Rules) ....................................................... 303

- xiv -

Appendix 11, Episode 24 (Sun Travels) ........................................................ 306



Appendix 14, 30 (Pollution) ........................................................................... 312

Appendices Role play Classroom Episodes ........................................................ 316

Appendix 15, Episode 1 (Respect for Feelings) ............................................ 316

Appendix 16, Episode 3 (Respect for difference) .......................................... 320

Appendix 17, Episode 5 (Self-respect) .......................................................... 323

Appendix 18, Episode 7 (Respect for Rules) ................................................ 325

Appendix 19, Episode 9 (Telling a lie) .......................................................... 328

Appendix 20, Episode 9 (Telling a lie) (Role play 2 group 2) ....................... 329

Appendix 21, Episode 11 (Telling a lies) ...................................................... 331

Appendix 22, Episode 11 (Role play scenario 2) ........................................... 332

Appendix 23, Episode 13 (Friendship) .......................................................... 334

Appendix 24, Episode 15 (Friendship) .......................................................... 336

Appendix 25, Episode 17 (Peer pressure) ...................................................... 338

Appendix 26, Episode 19 (Cheating) ............................................................. 340

Appendix 27, Episode 21 (Good man and his son) ........................................ 342

Appendix 28, Episode 23 (The blind man and elephant) ............................... 344

Appendix 29, Episode 23 Debriefing Questions ............................................ 345

Appendix 30, Episode 25 (Earth day) ............................................................ 346

Appendix 31, Episode 25 ............................................................................... 348

Appendix 32, Episode 27, .............................................................................. 349

Appendix 33, Strong Episode 29 (God is great) ............................................ 350

Appendix 34, Questionnaire critical thinking Attitude .................................. 353

Appendix 35, Questionnaire Critical thinking ............................................... 355

Appendix 35: Transcription coding ............................................................... 356

- xv -

List of Tables

Table 3.1 Discourse Trends in the Analysed Episodes throughout the Intervention

in the Questioning Classroom

72


in the Role Play Classroom

73

Table 4.1 Standards as Teaching and Analytical Tool 83

Table 4.2 Wilcoxen Signed Ranked test indicates the difference of pre and post

subscales of critical thinking in Questioning classroom

87

Table 4.3 Wilcoxen Signed Ranked test indicates the difference of pre and post

subscales of critical thinking in role play classroom

90

Table 5.1 Standards as Teaching and analytical tool 93


in the Questioning Classroom

99


in the Role Play Classroom

133

Table 5.4 Extract from Epi-1 171

Table 5.5 Extract from Epi -6 172

Table 5.6 Extract from Epi -6 174




Table 5.10 Extraxt from Epi-14 182



Table 5.13 Extract from role play classroom Epi-5, debriefing questions 186

Table 6.1 Intellectual traits as analytical tool 190

Table 6.2 Wilcoxon Signed Ranked test indicates the difference among subscales

of Attitude before and after the intervention in Questioning classroom

193

Table 6.3 Wilcoxon Signed Ranked Test indicates the Difference among

Subscales of Attitude Before and After the Intervention in role-play

classroom

196



- xvi -

List of Figures

Figure 3.1 Transcript numbering 71

Figure 4.1 Mean difference of student's performance in pre and post-test of

critical thinking in questioning classroom

86

Figure 4.2 Mean difference of student's performance in pre and post-test of

critical thinking in role play classroom 89

Figure 5.1 Discourse trends in analysed episodes throughout the intervention in

questioning classroom

98

Figure 5.2 Discourse Trends in the Analyzed Episodes throughout the

Intervention in role play classroom

132

Figure 6.1 Mean difference in student's performance in pre and post critical

thinking attitude in questioning class room

192

Figure 6.2 Mean difference in student's performance in pre and post critical

thinking attitude in role play class room

195

- 1 -

Chapter I

Introduction

This chapter begins with a brief context of the study and rationale for conducting an

intervention study. It then presents the statement of the problem, purpose of study,

significance of the study, research questions and finally a summary of the

forthcoming chapters is outlined.

1.1. Context of the Study

In Pakistan, the Ministry of education governs the education. Generally, the

Pakistani education system is divided into three main systems; public, private and

madrasas. First, the public schools are largely Urdu medium and cater education for

middle and lower middle class people of the society. Second, the private schools that

are divided into two sub levels; (i) elite private schools, mainly provide education to

upper class and upper level of middle class people and (ii) non-elite private schools

are so called ‘English medium schools’ where the curriculum is in English but mostly

teachers and students communicate in their native langue. These schools are first

choice of the parents of lower level of middle class who are unsatisfied with the

public schools education system and cannot afford the expenses of elite private

schools. However, the number of such schools is enormously increasing day by day

in urban and rural areas (Qaisar, 2011). Third, madras schools provide free formal and

religious education, boarding and to poor and deprived people of the society. This

study is conducted at upper primary level of public school

- 2 -

1.2. Rationale of the Study

The researcher as a student and teacher observes that Education in Pakistan is

always examination-inclined, and teaching English is still a process of transmission of

knowledge, rather than a process of meaning construction. Pakistani education system

is mostly producing the best breed of parrots and these creatures are supposed to

produce staggering amount of useless information from their memory banks (Malik,

2005).Such aimless education system is the real issue which is needed to be revamped

and invigorated.

The failure rate of students in English is noticeable in the Pakistani institutions

(Jilani, 2004). Many students give up their study because of poor results in English

(Gillani, 2000) and the common reason of unsatisfactory results at elementary,

secondary and higher level (see section 1.1) was student failure in achieving their set

targets especially in English. In the similar fashion if we speak about "different

reasons to fail in English, one of these can be its teaching methods because right

choice of teaching method can make teaching learning process successful. For

example, some common methods like direct method and grammar translation are

considered the best approach for teaching and learning of English in Pakistani

context. In direct method of teaching, the teacher presents students with step-by-step

instructions. Students needed only to acquire that piece of knowledge first and then to

master it through drilling exercises. So, the teachers are most concerned in transfer of

factual knowledge rather than development and assessment of critical thinking skills

(Akram & Mehmood, 2011).Another teaching method grammar translation method is

also very much common in Pakistani institutions in which translation exercises are

given to students in their mother tongue. Teachers merely slogging at structured

grammatical patterns and encouraging cramming of vocabulary for the sake of

- 3 -

learning of (Patil, 2008). Ironically, such approach makes the subject desolate by

emphasizing boring English grammar drill, meaningless grammar construction and

long array of word retention (Nunan, 1989). Consequently, the approach of teaching

English in Pakistani's schools is traditional. The classroom context is teacher centered

where they performs as authority. They decide the content and the method of English

language teaching which usually is drill and book reading method. They teach

students to rote memorize the whole decided material to pass the examination.

On the other side students are supposed to follow all the teacher’s instructions

and to demonstrate the best use of their memory skills. In such context teacher is

viewed as a rigid and authoritative figure who instruct everything to students in the

classroom and students behave like puppets who follow all guidelines of teachers

blindly. The classroom context presents the picture where students sit passively and

respond only when teacher ask the questions. However, their interaction with other

students is often discouraged. The education system of Pakistan is not inculcating the

rational, independent and critical thinking skills among students at all levels. The

focus is to filling the minds of students with dogmatic and unscientific factual

knowledge (Malik, 2005).

In contrast to the teacher-centred approach, there is a dire need to promote such

pedagogies like questioning, argumentation, reflection and role play etc. These

pedagogies would be valuable if they facilitate in developing critical thinking skills

among students by clear and logical conceptualization, comprehension, analysing and

applying the knowledge achieved through observation, experience, reflection or

reasoning to shape beliefs and actions (Silva, 2008).

In critical thinking classroom, the role of a teacher is different from traditional

classroom role in which he/she engages the students in critical thinking process, plays

- 4 -

his/her role as a facilitator, encourages students for open discussion and regulates free

thought process to brainstorm their ideas to share in the classroom. As Hurley &

Hurley (2013) state that teacher as a facilitator involves students in the continuous

process of own meaning making through evaluating conflicting views and illogical

opinions of their peers. Keeping in mind all these facts, teachers’ practices at

classroom and scarcity of research in the area of critical thinking in Pakistani context,

I decided to carry out an intervention of two students centred teaching strategies such

as 'questioning’ and ‘role play’ to promote critical thinking through English

curriculum. It is supposed that learning is possible if critical thinking skills are

incorporated into all school level subjects that may enhance the interest and

motivation of the students to learn the subject matter deeply and increase their

academic achievement (Zohar & Dori, 2003). It is assumed that these strategies can

be productive if they promote critical thinking skill through English which may affect

indirectly student's learning and their attitudes. This study is an exploration of the

above assumption in primary English classrooms.

1.3. Purpose of the Study

It is an attempt to design and implement an intervention to develop critical

thinking and critical thinking attitudes among students through curriculum at upper

primary level in English classroom. Through present study, an intervention is

employed over a span of whole academic term to develop critical thinking skills

through English curriculum in a usual classroom.

First, assumption of the study was that ‘questioning’ and ‘role play’ can be

productive teaching strategies, if both bring change among students in developing

critical thinking at primary level. The critical thinking was analyzed by using of Paul

standards (Paul & Elder, 2008) that revealed the extent to develop critical thinking

- 5 -

skills either in weak, moderate or strong critical thinking over the whole period of

intervention. The change was measured through observation and pre and post

questionnaires. It provided evidence that intervention has brought about the cognitive

change, and therefore strategies used for intervention are viable and can be

productive.

Second, assumption here was that ‘questioning’ and ‘role-play’ can be

productive strategies if they bring change in attitudes. The attitude is analyzed by

intellectual traits model (Elder & Paul, 1994) that consist of intellectual humility,

intellectual autonomy, intellectual integrity, intellectual courage, intellectual empathy

and intellectual perseverance. If students’ attitudes change over the course of the

programme, this was taken evidence that intervention has brought about the attitude

change, and therefore strategies used for intervention are viable and can be

productive. This change was measured through pre and post questionnaires. The

analysis is made of in the start and in the end of the study based on the outcome of pre

and post questionnaires for all students of the class involve in the study. The analysis

reveals the extent to which students are interacting either in weak, moderate or strong

critical thinking attitude.

Third assumption of the study was to explore the factors that influence the

promotion of critical thinking skills among elementary students of Public school of

Pakistan.

1.4. Statement of Problem

Developing critical thinking among students is quite difficult task because of

traditional teaching strategies and attitude of teachers and students. As both teachers

and students think it easier to transfer and rote memorise the facts provided through

teacher and course books rather to evaluate facts and arguments before making

- 6 -

decisions. Traditional teaching strategies such as book reading and drill method are

commonly used in Public primary schools. The promotion of critical thinking through

such traditional methods is not possible as these methods create stagnated thinking

with clogged and narrow minded individuals. Students are not encouraged to question

any information in the classroom rather forced to accept the dogmatic and unscientific

information by the authority. Critical thinking needs context and time to establish and

in such environment it is not possible to promote critical thinking. Questioning and

role play two teaching strategies are assumed to develop critical thinking among

students in the present study. Although in traditional class room of Pakistani schools

questions are asked from students yet these questions are content based and students

are supposed to bring answers from available course book. In the study, thought

provoking probing questions are used to stimulate thinking of students in order to

make them independent thinker and evaluator of their own thinking. For the

evaluation of thinking Paul's model of intellectual standard is suggested more

appropriate. It is also assumed that critical thinking if developed through questioning

and role play it will influence the attitudes of students. Paul' trait model is

recommended significant in the study to examine the effect of critical thinking on

attitude of students.

1.5. Significance of the Study

All over the world, it is generally accepted that critical thinking skills are

essential for an individual's success in meeting with new challenges in ever-changing

world where rational and evaluative skills are considered crucial for sound judgment.

The worldwide scholars and Psychologists, agreed upon, the reality that critical

thinking makes students independent to set their goals and targets and it also develops

their own consensus on complex issues of life.

- 7 -

Researchers across the world generally agreed upon the pivotal role of critical

thinking in individuals general as well as in academic life (Bloom, 1956; Ennis, 2003;

Dewey, 1933).They describe critical thinking as integral part of general education

instead of being merely an option of education (Ennis, 1989, 1992; Paul, 1995) and

believe such thinking is not limited to any subject, content or area rather it serves as a

mean of improvement in thinking by avoiding irrational and illogical thoughts (Paul,

2008) and continuously strives for removing distorted thoughts and improve one’s

intellectual and reasoning abilities (Elder, 2004).

The present study may provide guidelines and a framework for teachers to

adopt questioning and role play strategies to promote their students’ critical thinking

skills. My current research introduced critical thinking pedagogy that can be

implemented in elementary schools to enhance student's critical thinking skills. There

is worldwide consensus that if we want to produce innovative and challenging

students in this demanding world then we need to equip them with rational and sound

knowledge to question preconceived realities and to take their own decisions justified

and supported by strong proofs. Elder (1996) argues that critical thinking provides us

opportunity to learn from multiple perspectives through using critical lenses to make

sound and rational judgments about different contexts. The scope of critical thinking

is not limited to any specific field of life or any subject area of education. It is an

essential skill for every field of life. It is a dire need of Pakistani institutions to

develop critical thinking among students to overcome the negative effects of

conventional teaching that is only producing crammers rather than evaluators or

rational thinkers. The present study will help teachers to promote critical thinking

through using two teaching strategies questioning and role play in usual classroom.

Teachers can improve their thinking and practice by challenging students through

- 8 -

questioning to explore the answer of the question beyond the context of the classroom

(Arend, 2009).

1.6. Research Questions

I started my research with the assumption that role-play as a teaching strategy

may be productive at upper primary level in Pakistan. Productivity in the sense of

increasing level of critical thinking from weak to moderate to high. The role play

strategy consists of two parts; i) performance on given script ii) debriefing (for detail

see section 3.5.1). In the first part, students were performing their roles on the given

script and in the second part, there was a whole class discussion on the format of Paul

questioning (see section 3.5.1). However, the researcher realized that role play and

questioning may separately contribute in developing critical thinking. Therefore, the

researcher decided to use questioning strategy separately in another classroom as a

second case. Now the intervention consists of two teaching strategies; questioning and

role-play instead one. I am not only analysing the increasing level of critical thinking

if any but also comparing and contrasting of these two cases. In the light of literature

(see section 2.6.1) I did not focus only on the cognitive part by the analysis of critical

thinking but its affective part by analysing traits which were developed in the result of

critical thinking. So analysis of critical thinking attitude of the students involved in

intervention would be another evidence for the productivity of the intervention.

Researcher analysed there are many factors that influence in the development of

critical thinking. I am taking two of them that appeared more dominantly in the study.

In this perspective my research questions are:

Q. No. 1. What is the effect of intervention on the development of critical

thinking at upper primary level in Pakistan?

a) Is role play a viable and productive teaching strategy at upper primary

level in Pakistan?

- 9 -

b) Is questioning a viable and productive teaching strategy at upper

primary level in Pakistan?

c) Does intervention change the critical thinking attitudes of the students

to become stronger at upper primary level in Pakistan?

Q. No. 2. What factors influence the productive potential of intervention at

upper primary level in Pakistan?

a) How level of critical thinking is affected during intervention at upper

primary by the role of teacher?

b) How level of critical thinking is affected during intervention at upper

primary level by social context?

1.7. Outline of the Study

Chapter-1; provides context, rationale, purpose, statement of the problem,

significance of critical thinking for elementary students. It entails the possible

research questions of the study. In the end, it presents the summary of all chapters.

Chapter-2; includes theoretical and practical issues of critical thinking from the

literature. This chapter includes sections on history of critical thinking, various

frameworks, constructivism as framework of the study, critical thinking among

children, different teaching strategies including critical thinking and questioning,

critical thinking and role play, assessment of critical thinking, critical thinking and

dispositions or attitudes, factors influence students’ critical thinking.

Chapter-3; provides the detail of methodology used in the study. I present the nature,

piloting and methodological issues surrounding the case study as a method. This is

followed by the presentation of the issues regarding the research tools, data collection,

and sources of information and generation of data through multiple sources such as

pre and post questionnaires and observation. In the end of the chapter i discuss the

elements and issues of trustworthiness of the study.

Chapter-4; is concerned with analysis of data collected from two classrooms to

answer the research question. This chapter reports the extent of quantitative cognitive

change occurred in students’ critical thinking in the result of intervention that consists

- 10 -

of two teaching strategies; questioning, role play in two different English classroom

of Grade 4. This section further divided into two sub sections: (i) Quantitative

analysis of questioning strategy, (ii) Quantitative analysis of role playing strategy.

Chapter-5; explains the analysis of classroom discourse emerged during intervention

and divided into two further parts; part-1 and part-2. Part-1 deals the initial analysis of

all recorded episodes and Part-2 discusses about the deep analysis of some selected

episodes in which critical thinking was very high or very low with the purpose to

explore the factors involved. In the end of the chapter, I elaborate some factors

emerged from the data which influence critical thinking of elementary students such

as teacher role and social context.

Chapter-6; states about the change of students’ attitude occurred in the result of

intervention. It presents the results of Pre and post critical thinking attitude

questionnaires.

Chapter-7; Discusses the findings of research in line with literature review and

analysis. I present the detail of the intervention and its usefulness for elementary

schools of Pakistan. I report the factors emerged during intervention .I also discuss the

quantitative analysis and the attitude questionnaire analysis and its usefulness for

Pakistani elementary schools.

Chapter-8; provides the conclusion of the study, which clarify the contribution of the

current study to the extant literature and present my suggestions based on some

limitations for future research.

- 11 -

Chapter II

Literature Review

In the chapter, I have discussed theoretical and practical issues of critical

thinking from the literature. This chapter includes sections on etymology and history

of critical thinking, different frameworks of critical thinking, constructivism as

framework of the study, critical thinking among children, different approaches,

critical thinking and questioning, critical thinking and role play, assessment of critical

thinking, critical thinking and dispositions or attitudes, factors influence students’

critical thinking.

This chapter discusses that how critical thinking is perceived in wider literature.

It presents the contrasting perspectives on development of critical thinking in young

children through developmental and socio cultural theories. The key idea is discussed

in the chapter that cognitive development and critical thinking development is not

viewed as individual entity, but as situated within socio and cultural context of the

learner. This chapter also discusses different teaching strategies that claim to promote

critical thinking in young children and describes some assessment criteria of critical

thinking. It provides detail on factors as well that hinder critical thinking of students.

2.1. Etymology of Critical Thinking

History of critical thinking reveals that critical word is originated in Greek word

"Kritikos" that means judgement and the second word "kriterion" gives meaning of

criteria or standards (Paul, 2009). The philosophical and intellectual roots of critical

thinking are traced in the philosophy of Socratic 2500 years ago who used probing

questioning technique to explore the answers of complex problems from human mind.

He opines that deep questions probe profoundly in to human thinking to infer the

conclusion logically. He emphasized on logic, reasoning and analytical skills in

- 12 -

making rational and sound judgment about any issue. His probing questioning

technique is well known strategy in promoting critical thinking. He believes that it is

the teacher who creates innovative ideas and reflects critically on conflicting issues of

the world. He challenged the beliefs of authority and argues that one should not

accept any illogical or irrational idea or decision presented by any authority (Delius,

Gatzemeier, Sertcan, & Wünscher, 2005).

Socratic practice is followed by Plato, Aristotle and other Greek philosophers

who mutually agree on one thing that only a critical thinker can understand and

explore the reality beneath the surface as things sometimes do not appear in their real

properties. Aristotle extended the meaning of critical thinking by introducing the rules

of reasoning such as syllogism and pair of propositions for inferring a conclusion

from multiple sources. He argues that a person can critically evaluate multiple issues

by making logical connections among different concepts. Majority of Greek scholars

mutually insist the need of systematic, comprehensive and well-reasoned thinking

based on rational arguments that make individuals to explore the implications broadly

and beyond the superficial surface (Carroll, 2004).

2.2. History of Critical Thinking

Many researchers and scholars have presented different models of critical

thinking yet they found it hard to achieve a single consensus on critical thinking. Paul

(2011) has presented history of critical thinking in three possible periods. He divided

these periods into Greeks, middle and renascence.

First period (1970-1982). According to him, the first period was dominated mostly by

philosophers. The dominated philosophers in this era were Aristotle, Dewey, Glaser,

McPeck, who focused on logic, theory, argumentation and reasoning of thought in

development of critical thinking. This period discusses only theoretical and cognitive

- 13 -

part of critical thinking and ignored the aspect of how the affective part of critical

thinking can be fostered.

In the first period, philosophers overly emphasized on logic and reasoning as a

mean of exploring reality, however there was a debate among scholars on using

reasoning and logic as a mean to understand critical thinking or to include logic as

integral part of critical thinking. Philosophers only promote argumentation through

logic and neglected the affective domain as emotions and feelings of humans.

Second period, 1980-1993. In this period Psychologists such as Brookfield (1987),

Cottrell, Ennis (1987), Delphi report (1990), Lipman (1988) emphasized only the

cognitive domain of critical thinking through using curriculum among individuals. It

focused on development of critical thinking but did not present the comprehensive

criteria of evaluation of quality of thinking.

In comparison with philosophers, psychologists promoted cognitive and

intellect theories to promote critical thinking (Bransford, 1998; Halpren, 1998).

Psychologists faced problems in infusing cognitive skills among students through

curriculum. They could not establish a link between skills and critical thinking and

believe that skills separately can make humans intellectual (Strenberg, 1987; Smith,

1993). In a nutshell, philosophers emphasize argumentative nature of critical thinking,

on the other side, Psychologists consider context most important in imparting critical

thinking among students.

The third period from 1990 till now. The Barnett, Ennis, Paul & Elder are prime

scholars of the period who discussed the issues of critical thinking deeply a

comprehensively with respect to learning and teaching and identified the gap between

theory and practice. They tried to not only open the debate on the issues that were

- 14 -

ignored in the first two periods but also suggested a model that is considered useful to

develop critical thinking in teaching and learning process.

As said earlier, scholars attempted to bridge the gap between first and second

period by overcoming the weaknesses of these two eras. For example, in the first

period researchers promoted the concept of logic, in the second period thinking skills

and context were on the top and the third period deals with the measurement of

thinking. In the first and second period nobody presented clear criteria or standard to

measure the quality of thinking. They did not focus on assessment of the quality of

thinking. Paul (2005) contributed valuable input in the area of critical thinking. He

presented a comprehensive model of critical thinking that although has commonality

with previous work of different scholars such as the idea of logic, reflection,

evaluation and different skills and dispositions. Yet his contribution was significant in

presenting all these facts in a systematic and organized hierarchy. He believes that

critical thinking is not a meaningless or haphazard idea rather it is a purposeful

thinking that can be nurtured in all academic disciplines. He argues that it is

imperative to measure the quality of thinking through using some intellectual

standards. He explains that through the intellectual fitness of mind a person can

actively develops intellectual traits/dispositions of mind. He argues that a critical

thinker can take charge of his/her thinking to make independent decisions of practical

life and during the development of critical thinking process he learns to adjust, adapt

and improves his/her thinking according to the context.

Paul and Elder (2007) argue that critical thinking enables individuals to strive

for rational, reasonable and sound solutions of the problems. They know the limits of

human thinking that is unreflective and irrational in a routine life. They use

intellectual tools to diminish the flaws of uncritical thinking and adopt the principals

- 15 -

and concepts that guide them to access, analyse and improve thinking. Such kind of

CT attitude helps them in developing intellectual dispositions as intellectual empathy,

intellectual humility, intellectual perseverance and courage and independence. Paul

and Elder (2007) do not care for either they are skilful thinker or not rather

understand that making errors in reasoning and comprehension is a natural human

tendency so they always strive for self-correction, removing biases and prejudices,

improves their concepts towards egocentricity and social centricity and make constant

efforts in transforming themselves as critical thinkers.

2.3. Frameworks of Critical Thinking

Many researchers and scholars presented different models of critical thinking

yet they found it hard to achieve a single consensus on critical thinking. Researchers

all over the world attempt to define such complex and abstract concept of critical

thinking in different ways. After Socrates , Dewy, another prominent contributor in

the critical thinking area defines critical thinking as an active, persistent and careful

consideration of a belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds

which support it and the further conclusions to which it tends (Dewey, 1938). He

believes in reflective thinking and importance of one's own beliefs based on reasoning

(Vacek, 2009). Dewey presented below five stage model of reflection that discusses

the importance of reflection in developing critical thinking.

2.3.1. Five stage model.

Dewey (1900) agrees that "the essence of critical thinking is suspended

judgment". He proposed five stage model of critical thinking in which a person

involves in 1) suggesting recommendations after reflecting on an issue, 2) defining a

problem, 3) suggesting hypothesis, 4) providing reasons of his/her conclusion and 5)

evaluating a hypothesis.

- 16 -

Although, Dewy emphasizes on reflection and evaluation of thought but he did not

clearly describe the definition of reflection and criteria of evaluation of reflective

thinking. He states that conclusion of any situation cannot be drawn until the issue is

not fully understood. Philly (2005) claimed such type of thinking lateral thinking that

always attempting for alternatives rather fixed conclusion. Dewy presented inductive

and deductive reasoning in understanding critical thinking concept. Fifty years later,

Smith (1959) denied the relationship of critical thinking and logic. He distinguished

teaching logic from teaching of critical thinking. Smith was doubted that over

emphasis on logic hinders the development of critical thinking. He presented both as

separate entities.

2.3.2. Ennis’s framework.

Two other prominent scholars, Ennis and Paulus (1965) showed agreement with

Smith’s idea of critical thinking. Ennis (1985) stated that logic can be a part of critical

thinking but it is not necessary to use logic for complete description of critical

thinking. Indeed, he presented some attributes of critical thinker such as the ability of

recognition and generalization of conclusion and assumptions. He agrees with three

parts of Bloom's taxonomy such as analysis, synthesis and application to describe

critical thinking. He criticized the Bloom's taxonomy for ignoring lower level

knowledge and stressing upon higher order skills such as analysis, synthesis and

application. He asserts that application of knowledge can be possible at any stage if a

person learn. Moreover, in order to meet the inconsistency in Bloom's taxonomy, he

presented a set of 13 disposition and 12 skills of critical thinkers. He believes that

critical thinker can clarify the ideas logically and rationally and can infer the

conclusion based on facts. As Ennis (1987) presents a framework which presents CT

skills and critical thinking dispositions separately for effective use of critical thinking.

- 17 -

In this framework he also presents the assessment ways of critical thinking. After

some time, Ennis and his collegues Daniel and Lawrence (1990) developed a Cornell

Critical Thinking test to assess critical thinking. In the test, respondents were asked to

respond weather the conclusion match or contradict with the statements.

Afterwards, Ennis and Weir (1990) developed another test to measure critical

thinking skills in which respondents were given more freedom and choices to evaluate

arguments. In the test respondents were expected to give arguments based on logical

reasoning. Respondents were assessed on the bases of their logical conclusions, upon

valid reasons and drawing accurate inferences of the statements.

2.3.3. Bailin’s framework.

In comparison, Bailin et al (1991) rejects all concept of critical thinking as

skills, dispositions and mental process. He presented critical thinking as "normative

enterprise" in which critical thinkers apply some standards to measure the authenticity

of their or other's thinking. He states that people can develop critical thinking in

already exciting context being aware of intellectual sources of background

knowledge, knowledge of certain criteria's or standards applied for evaluation of

thinking and possession of intellectual habits of mind. Bailin (1999) believes that

critical thinking always developed in such a context in which concepts, beliefs and

values are already formed. Such type of context contributes significantly in promoting

reasonable and profound thinking which is showing the application of standards.

Further, he argues that background knowledge, experience and skills in particular area

are significant in establishing critical thinking skills. He also indicates the importance

of knowledge of relevant standards at the operational level as a fundamental tool for

critical assessment of thinking. Accordingly, Bailin (1999) recommends that a critical

thinker should adopt multiple sources of knowledge to handle different complex real

- 18 -

life issues more effectively. He believes that it is imperative for a critical thinker to

reflect through certain important critical thinking attitudes, dispositions and habit of

mind. These attitudes or dispositions are as following; an inquiring mind, open-

mindedness, fair-mindedness, ability to looking for reasons and possible solutions of

different issues, respect for others point of views and work ethics.

2.3.4. Paul’s framework.

Paul (1995) extended Bailin work by presenting another comprehensive

framework for critical thinking. Although Bailin talks about standards and intellectual

traits but he did not establish link between standards and critical thinking skills and

dispositions. Paul framework includes three parts, elements of thought, intellectual

standards and intellectual traits. He argued that critical thinker can identify elements

of thought in all thinking about any problem of life. For instance , he can evaluate

his/her own thinking by checking the purpose, point of view, source of information,

type of interpretation and the conclusion is drawn . For the assessment of the quality

of critical thinking, Paul presented a comprehensive framework that includes

intellectual standards such as clarity, accuracy, relevance, depth, precision, logic and

breadth. Finally, Paul (1995) asserts that such type of thinking produces rational and

reasoned answers of the fact of life as a thinker goes through the disciplined and

reasoned process of thinking. A critical thinker does not seek only for multiple

perspectives in making alternatives but he/she also monitors his/her own

shortcomings and weaknesses to improve and his thinking is taken as self-monitoring

and self-correction. Paul (1995) recommends that after getting commands on elements

of thought and intellectual standards a person may develop intellectual traits of mind

such as autonomy, civility, confidence or faith in reason, courage, empathy,

intellectual humility, integrity, perseverance, , and fair-mindedness. According to

- 19 -

Paul's (1995) framework critical thinking has three major dimensions, First, cognitive

thinking (micro skills), second, cognitive thinking (macro skills) and third affective

thinking skills. He argued that only micro skills include 35 dimensions of critical

thinking. He further points out those both cognitive and affective skills are useless for

unmotivated persons who are unable to learn or think critically. In the study, for the

assessment of the quality of thinking, Elder and Paul's (1994) framework was used.

2.3.5. Theoretical framework.

For the development of critical thinking, constructive framework is believed

ideal due to the same nature of activities practiced in both contexts (Driscoll, 2000).

Constructivists believe that knowledge is subjective, contextual and inherently partial.

Students are not directed information rather led them to explore new information by

examining, clarifying, and inferring conclusions by themselves. Constructive class

room promotes reflective, critical and logical skills and attitudes among learners

(Sharma, 2006). It does not encourage students to accept reality at face value instead

enables them to challenge the reality by putting logical inferences. Critical thinking

and constructivism both invite students to ask questions, share ideas with each other,

probing, arguing with sound reasoning, challenging pre-existing assumptions and

distorted beliefs of others and make independent decisions in case of any complex

situation.

Constructivism historically rooted in Socratic questioning practice. Socrates

used dialogue with his students and asked challenging questions which led them to

realize the weaknesses of their thinking. Constructivist still uses Socratic questions to

develop and evaluate critical thinking of their students. After Socrates many other

prominent scholars presented different constructivism models to develop critical

thinking among students. Among these, Piaget, Bruner, Ausubel and Vygotsky (1978)

- 20 -

contributed valuable input in constructivism. Piaget presented individual

constructivism theory in which student construct his knowledge through involving

challenging classroom tasks by own. In comparison, Vygotsky (1978) introduced his

social constructivism model and believes that learning is social in nature. Students

crosses through different stages of physical, emotional, mental and social and each

stage provides him different set of knowledge and experience that determine the

extent of the capacity of the learner using this knowledge in real context.

In constructive class room, teacher plays a role as mentor, guide and facilitator,

conversely in conventional class room where he works as authority in transmitting

factual knowledge to passive learners who wait like for filling their empty vessels

with meaningless information and do not challenge the authority of teachers at any

stage. In the same lines, critical thinking requires the environment in which student

are the knowledge constructor and teacher is required to help students in knowledge

construction by engaging them in challenging tasks and questions. In both contexts,

teacher rummages around the comprehension of students of content and then develop

create atmosphere where they revise and refine their understandings through thought

provoking questions, discussion, posing contradictions and encoring research that

stimulate their critical thinking to challenge the exiting knowledge and to present their

new knowledge.

Constructivism and critical thinking both suggest same guidelines for the

teacher to keep in mind while teaching to instil critical thinking skills among students,

for instance, learning is not a robotic process rather is an active process in which

learners make sense of the context through cognition and social interaction, learning

is a social and contextual activity, motivation is key component of learning and

critical thinking and learning takes time to develop.

- 21 -

Constructivism is a student cantered philosophy in which student constructs his

knowledge through social interaction. Meaning is constructed by student and rooted in

his background knowledge and current knowledge (Kumar & Gupta, 2009). Student

learns through his personal experiences and scaffolding of teacher. Such experience

increase deep understanding of the content and class room activities (Santrock, 2006).

Learning is enhanced in such positive environment in which students learns through

building relationship and interaction with each other. Critical thinking requires such

conducive environment in which students not only fully engage in content acquisition

but to learn from those who are involve in the class room activities. Critical thinking

does not need mastery of content, yet it requires thought provoking questioning,

discussion and reflection (Nayak & Senapaty, 2009).

In traditional classroom, teachers often busy in training their students to rote

memorizing the content without thinking and questioning. In response, students

behaved remotely and passively while answering the questions elicited by the teacher.

They do not search for alternatives as teacher needs a single correct answer.

Conversely, in constructive classroom, teacher creates the environment in which

students build their own consensus towards the class room discussion by sharing,

exchanging and collaborating with each other (Marzano, 2007). In constructive class

rooms, teacher serves as facilitators and provides opportunities that challenge students

to think, illuminate, and formulate solutions to the problems. The constructivist

teacher does not impart content knowledge to students instead he supports the

environment that encourages the ownership of student's knowledge. Jenkins (2009)

asserts that content knowledge should be taught with integration of critical thinking

skills rather mere shift of isolated complex facts.

- 22 -

Vygotsky (1978) is a strong proponent of constructive school of thought. He

presented his theory of social constructivism which focuses on collaboration of

learning and development. He believes that children learn through social and

contextual factors such as religion, language, previous knowledge and collaboration.

Student first interacts with the environment on interpersonal level and internalizes his

experience. Such new experience affects his learning and makes child able to

construct his own meaning.

In Vygotskian (1978) class room, students take charge of their thinking in

making decisions. He advocates for creating such environment in which class room

activities should be practiced alongside real world context. He supports for assisted

discovery through teacher student and students -student interaction. Students learn

through questioning, predicting summarizing and clarifying concepts. He believes that

dynamic support and considerate guidance according to the need of the student

involve learners in discussion, searching out alternatives, finding outcomes

collaboratively. Constructivist class rooms engage students in collecting, filtering,

analyzing and reflecting on information provided that further transform it to personal

learning of students (Kim, 2006).

On logical grounds, there is no compelling reason to argue that Vygotskian

social constructive learning model is quite suitable for current study because

constructive model provides such context that is appropriate for promotion of critical

thinking. Vygotsky discusses three main features such as language, culture, zone of

proximal development and scaffolding to reinforce cognitive development which

further promotes critical thinking. Findings of the study are in line with Vygotsky's

model for instance, students demonstrated weak critical thinking in the earlier

episodes due to language barrier and unfamiliarity with class room context. In later

- 23 -

episodes, result showed that students presented strong critical thinking after

overcoming their language barrier, showing familiarity with class room context.

Moreover, scaffolding of teacher helps them to bridge the gap in their actual and

potential zone of proximal development by improving critical thinking level from

weak to strong level. Vygotsky strongly advocates that enriched learning environment

is essential for advancing learner's critical thinking through mutual learning

experiences from one another and also from scaffolding of teacher.

Furthermore, in critical thinking class room student is empowered to initiate

questions, freely interact with each other and develop social bonding such as

cooperation and tolerance for argumentative talk (Sadker & Sadker, 2003). On the

other side, teacher in critical class room creates such environment through probing

and thought provoking questioning, discussions, reflection and role play activities.

Social constructive learning model fulfils all criteria of development and advancement

of critical thinking.

Social constructive frame work is used as baseline for the current study. As

constructivists believe that knowledge is subjective, contextual and inherently partial.

Students are not directed information rather led them to explore new information by

examining, clarifying, and inferring conclusions by themselves. Constructive class

room promotes reflective, critical and logical skills and attitudes among learners. It

does not encourage students to accept reality at face value instead enables them to

challenge the reality by putting logical inferences. Critical thinking and

constructivism both invite students to ask questions, share ideas with each other,

probing, arguing with sound reasoning , challenging pre-existing assumptions and

distorted beliefs of others and make independent decisions in case of any complex

situation.

- 24 -

2.4. Critical Thinking and Questioning

By keeping in view the significance of questioning strategy in education, this

study encompasses systematic review on the importance of questioning in teaching

and learning in various disciplines especially in second language class room. It also

discusses the role of teacher and students in questioning class room.

2.4.1. Functions of teacher questions.

Although there is no appropriate way to teach critical thinking however,

researchers recommend those teaching strategies more appropriate in promoting

critical thinking which require students' motivation and active participation in

learning process instead of didactic teaching practice (Khatib, Marefat, & Ahmadi,

2012). Amongst all other teaching strategies it is the teacher's questioning that has

great impact on student's learning. Teachers also use it in developing critical thinking

skills among students (Farmer, 2006; McKenzie, 1997; Rop, 2003). However, critical

thinking is prompted by those questions which define the tasks, convey actual

problems and describe issues and ultimately support to reach on any conclusion (Paul

& Elder, 2006). Critical questions of teachers motivate students to think, analyse and

infer conclusion (Khan & Inamullah, 2011).

In usual classroom, teachers use questions to initiate talk between students.

Another purpose of the teacher's questions was to maintain classroom discourse and

to get feedback of students. Teachers usually use IRF exchange for classroom

questions in which teacher asks questions, student responds and teacher provides

feedback to the students (Mehan, 1979). IRF exchange is criticized for its robotic

pattern as it only initiates discourse but do not stimulate thinking to get answer

beyond the context (Van Lier, 2001).

- 25 -

Researchers report many taxonomies of questioning used by teachers. Barnes

(1975) presented the earliest taxonomy of four types’ questions in which first part

deals with factual questions, second part includes reasoning, third part entails opening

questions and the last part talks about social questions that deals with student

behavior. Banes divided reasoning questions in to two types, close ended and open

ended questions. He argues that open ended questions deal with opinions, beliefs and

feelings.

Ellis (2012) divided questions into two types, display questions and referential

questions, display questions validate the factual knowledge of the respondents, on the

other hand referential questions explore reasons of the issue, for example why did you

show such kind of behavior?

In English language instruction, questioning provides opportunities to students

to get mastery of language by extensive practice. Especially, in grammar learning

context, questioning cannot be manifested through recall, rote memorization of

structure of grammar rules rather it should be promoted by providing opportunities to

students to listen, to manipulate syntactical elements and use language in real life

context in a natural way .Open ended questions are useful in addressing all classroom

issues in a flexible and natural way (Lee, Kinzie, & Whittaker, 2012).

2.4.2. Classification of teacher's questions.

Khan and Inamullah, (2011) classified questions into two main kinds: (i) close

ended questions and (ii) open ended questions. Close ended questions are used to

elicit mostly factual information and open ended questions are used in order to get

deep answers from students. Similarly, Hamiloğlu and Temiz (2012) divides

questions in to two types, first are factual and second are open ended questions. He

argues that if teacher corresponds the answer to students, such questions are called

- 26 -

knowledge based primary questions and on the other side to those questions to which

teacher is unable to answer , he may pass them towards students for clarification are

called open ended questions. Open ended questions are used for the promotion of

critical thinking and in eliciting perceptions, comprehension and aptitude of students

(Roth, 1996).

In the connection, Samson, et al (2011) argues that Socratic questioning is

also helpful in developing critical thinking. The context of such questions was similar

with open ended question as it is a form of dialogic discussion in which a group of

individuals participate in a discussion on text or specific topic. Socrates used dialectal

questioning method in the class room to draw an answer from the students through

dialogue (Davies & Iqbal, 1997; Dean, 2005; Gul et al., 2010; Siddiqui, 2007).

Chin (2007) reveals that Socratic questions can bring conceptual change in

students thinking and develop higher order cognitive skills like self-reflection,

autonomy and fair-mindedness that may lead to develop critical thinking skills among

students. Researchers all over the world have classified Socratic questions into

different categories though most of them share the common ground. As, Fisher (1998)

has divided Socratic questions into five categories including:

i. Clarification ( i.e. clarity of ideas with the use of different examples)

ii. Reasons and evidence (i.e. mainly focus on supporting ideas)

iii. Alternative views ( deals with other person's point of view)

iv. Implications and consequences ( deals with influence and impact of present and

past events)

v. Question about question ( comparing, analyzing, synthesizing the information

and coming on one conclusion of discussion)

- 27 -

Similarly, Paul and Elder (2007) claim that Socratic questions are the most

significant way in promoting critical thinking skills. He argues that both critical

thinking and Socratic questions have similar ends that lead towards exploring ultimate

truth. He also asserts that Socratic questions challenge student's accuracy and

completeness and stimulate them to ask thought provoking questions to explore truth

as their ultimate goal. In favour of questioning strategy , Elder (2002) argues that

questioning is the heart of CT as, “thinking is question driven” and thought provoking

questions are used to get deep understanding of student's reconstruction of their

thinking .

2.4.3. Paul questioning model.

In 1991, Paul and Elder provided a comprehensive critical thinking framework

to measure the quality of thinking and argued that students can only explore their

thinking components by asking thought provoking questions. His model includes

"Elements of thought" "Universal intellectual Standards" and intellectual traits.

Elements of thought model consist of following categories:

Questioning goals and purposes

Questioning questions

Questioning data and information

Questioning inferences and conclusions

Questioning concepts and ideas

Questioning on pre assumed or preexist assumptions

Questioning on making implications and inferring consequences without

thinking

On the other hand the second model of Socratic questions deals with the quality

of reasoning in universal intellectual standards. It includes nine categories:

- 28 -

Clarity (refers to the understanding of a person's point of view)

Accuracy ( applies when the information is clear but not exact)

Precision (applies when a information is not presented in detail

Relevance ( deals with the relevance of information with particular issue)

Breadth ( deals with different point of views of different persons on one

particular issue)

Depth (deals with the superficiality of the information)

Logic (applied to give a sense of one particular problem)

Significance (applies when the most important problem is ignored in the

information)

Fairness (deals with partiality or prejudices

I used the patron of following questions (Paul, 2006) during intervention. This

patron of questioning more or less overlaps the previous questioning models such as

Socratic models. In the questioning session, I involve students in thoughtful

discussion to elicit the answers of questions. I prepared all lesson for question strategy

based on the following questions. The sequence of asking questions in each lesson

was different but I used them as baseline to develop the critical thinking among the

students. Students were asked questions to provide clarification, reasons, evidence,

logic, and relevance. They were provided scenarios to assume the real life situations

to infer the conclusion. They were also probed to argue and share their own point of

views (Paul, 2007).

2.5. Critical Thinking and Role Play

The second teaching strategy was adopted in the study "role play". Role play is

referred as most effective teaching strategy to animate the whole learning

environment, motivate students and teachers both to acquire learning objectives in a

- 29 -

most dynamic environment (Harbour & Connick, 2005). Richards and Rodgers (2001)

believe that new methods such as questioning, role play, argumentation and reflection

are developed after criticism on traditional methods. These methods are the product of

free and student cantered environment in which students are autonomous in

presenting their thoughts and promote their critical thinking by sharing , interacting ,

imagining and reflecting on.

I used role play a new technique in the elementary classroom to develop critical

thinking skills of students. As it involves students in practical experiences to

outperform and reflect upon their knowledge within an imaginary or real world

situation (Budden, 2004). Role play activity encourages students to share their ideas

with each other that further enhance their speaking confidence. Moreover, by

participating in a role play, students are encouraged to empathies the feelings of

others by looking beyond their own assumptions and expectations (Harmer, 2001).

Although role play has many advantages in promoting critical thinking yet many

teachers do not prefer role play in their routine teaching as they think it useless and

time consuming. They ignore the benefits of role play that it provides to the learners

instead focus on their own comforts. As teachers think, for the role play they have to

make extra arrangements such as specific context and tasks. Actually, they find it

difficult to revert from traditional to new methods in which they have less command

(Jarvis, Odell, & Troiano, 2000).

In comparison, role play is beneficial for second language usage as students can

rehearse their foreign language in safe and comfortable environment. They are given a

chance to think and practice without any fear of mistakes as mistakes are taken in role

play a part of learning (Tsui, 2002). Likewise, role play enhances motivation of

students as they find it most interesting, funny, lively and different from traditional

- 30 -

context in which they only focus on retention and memorization without

comprehension. Role play enhances confidence of shy students with a sense of

successful completion of a task by themselves. They get opportunities to imagine and

practice real context in their class rooms which increases their likelihood of learning

(Feng & Ding 2009). Moreover, role play provides a chance to non-English students

to improve their communication by practicing different real life situations such as

doctor role, shopkeeper, and many more. By all means, students get ample chances of

practicing English language which is hardly present in traditional English language

class room where students are expected to reflect on what they have learnt from

course book or from their teachers. Role play creates more effective learning

environment in which students learn to talk with each other, solve learning problems

and work collaboratively. Moreover, role play may work as icebreaker to break the

learning barriers and develops the more dynamic and effective environment in which

students learn from each other (Jones, 2007).

Similarly, argue that role play is a student centred and less teacher centred

activity. In such context, students work independently and teacher is not a centre of

focus instead he works as a guide, mentor and facilitator. Role play creates natural

environment of the class in which students learn to cooperate with each other and

display their patience in accepting other's arguments. Moreover, the language

produced here will be more natural and authentic. Students get autonomy of thoughts

and decisions while playing a role that motivates them to argue and to construct their

own meanings which are essential characteristics of critical thinking (Kayes, Kayes,

& Kolb, 2005). .

According to Landousee (2005) role play scenarios can be developed such as a

real need (doctor or shopkeeper), some real life experiences of students (customer)

- 31 -

and fantasy or imaginary world of students. Littlewood (1994) presents five different

frameworks to play a role according to the context. First role play is followed by

cued dialogues in which students are directed through a cue card on which a role is

described. This framework is controlled through directions of teacher and meaning

construction is restricted to cues. This frame work is suggested mostly for very young

children who need full direction of the play and independently are unable to perform.

In such framework creativity of students is limited. The second framework is less cues

and teacher directed and is considered more flexible. In such framework one student

is given the cue card of the situation to perform and the other students are given

chance to understand the first student's dialogues to respond accordingly. In the frame

work, students get chance of thinking, manipulating and making decisions

independently without being scared of mistakes. Teacher has lost control in the

following framework and students are more autonomous in taking decisions. This

frame work is recommended for 10-15 years old children as they can understand well

the cues direction and can devise alternatives for the problem more flexibly. In third

framework students are required to create situation or suggest situation to share and

perform. This type of role-play is suitable for higher classes as they are capable of

negotiating with each other and acting situations easily and confidently. Fourth

framework is in the form of debate or discussion. In such framework students are

given a topic by the teacher or students select topic by themselves to discuss. Students

are divided into different small groups to debate on certain issue and through

discussion they draw the conclusion of the problem. Such type of framework is

suggested for higher classes as it requires higher level of intellectual capacities to

debate on challenging issues. The last framework deals with advance level students.

In the framework, different modules of social situations are allotted to perform.

- 32 -

In comparison with all frameworks, I used second framework "role play through

cues and information, in which students are given situation by the teacher on a cue

card to perform. Students were not restricted to follow all dialogues but have liberty

to change dialogues according to the response of the other student. It was fewer

teachers centred and more students centred. I chose this framework for number of

reasons. First, it is designed for primary level students, second, it is suitable for those

students who are less competent in their language usage .Thirdly, and teacher can

facilitate them with his feedback to correct their mistakes. Fourth, the emphasis of the

activities was to practice communicative skills, intellectual skills and performance

skills rather evaluation of its product. Fifth, cues help students to understand, imagine

and perform a role appropriately. As for as other types of role play are concerned, the

first frame work was mostly teacher centred and not suitable for the promotion of

critical thinking , similarly , it was hard for elementary students to cope with other

advanced role play kinds such as debates, discussions and simulation because of their

limited vocabulary and communication skills.

Moreover, role play is considered a viable activity that engages students

cognitively and affectively to work together to resolve issues. (Jones, 2007). In role

play one word debriefing is used for a meaningful discussion after the activity.

Teachers mainly conduct the debriefing session for students. Debriefings enhance

critical thinking skills of students by providing the opportunity to grab in-depth

meanings of the reality by deep analysis of the situation (Jeffries, 2005). It guides

students to apply new knowledge in new real life situation (Childs & Sepples, 2006;

Dreifuerst, 2009; Jeffries, 2005).

In the study, I focus on understanding the process of learning through role play

in which students play a role to reflect other's perspectives as natural as they can do.

- 33 -

Findings of the study suggested the success of role play strategy which is in line with

Brookfield (1987) who recommends role play as significant for critical thinking in

which students present the perspectives of others by using their cognitive and

affective skills. Role play helps students to integrate both cognitive and affective

skills to comprehend and demonstrate the role.

2.6. Assessment of Critical Thinking

In the section I will explain about different criteria and standards to measure

critical thinking. Literature has not only presented different theories and methods to

develop critical thinking yet it has focused on assessment of critical thinking as well.

Numerous researchers have discussed about different criteria and standards to

evaluate critical thinking. Fischer, Spiker, and Riedel (2009) argue that critical

thinking is elicited more from uncertain, ambiguous, disorganized and contradictory

problems or questions rather than the material that is orderly, well organized and

coherent, because uncertainty and unclarity motivate students to use critical lenses in

making material more consistent. He argues that many tasks which require the

exercise of judgment prove more authentic in assessing critical thinking instead using

those tasks that require simply the understanding of the given material.

On the other hand, Silva (2008) presents her different opinion that students

should be evaluated on the basis of the quality of their thought rather than the

performance of the task. She advocates that students should be capable of

manipulation of what they learned in novel situations.

There is a debate among scholars on role of criteria in evaluating critical

thinking and different scholars suggest different criteria essential for judging

evidence, for evaluating argument of others and for evaluation of one's own thought

(Case, 2005; Lipman, 1988). These criteria may come in the form of standards, to

- 34 -

evaluate the credibility of evidence developed by authorities, to analyse the accuracy

of a concept in generating the meaning of new phenomena and to examine the

adequacy of moral or legal reasoning. Criteria can also be in the form of laws, rules

and regulations and norms (Bailin et al., 2002).

Similarly, Bailin et al. (1999) and Case (2005) advocate the knowledge of

criteria to measure the quality of thinking and they also in the view that these criteria

or standards should be communicated to students. Ennis (1987) and Faconi (1990) on

the other hand, believe on using different tests to measure critical thinking rather than

using standards. Both argue that tests are more valid and reliable tools in evaluating

critical thought objectively instead of standards that are only used to assess theoretical

part of thinking and they ignore the affective part of thought.

For critical thinking assessment, Paul (1994) provides a complete model of

critical thinking that has three parts, one part discusses elements of thought, the

second part suggests intellectual standards to measure elements of thought the quality

of thinking further leads to intellectual traits. Paul (1994) argues that standards

address the cognitive part of thinking and traits measure affective part such as skills

and dispositions of critical thinkers.

Among several critical thinking models, Paul's model was selected for the

present study for its theoretical appropriateness, its flexibility to address a broad range

of context and inclusion of standards and dispositions. Moreover, Paul (1994)

intellectual standards can be appropriate as teaching and analytical tool to develop and

measure critical thinking of students, so I used it in my intervention.

2.6.1. Critical thinking dispositions, attitudes or habit of mind.

Facione (2000) divides critical thinking in to skills and dispositions. He calls

these dispositions habit of mind or attitude including open-mindedness, flexibility in

- 35 -

accepting alternatives; desire to search for evidence or reason about facts, willingness

to seek solutions of the problems from multiple viewpoints.

Five theorists such as Ennis (1989), Paul (1992), Fisher (1997), Halpern (1998)

and Kuhn (1968) are chosen for discussion of critical thinking skills, dispositions and

attitude .They are selected because they represent major positions on critical thinking

area. Ennis, Paul and Fisher are as philosopher's major figures in the critical thinking

movement. Halpern is a cognitive psychologist and her contribution comes from the

extent to which she has related the general field of cognitive psychology to work on

critical thinking. In contrast, Kuhn is a developmental psychologist who has

conducted primary research on the development of children’s and adults’ reasoning

and has begun to frame these results into a more general theory on the development of

critical thinking and epistemological beliefs. As well as providing some detailed

analysis of specific theories, the purpose is to draw out similarities and differences

between them. Despite differences in terminology and the theoretical status of some

of the terms, it is possible to identify recurring concepts and themes. These different

scholars define critical thinking attitude in terms of different skills and dispositions.

One group of scholars is in favour of using skills and dispositions separately and in

comparison the other group uses skills and dispositions together.

2.6.2. The Delphi’s report.

Delphi report is a great achievement in the area of critical thinking (Gordon,

1993). Facione (1990) was the leader of the report including 46 more scholars and

educationist of all over the world. The aim of the report was to set a mutual consensus

on critical thinking skills and dispositions. According to Facione (1990) critical

thinking is not only encompassing abilities and skills but it also has some

dispositions, attitudes or habit of mind. He argues that critical thinking deals with

- 36 -

cognitive and affective skills. Accordingly, he added that dispositions and abilities of

critical thinking are, in fact, two different entities. These dispositions are considered

attitude or habit of mind. He further argued that dispositions of critical thinking

stimulate a person to respond to an event, person or circumstances positively and

impressionably .These groups were later divided in to two groups in explaining the

difference in CT skills and dispositions. Some stress on intellectual skills integral part

of critical thinking and the others emphasize personality attribute important for

development and assessment of critical thinking. Experts of the report define CT skill

as ability to perform a task or activity rationally and logically. Among these experts

95 % were agreed that analysis, evaluation and inference are heart of critical thinking

and 87 % were in the opinion that interpretation, explanation and self-regulation are

more important .these main skills are further linked with sub skills. All experts shared

a mutual consensus that it is not essential to show all these skills at a time to

demonstrate critical thinking attitude. Interpretation includes sub skills of clarifying

and decoding the meanings of experiences, content, situation, events, beliefs and

criteria. On the other hand evaluation means the ability to assess the credibility of

arguments and beliefs, perception of individuals based on their experiences. Inference

sub skills deal with the ability to draw logical conclusion from evidence to form

hypothesis or assumptions. The other skills explanation is the ability to state the

reasoning based on evidential, methodological and criteria logical considerations.

Self-regulation is the ability to self-monitoring of one's own thinking for his

correctness of thought.

The second focus of the Delphi experts was to define disposition. The findings

of the report defined disposition as personal traits or habit of mind and attitudes which

presents good critical thinker (Facione, 1990). Experts claim that if skill is developed

- 37 -

appropriately then it further promote CT disposition. Delphi report presents 19

affective dispositions for making true critical thinker. The experts again divided in to

two groups with two different focuses. One group argues that overemphasis on all

dispositions will mislead critical thinker, on contrary the other group claim that the

absence of these dispositions will produce close minded, unfair and dogmatic

dispositions among students (Facione, 1990). All skills, sub skills and disposition

presented in Delphi report are not mutually exclusive as many of them are present in

the models and frameworks of other scholars.

2.6.3. Ennis’s model.

After Delphi report Ennis (1991) presents another list of skills and dispositions.

He claims that following dispositions such as "get it right", clarity and fair-minded

represent a true critical thinker. He believes that the disposition get it right related

with logical reasoning. It deals with the ability of a person to present every concept

with sound and rational evidences. The second disposition relates to the appropriate

use of language in arguments, to discern truth rather than just to win the argument,

which can be traced back to Socratic influences. Ennis (1999) presented third

disposition to respect the dignity of every human and not to devalue or discern the

right claims of others. In summary, if the first two dispositions are concerned with

scientific and philosophical matters, the third disposition points to the human and

interpersonal consequences of critical thinking. In addition, Ennis suggests his

dispositions reflect values associated with the disciplines of science, philosophy and

humanities.

Ennis also presented a set of abilities or skills crucial for critical thinker. He

argues that metacognition is important skill for a critical thinker in which he

overviews of his own thinking for identifying the weaknesses and strengths of

- 38 -

thinking for improvement. Ennis refers to three general critical thinking components,

i.e., skills, dispositions and metacognitive components. Ennis’ metacognitive

components concern awareness of what has been learnt while reflecting on both one’s

critical thinking skills and dispositions. Many others have recommended

metacognitive style checklists for their potential in developing critical thinking

particularly in younger children. Ennis suggests that there is much overlap in his lists

of dispositions and abilities and he concedes that his taxonomy is ‘not an elegant list;

this is a practical list’ (Ennis, 1987). Overall, Ennis’ ability lists are complex due to

their detail, mutual non-exclusivity and mutation, as he has moved his focus from

critical thinking skills to critical thinking dispositions. Furthermore, his theories have

little or no empirical support. However, like Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy he has

provided an influential list of critical thinking abilities and dispositions, which has

sparked much debate. In short, more than any other author, Ennis’ ideas have

promoted the area of critical thinking.

2.6.4. Paul’s model.

Paul (1999) another prominent philosopher and a great contributor in the field of

critical thinking has presented two major theories of critical thinking. The first theory

is called, Strategy List for Redesigning Lessons and his second theory is a framework,

which describes the essential characteristics of a critical thinker. His initial model

Strategy List for Redesigning Lessons has 35 strategies, which are broken down into

three sections which are cognitive strategies, macro and micro Abilities and the third

section deals affective strategies. It is suggested the content of the two cognitive

strategies groups are similar to critical thinking abilities as they feature skills such as

analyzing, questioning, reasoning and inference, while the affective strategies are

- 39 -

similar to critical thinking dispositions such as fair-mindedness and intellectual

humility.

Paul (1992) presented his CT model that includes four parts. First three

parts include elements of thought, standards and intellectual abilities. The

fourth group is called Intellectual Traits and is described as essential to be a

critical thinker. This framework, like his original model, can be divided into

abilities and dispositions. The first three components, i.e., the essential to

critical thinking components, could be described as his taxonomy of critical

thinking abilities and the last category of intellectual traits which he also

calls ‘Traits of the disciplined mind’ could be considered as his descriptions

of critical thinking dispositions. Elder and Paul (1994, p 28) defines that

Elder and Paul (1994) argues that when a person thinks intellectually and fair-

mindedly in making decisions he exhibits strong sense critical thinking and develops

intellectual traits of mind. On the other hand, when a person shows egocentric and

socio-centric attitudes it shows weak sense critical thinking .Like Ennis Paul, provides

a model which consists of both critical thinking skills (abilities essential to critical

thinking) and dispositions (attitudes essential to be a critical thinker). According to

Paul (2002) when there is strong sense of critical thinking among individuals it

develops some intellectual traits in individuals and these traits transformed a person

"Critical thinking is disciplined, self-directed thinking which

exemplifies the perfections of thinking appropriate to a particular mode

or domain of thought. It comes in two forms .If disciplined to serve the

interests of a particular individual or group, to the exclusion of other

relevant persons and groups, it is sophistic or weak sense critical

thinking. If disciplined to take into account the interests of diverse

persons or groups, it is fair-minded or strong sense critical thinking."

- 40 -

into a critical thinker. These traits are as follows , intellectual humility that represent

the worth of our knowledge , intellectual autonomy which shows adherence of oneself

with some standards while making decisions, intellectual integrity leads towards a

balance in one's saying and doing, intellectual courage presents one's courage to stick

on own beliefs, Intellectual empathy represents the empathic feeling of one to

another and intellectual perseverance is the ability to work persistently in challenging

situations.

Paul and Elder (2001) suggest that the ‘elements of reasoning’ contains the

fundamental components for human reasoning. Paul sees the next group ‘standards in

critical thinking’ as those components of human thought that are not commonly

present. However mastery in these components produces quality critical thought. In

essence the standards list contains skills like the elements of reasoning list, however

they are considered to be higher order. Paul postulates that an intellectual ability is

composed of three elements. The first is a process and he gives the example to drive.

The second is an object and the example is a truck and the third is a standard in this

example safely. So the intellectual ability example is to drive a truck safely.

Intellectual traits are the dimension, which Paul suggests produce the strong sense

critical thinker or essential to what it is to be a critical thinker. He suggests that these

are moral or affective components of critical thinking. Paul enhances his framework

by placing them in two different contexts. The first is a six stage developmental

process of critical thought. He suggests that a person can move from 40 the lowest

stage of an unreflective thinker through to the final stage of a master thinker. He also

proposes the notions of strong and weak critical thinkers, that is, people can use

critical thinking for either altruistic reasons (strong) or personal benefit (weak).

- 41 -

The purpose of current study is to inculcate these traits in students through

critical thinking to change their attitude, and if these traits happen in their attitudes

then we can say that critical thinking is a productive strategy in promoting learning.

2.6.5. Fisher’s model.

In the 1997 Fisher presents his framework of critical thinking similar to the

taxonomies of others like Ennis and Paul. However, his taxonomy is specifically

derived from Paul and Ennis ‘evaluative definition’. As a result he proposes a more

focused model of critical thinking based on the central skill of evaluation. He suggests

that, although these other taxonomies detail some of the essential aspects of

reasoning, reading and 42 writing they do go beyond what should be seen as essential

critical thinking components. The reason he gives for this omission is that he is

specifically describing the qualities of critical thinking and not the attitudes of the

critical thinker. In other words he does not feel that the definition of critical thinking

should include an affective or dispositional dimension and should remain simply as a

list of cognitive skills. He concurs that critical thinking is best evidenced by behaviour

rather than self-report.

Fisher does not entirely disregard critical thinking dispositions as he suggested

that teacher should teach critical thinking attitudes while teaching other critical

thinking concepts. Interestingly, the definition and Fisher model of critical thinking

competencies does not include critical thinking dispositions. There is a strong sense

that Fisher’s model of critical thinking is based around the principles of informal

logic. Fisher’s model has a number of similarities and differences to the frameworks

of Ennis and Paul. Many of the abilities identified by the two American philosophers

mirror those mentioned in Fisher’s model. For example, Fisher describes Clarification

of meaning which overlaps with one of Ennis’ skills i.e. clarify. Fisher also highlights

- 42 -

the importance of integrating the various skills to use them in tandem. This hybrid use

of skills is also advocated by Ennis and named a skill of ‘making suppositions and

integrate abilities’. However, Fisher’s model differs in one major respect from the

others in that he excludes critical thinking dispositions from his framework.

2.6.6. Halpern’s model.

Halpern skill model presented 63 skills for a strong critical thinker. Lastly, there

is one striking omission in Halpern’s framework, i.e., critical thinking dispositions.

Halpern's discussion of critical thinking dispositions is not comprehensive. However,

she does put forward a list of attitudes which she feels teachers should try and instil in

their students. They include flexibility and openness, fair-mindedness, self-correction

and persistence in difficult environment.

As stated, this framework has a strong cognitive influence, although Halpern

(1998) has not carried out empirical research on critical thinking she does draw

heavily on cognitive research to produce her theories on the subject. Skills like

problem solving, decision making and memory should be particularly familiar to

cognitive psychologists. Fisher and Scriven (1997) argue against the inclusion of such

a wide range of cognitive skills for a number of reasons. They state that critical

thinking is closely related to decision making but they suggest that decision making is

not actually a critical thinking skill. Good decision making is reliant on critical

thinking but a person can still make decisions without using critical thinking. Fisher

and Scriven (1997) would again argue against the inclusion of problem solving. They

suggest in Mathematics, for example one often has to solve numeric problems yet it

need not be described as critical thinking. Furthermore, they state that animals like

dogs often solve problems but it would not be accurate to say they are doing critical

thinking. However, others have suggested that problem solving should be included

- 43 -

under critical thinking (Kurfis, 1988). More generally, Fisher and Scriven identify the

problem of popularity as a reason for the inclusion of a wide range of cognitive skills

within the critical thinking framework.

Halpern’s (1998) model is not exclusively influenced by cognitive psychology,

as she draws on the ideas of philosophers like Ennis, Paul and de Bono. As a result,

skills included in her framework like argument analysis, thought and language skills

and creative thinking have some philosophical notions. For example Halpern’s

thought and language skills feature many of the philosophical characteristics of Ennis’

clarify ability. A further characteristic in Halpern’s (1998) framework similar to the

models of Ennis and Paul is that she states the categories are not mutually exclusive

and often work in a dynamic way to produce critical thought. Halpern also suggests a

general guiding checklist for critical thinking like Robert Ennis’ FRISCO system.

Halpern calls this a metacognitive framework. However, unlike Ennis and Paul,

Halpern includes creative thinking theory in her model much of which has parallels to

the work of de Bono. Fisher and Scriven (1997) agree with Halpern on the inclusion

of this construct as they state it is impossible to be a critical thinker without being able

to create different perspectives and viewpoints on issues. However they warn that this

type of creativity is not the same as artistic or writing ability which they suggest is not

required to think critically.

In summary, Halpern’s model can be loosely divided into three components, i.e.,

cognitive skills, traditional critical thinking skills (mirroring many of the constructs

proposed by other major authors in the area) and a metacognitive dimension. Overall

Halpern believes that critical thinking is more necessary now than ever before because

of the vast role of the media (newspapers, advertising etc.) and politics in our lives.

- 44 -

2.6.7. Kuhn’s model.

Kuhn’s (1968) perspective on critical thinking is different from the other authors

in that she embeds her critical thinking model in a developmental framework.

However parallels can still be drawn between her work and the models of the other

major authors. Kuhn’s idea of ‘metacognition" was widely accepted by many other

scholars as an integral part of critical thinking frameworks, for example Ennis and

Halpern state that self-regulation and self-checking of one’s thinking is an important

aspect of critical thinking. Kuhn’s second developmental stage of meta-knowing

‘meta strategic knowing’ is the point where she suggests a person begins to use the

strategies of thinking to discern truths. This concept has a number of similarities with

critical thinking skills. Kuhn’s third stage – ‘epistemological knowing’ has

similarities to the critical thinking dispositions mentioned in the other frameworks.

However the links between personal epistemological stances and thinking dispositions

may be extremely tenuous and as yet there is no empirical evidence for or against this

link. Overall Kuhn argues that meta-knowing lets a person “know how you know”.

This puts the thinker in control of their own knowing and as a result puts them in

charge of their own lives.

Over all analysis of all models presented by different scholars show that all

skills and dispositions overlap. The first two authors Ennis and Paul are firmly based

in educational philosophy. Fisher has also worked in this field but also have ties to the

disciplines of psychology and mathematics. The last two theorists Halpern and Kuhn

use psychological theory and methods to add to the critical thinking area. Halpern

looks at critical thinking from a cognitive psychology viewpoint whereas Kuhn takes

the perspective of a developmental psychologist. The main reason for presenting these

author’s ideas is to map out the components and concepts within critical thinking. As

- 45 -

a result of making explicit the full repertoire of skills, it might be possible to draft a

complete set of dispositions and abilities.

In the whole world, no doubt, many researchers have contributed a lot in

defining critical thinking; however, still many areas of critical thinking are uncovered.

Although , many researchers agreed that critical thinking encompasses both entities ,

skills and dispositions, there remain disagreement on the nature of disposition, either

it is normative or laudatory. Paul (2004) framework of attitude seems appropriate to

measure critical thinking attitude of elementary students. In the framework, Paul

(2004) identified some dispositions such as, empathy, fair-mindedness, perseverance,

open-mindedness and intellectual humility. The objective behind using Paul's

framework was to understand the change that questioning and role play, two teaching

strategies used in the study may bring in student's attitudes.

2.7. Factors Influencing Students’ Critical Thinking

Although there are numerous factors influencing the development of critical

thinking yet literature suggests some influential factors such as teacher's role,

communication and subject knowledge that influence the promotion of critical

thinking of students. Rath et al. (1966, cited in Pithers & Soden, 2000) argue that

there is relationship between thinking and behavior patterns. These behavior patrons

influence thinking, for instance those students who neither think critically nor

participate in critical thinking class room activities learns less.

Rath et al (2000) asserts that student-teacher interaction and class room context

are important factors in developing critical thinking of students. He identifies some

factors such as impulsiveness, rigidity, dogmatism, irrationality, dependency on

other's beliefs, unclarity of ideas, illogical thinking patrons and accepting facts

without evidence that may hinder the promotion of critical thinking. Moreover , he

- 46 -

believes that behavior patrons of teachers such as agreeing or disagreeing without

sound evidence, discouraging student's questioning, rejecting conflicting ideas

generated by students, appreciating only content based answer, avoiding

argumentative discussion and merely encouraging demonstration and presentation

also hinder the promotion of critical thinking. While describing factors in promotion

of critical thinking, he also finds some discrepancies in teacher's thinking in

development of critical thinking of students. First, teacher's misconception that

critical thinking is only teacher's job instead of student's part. Second, they believed

themselves as experts and felt ashamed in learning from students. Third, they think

that there must be a separate program to teach critical thinking. Fourth, when teachers

answer student's questions blindly without reasoning. Fifth, they believe that class

room discussion is a way to conclude content rather thinking that it is the means to

develop another discussion. Sixth, mastery-learning concept of teacher also stops

good thinking. He describes some other factors that restraint the development of CT

of students in a class room such as merely transfer of knowledge, focus on only

completion of content , overcrowded class rooms, weak student, teacher relationship

and discouraging student's thought provoking questions that may influence critical

thinking (Rath, et al, 2000).

2.7.1. Teacher’s role.

The role of a teacher in critical thinking classroom is different from traditional

class room setting in multiple ways. In traditional class room teacher moves as sole

authority to exert control over students by implementing predefined rules, routines

and punishments to achieve all instructional objectives and to maintain the order of

the class room efficiently . Oliveira ( 2009). believes in traditional methods such as

lecture, drill and book reading to teach students in his class. He is a control agent and

- 47 -

dominant in initiating all tasks in the class and takes all decisions about teaching and

learning, in return students are expected to present correct answers exert from their

course books. Moreover, he believes in extrinsic motivation through awards, medals

or any title on successful completion of student's work. In case of failure in any

accomplishment of task, he uses punish, reprimand or deprive students from any title.

In such context, students follow all instructions of teacher without thinking (Rahimi,

2013).

In contrast, in critical thinking class room, a teacher adopts different orientation

towards class room context and students. He is mainly interested in building friendly

and meaningful class room environment by sharing problems and issues and finding

alternatives by try-out many possible solutions to construct their own meanings

(Thompson, 2002). In such context, teacher works as facilitator or a guide in helping

students to meet learning challenges. He adopts shared relationship and responsibility

and facilitates community building in the class room. He welcomes discussions, novel

ideas and alternative suggestions from students in manipulating pre-existing facts and

figures. He promotes different instructional strategies from traditional class room

settings such as reflection, debates, open discussions, challenging questioning, role

play, argumentation and project to promote critical thinking. In critical thinking class

room teacher talks less and evoke and scaffold more students through open-ended

questions. He provides them social, physical and historical planes to think critically

and uses verbal and nonverbal techniques to stimulate their higher order thinking

(Feng & Yun , 2009). The quality of teacher's questions depends on the context,

content and respond from learners. Good questions are defined as those which

facilitate student's critical thinking through eliciting explanations, elaborations of

- 48 -

previous ideas and alternatives that contradict with student's intuitive thoughts about

natural phenomenon (Gladday, 2011).

Another technique for facilitation of student's learning teacher use is wait time.

After posing a question, teacher provides 5-10 seconds wait time to students to think

deeply on the issue and share their information after deep thinking. Wait time

increases the volunteers in responding the question. It is also recommended for

teacher to rephrase the question when no meaningful answer comes from students

after a sufficient wait time instead of answering the question. A teacher should not pin

point the fault of the question rather mention the weakness of the question by asking

another leading question. In case of failure of a student in responding an answer he

should open up the question for whole class instead of providing direct answer

(Brown, 2000).

In a role play class room, teacher has to put a lot of efforts in developing,

maintaining and conducting role play in a class room. Teacher's personal factors also

contribute in making learning successful in a class room. If a teacher is not expert and

highly motivated in organizing a role play, students will not be motivated in

performing a play in a response. A teacher having low level of self-esteem will affect

the self-esteem of students. As Yan and Meijuan (2002) argues that a teacher plays

three roles as a lecturer, teacher, and facilitator. He distinguishes these three roles as

lecturer only has professional skills but not expert in teaching techniques and there is

minimal interaction between student and teachers. On the other side, teachers are less

interested in knowing the individual differences that create difference among student's

achievements. Only facilitator explores the psychological wellbeing of students and

can break the invisible walls that hinder learning and convert a classroom in to

dynamic learning place.

- 49 -

However, such shift can only be possible, if two main agents' students and

teachers collaborate with each other in adaptation of new roles (Elen et al., 2007). In

critical thinking class room, teacher is required to provide two types of knowledge,

procedural and metacognition. In procedural knowledge, teacher helps students to

reason, inquire and present knowledge logically and in metacognition students are

required to get cognitive control in evaluating their own thinking and knowledge they

are getting from teacher (Richards & Rodgers, 2001).

In order to get students fully involved in all instructional activities, it is

important to enhance their sense of responsibility and their empowerment (Dreyfus,

Hershkowitz & Schwarz, 2001). Students can be given multiple tasks to complete

with minimizing teacher instructions and by using their own intellect and

comprehension. Teacher encourages their efforts by noticing their voices and uses

their experiences and ideas as starter of new discussion. He never claims to be the sole

source of knowledge instead remained open to be challenged by students for his

information (Walton & Krabbe ,1995). Moreover, a teacher motivates students to see

things from big canvas by engaging them in critical thinking activities beyond the

class room context. In the class room, a teacher works as helper and manager. He does

not believe in using "how to do approach" rather indirectly helps students whenever

they show difficulty in resolving instructional tasks (Seed House, 2010).

Pithers (2000) argues that those teacher who are better facilitators in learning are

considered more eligible in promoting critical thinking skills among students.

However, on the other hand, Luhtala (2011) points out some barriers teachers face

while teaching critical thinking. She discusses that teacher's perception, attitude and

behavior constraint the promotion of critical thinking. As some teachers find it

difficult to teach critical thinking skills to those students who lack communication,

- 50 -

analytical and evaluative skills or having learning disabilities. Others think critical

thinking as time consuming and useless in completion of course. Choy & Cheah

(2009) asserts that teacher's incompetence to teach critical thinking relates with their

pre and in service training where they are not well versed with critical thinking

teaching methods. Shirkhani &Fahim (2011) ) argues that teachers prefer traditional

methods in coverage of lengthy content by using tyranny of quick answer session

perceiving critical thinking methods only wastage of time. In comparison, Hirsch

(1992) states that only coverage of content without comprehension is useless; it looks

like to fill the empty vessels without knowing the material. He argues that without

comprehension of content, it is impossible to inculcate critical thinking as it requires

great deal of pertinent knowledge about specific subject.

2.7.2. Social context.

Classroom context is very important in developing critical thinking among

students. Students do not take interest in those activities that are apart from their

interest, needs and curiosity either they learn more eagerly when they are intrinsically

and extrinsically motivated (as cited in Caram & Davis, 2005). They fully engage in

classroom activities to extend their knowledge when they find these activities

purposeful and meaningful. The role of a teacher as a facilitator, the use open ended

questions, and mutual efforts of teacher and students creates encouraging environment

for the promotion of critical thinking (Caram & Davis, 2005).

In critical thinking classroom, students are involved in evaluating new

information, creating logical connection between two entities, thinking rationally and

reflecting on their thinking and experiences help them in accelerating their learning

(Jonassen, & Bosung, 2010). In Pakistani classroom teachers usually adopt

knowledge transmission approach by using text books. They ask questions from text

- 51 -

books where answers are embedded in the content. Through this approach students

understand the only one correct answer of the question and they do not put efforts in

finding solution of the problem from multiple perspectives and find more convenient

to rote memorize the facts instead. Such kind of learning does not prepare students in

establishing link between classroom context and real world (Jones,2004).

Lemov,(2010) state that critical thinking development is only be possible in

such context where teacher shift his/ her focus from teaching to evaluate the memory

of the students to the paradigm where students enjoy liberty and freedom to explore to

share, to analyse the information by using their own thinking and through sharing

with their peers. Students promote their critical thinking through involving in a

context in which they are given opportunities to select activities independently, to get

ample chances of being fair and open minded in exploring and solving problems as

one group of scholars are in the view that critical thinking is a learned ability not

innate. By following the principles of such approach critical thinkers need free and

open environment where they could practice their analytical skills by involving in

thought provoking questioning, argumentation, debate and reflection of their thinking

(Henig & Stone ,2008).).

(Rockoff 2004). ) argues that it is the responsibility of teachers to create

thinking context where challenging tasks involve students to communicate with

teacher and students to present their beliefs and to extend their knowledge. Teachers

face difficulty in establishing such environment in usual classroom through using

conventional teaching strategies. It is imperative to develop critical thinking

community in the classroom where students and teacher solve problems mutually

(Case & Daniels, 2008). Teachers should not offer direst help in meeting classroom

challenges such as providing only one possible answer of the question rather probe

- 52 -

students in exploring the answer through using multiple perspectives (Case, 2008).

Through engaging students in challenging classroom activities, teachers provide them

tools and opportunities that help them in maximizing their independency and

minimizing teacher dependency. It helps students to become independent thinkers in

taking rational decisions in resolving classroom challenges. Critical thinking

environment supports students to develop certain habits of mind or attitudes such as

open-mindedness, flexibility, autonomy and courage. Moreover, it is not essential to

make students critical thinkers only unless their thinking is not assessed on certain

criteria or standards. Without measurement of thinking teachers and students will be

unaware of their strengths and weaknesses of thinking to take appropriate decisions

(Case, 2008).

- 53 -

Chapter III

Methodology

This chapter provides the detail of methodology used in the study. I present the

nature, piloting and methodological issues surrounding the case study as a method.

This is followed by the presentation of the issues regarding the research tools, data

collection, and sources of information and generation of data through multiple sources

such as pre and post questionnaires and observation. In the end of the chapter I

discuss the elements and issues of trustworthiness of the study.

3.1. Research Design

3.1.1. Research approach.

Qualitative research is multi focused and subjective in nature and it attempts to

study subject matter in its natural settings. It aims to interpret the phenomena in terms

of the meaning people give to it. The focus of the qualitative research is to explore

any phenomena existing in social world about how it is constructed, experienced and

interpreted. It uses various flexible methods of data generation such as interviews,

observation and field notes to understand the subject matter (Denzin & Lincoln 2005).

Qualitative research concerns with process, context and meaning through inductive

reasoning. The focus of qualitative research is to interpret the meanings, and

perception of participants about certain phenomena through their perspectives by

using different techniques such as observation and their face to face interviews.

Qualitative research emphasizes on context that actually influences the actions,

interactions and meaning that participants relate towards their experiences. Through

- 54 -

interviews with open ended questions people can share how they make meaning

around the world (Flick, 2006).

The study is using interpretative approach to analyse the phenomenon under

investigation. Interpretive approach deals with "how the social world is interpreted,

understood, experienced produced or constituted" with the use of "the methods of

analysis, explanation and argument building which involves understanding of

complexity, detail and context".

3.1.2. Case study method.

Within qualitative tradition, various approaches such as grounded theory,

phenomenology and case study are used to obtain rich and contextually situated data.

One fundamental way to carry out qualitative researches is the case study method

which studies a particular phenomenon of real life through using multiple sources of

evidence (Robson, 2002). Case studies are detailed study of one person, groups or

organization. A case study can be a quantitative or qualitative depends on nature and

design of the study. In a qualitative case study a researcher is more interested in

understanding the meaning of the reality rather than in generalizing the results. As

Yin (2003) explains that in a qualitative case study a researcher can ask how or why

question in detail about different contemporary issues. Miles & Huberman (1979)

argues that in hieratically arranged research programs, case study methods are not

useful. On the other side Yin (2004) suggests that the usefulness of case study can be

expanded by making relevance among research questions, research methodology and

the type of case study. He further explains that a case study comprise of five essential

components such as research questions, its propositions, its units of analysis, detail of

data linkage with propositions and interpretation of the data. Case study provides

thick and rich information about each unit of analysis by using multiple investigators,

- 55 -

multiple sources of evidence, multiple triangulation and multiple sources of data and

sites (Yin, 2003). Stake (1995) contributes in the area of case study by differentiating

the types of case studies such as instrumental case study, intrinsic case study and

collective or multiple case studies. He opines that each type of case study depends on

the nature and focus of the inquiry. Feaigin, Orum and Sjoberg (1991) emphasised the

rigour of the case study rather than the purpose or unit of analysis. They argue that the

proponents of multiple case studies may weaken the importance and uniqueness of

single case. Yin (2003) suggested that case study method should be employed in

following certain conditions 1) when the focus of the research is to answer why and

how questions, 2) the behaviour of the participant cannot be manipulated 3) coverage

of relevant contextual conditions of the phenomena and when there is unclarity

between phenomena and context.

One shortcoming is associated with case study, that researcher usually choose

case study to answer a very broad question or to address the topic that has many

research questions (Lee, 2006). In order to overcome the weakness of the case study

Yin (2003) and Stake (1995) suggested boundaries for case study such as time and

place (Creswell, 2007), by time and activity (Stake, 1995) and by definition and

context (Miles & Huberman, 1994). According to Creswell (2007) the nature of the

case study is qualitative in which a researcher finds one or multiple bounded systems

over time. For rich and detailed exploration of the case an investigator collects

information from multiple sources such as through interviews, field notes, observation

and audio video material. Accordingly Yin (2004) introduces single and multiple case

studies. The single case may provide detail of a single unit of analysis and multiple

case studies may address multiple experiments and follow replication logic. The logic

- 56 -

of using multiple case studies is either to provide similar or contrast results (Lee,

2012).

For this study, I used the case study method to develop critical thinking skills

among elementary students and to see the productivity of this intervention in terms of

change in their attitude and learning. In this study class room as a case was studied

and investigated in relation to critical thinking. Thus the unit of analysis were three

class rooms. The purpose of using multiple case studies in the study is to provide the

case comparison and to identify common themes across the multiple cases. This

multiple case study conveniently selected for teaching critical thinking skills among

elementary students. Therefore I documented shifts in students' behaviour as well as

the means by which these shifts are supported and organized in this class room.

Cohen, Manion, Morrison and Morrison (2007) shed light on the significance of case

study describing how it can "recognise the complexity and 'emboldens' of social

truths" and how it looks a reality with different lens to uncover the hidden contextual

parts of a theme over the period of time through detailed data collection.

3.1.3. Design based research.

In the study, I used design experiment (Cob, Confrey, Disessa, Lehrer &

Schauble, 2003; Kelly, 2003) and I used the phrase design based research (DBR)

instead of design experiment to avoid mistaken familiarity with experimental designs

(Hoaddley, 2002). Brown (1992) has first time presented the idea of design based

research to overcome the complications of conventional experimental research design.

According to Wang and Hannafin (2005, p.7) DBR is:

- 57 -

There is another strong rationale behind using DBR instead of experimental design for

the present study; for example Collins cited in Suter and Frechtling (2000) stated that:

DBR uses continuous cyclic process of designing , enacting, analyzing and

redesigning

In comparison with other research designs that generally focus on one dimension of

the phenomena, DBR deals with multidimensional social interaction in real life

situations. Similarly, the present study is conducted in real life situations to avoid

controlled laboratory situations.

DBR produces sharable theories to help practitioners and educationists in application

of relevant implications in real life context.

DBR is accountable for the authentic use of designs in relevant setting.

The big advantage of DBR is to introduce research plans that are not already defined

and are revised on their success in practice. The purpose of DBR is to refine a

teaching method and to modify the refinement when appropriate (Qaiser, 2011).

Traditional experimental design the whole process of research is conducted in

controlled laboratory settings, in contrary, DBR presents the findings of experiments

that are conducted in real complex social situations.

In Traditional experimental design (TED) the experimenter controls the whole

experiment. On the other side, in DBR, multiple participants such as , Psychologists,

teachers, researchers and curriculum designers are developing a design by sharing

their diverse expertise (Qaisar, 2011).

"A systematic but flexible methodology aimed to improve educational

practices through iterative analysis, design, development, and

implementation, based on collaboration among researcher and

practitioners in real world settings and leading to contextually –

sensitive design principles and theories".

- 58 -

I think in contrast with conventional experimental design, DBR seems more

appropriate in understanding social, complex and real situations in naturalistic

settings. This is because DBR like other quantitative research designs does not merely

explore relationship between different variables without deep understanding instead it

focuses on understanding the relationship of students and schools with the production

of learning (Suter & Frechtling, 2000). DBR is used in broader areas of educational

research as its aim is to develop a new or modify existing curriculum, design artefacts

and technological tools , design a new theory or modifies existing theories in

naturalistic settings in order to provide new meanings of learning (Barab, Dodge,

Thomas, Jackson, & Tuzun, 2007; Barab & Squire, 2004; Fishman, et al., 2004). DBR

has potential to extend the scope of existing methods of research as a powerful means

in linking theory and practice in educational research (Faste & Faste, 2012). One of

the great contributions of DBR is that it always strives for understanding, interpreting

and improving educational practice (DBR, 2003). It can generate and test theories of

learning in an authentic and naturalist real context. It involves teachers, researchers

and other stakeholders in real life context for designing new interventions that will

facilitate teaching and learning.

Productivity of DBR. Designed Based Research is used in the study. The productivity

of this intervention is studied in the form of the change in student thinking cognitively

and affectively through the observation of dynamic student and student teacher

interaction in experimental classes and the shift in student attitude through pre and

post questionnaire data comparison. One class room of 4th grade students was selected

as case study. The data was generated through research tools i.e. , questionnaire and

observation.

- 59 -

A detailed explanation of research techniques and method of analyses is discussed in

the next section where I clarify the rationale to choose these techniques of observation

as reflected by the overview of research design (see section 4.1).

3.2. Selection of Participants

In qualitative research, those participants are chosen who can provide maximum

information about the research questions and phenomenon under study. No doubt

selection of participants in qualitative research is one of the most crucial parts of the

study. Selection of participants is based on theoretical perspective, nature and design

of the study and generally its number is not predetermined. The focus of the

participants’ selection depends upon the number that can provide thick and detailed

information of the phenomena. The number is considered appropriate when no new

information is coming from the participants, it is called data saturation. Analyses

moves around data collection in iterative cycle for the sake of data saturation.

(Creswell, 2009). This helps the researcher to report the occurrence of new themes

and also to report those perspectives that may be ignored. At this time, a decision

could be made to identify and recruit residents relevant to the study. Ragin (1994)

argues that complex cases need not to exceed from 12-15 cases. Miles and Huberman

(1994) argues that qualitative sampling provides the context to examine those

processes which aid our understanding towards new theory about the phenomena

being studied.

Schools. As explained previously, the aim of this study was to examine critical

thinking skills developed during intervention, which requires as much rich data as

possible to ensure various examples from different classrooms. For this purpose, two

classes of one convenient Public high school have been chosen. The rationale behind

taking Public school is the convenience of the researcher to conduct this present

- 60 -

research. Project schools are located in a large city in the province of Punjab,

Pakistan. The school is same-gender and their medium of instruction is English but

students speak predominantly in the Urdu language when they interact with one

another or with teachers. Researcher is female and there is a social and community

constraint to conduct the study in the same gender school.

Grade and topics. My research focus is on the upper primary level (up to grade 5) and

I was interested to take grade 5 students. However, the concerned schools hesitated to

cooperate in this regard because there is an external examination of grade five

students conducted by the Board (Punjab Education Commission). Therefore, I

selected grade four students for this study. In addition, children in grade four usually

are ten years old, so by this grade ends children have almost always turned eleven.

When discussing the measurement or development of critical thinking this age is

extremely important. In order to test or develop critical thinking, one has to take into

account this specific age and grade. The reasons for this can be found in Piaget’s

(1952) theory. According to this theory the last two stages are concrete operational

and formal operational. If one looks closely there is an overlap, one stage ends and the

other starts. By keeping this in mind it is seen that at age eleven concrete operational

ends and formal operational starts. Children at the age of eleven have acquired logical

reasoning. Throughout the concrete operational stage children learn to reason

systematically, relate things and draw conclusions out of their observations of the

social and physical world. So after they end grade four they can reasonably use these

cognitive abilities to further generalize the conclusions to the abstract world and these

will help outcomes of their hypothetically based thinking. Furthermore, when thinking

and specifically critical thinking is looked into, it can be seen according to the Paul

and Elder model (2003) that certain standards of thought clarity, accuracy, relevance,

- 61 -

fairness and logic are required for application on purposes, information and points of

view and these together help build personality traits. Hence, by combining both these

views it can be found that at age eleven (grade four) children have acquired the

cognitive abilities and elements required to base their thinking upon and the

foundations for critical thinking have been set.

Given the design of the study to investigate the effectiveness of two strategies;

questioning and role play, the sample needed to be directed to some activities. These

activities were intended to teach the topics of the data collection period in a

collaborative way in the two classrooms. They were prepared by the project teacher

and the researcher working together before intervention. We designed these activities

to examine that how critical thinking can be developed. I understand that minor

changes in task design might influence both dialogic patterns and learning outcomes

(Tolmie, Howe, Mackenzie, & Greer, 1993).

However, in this study the tasks were developed from the English course book

followed by the school. Before the intervention, I got the scheme of work school

prepared for academic year from the headmistress office of the sampled school.

School bounded me to follow the same scheme of work because examination is

conducted accordingly. I also do not want to disturb the natural setting for my

intervention.

3.3. Piloting of Instruments.

A pilot study was conducted in order to know the application of methods, their

practical implications, some possible problems and complexities because in my

opinion for a sound base of a qualitative research, especially for a novice researcher

needs to be supported by the trial of the research methods and tools in naturalistic

settings. The purpose of piloting is not just to test the authenticity and reliability of the

- 62 -

tools but to have more clear picture of real life situation and the feasibility and

implication of tools in real life situations.

For this study a pilot study was conducted in another primary public school. During

piloting:

I examined the practical procedure of research, specifically, the audio and video

recording procedure that how it can be located to capture the activities of

elementary students in a class room settings.

Investigated the authenticity and reliability of research tools, specifically, pre- and

post- questioners in order to know the responses of children, and to make any

modification if it is required.

Finally, I made the schedule of training interventions, time, space and order of the

activities and the content for the actual research procedure.

3.4. Data Collection

This section gives detail of each of implemented research instrument and

technique used in the study. The data sources of this study were (i) questionnaires

data (ii) observation (video recording) and (iii) fields notes. For this study, I used pre

and post questionnaires to examine the change in student's critical thinking level and

critical thinking attitudes. The researcher video recorded all the classroom activities.

3.4.1. Questionnaire.

A questionnaire is useful means of exploring the perceptions, beliefs and

feelings of sampled people. Questionnaire can either be structured or unstructured.

As a data collecting instrument, it could be structured or unstructured (Bryman,

2012). Questionnaires are commonly used as data collection tool in educational and

social sciences (Bowling, 1997, Sharp, et al; Scott & usher, 1999). They are cost

effective method for large data collection. Questionnaires are very much useful in

- 63 -

such situations when people do not feel comfortable to share their inner feeling,

experiences and attitudes through interview method.

In the study two pre and post questionnaires were used as an important data

source. After piloting and feedback of a small group of students a few modifications

were made in the questionnaires to finalize the instrument before practicing in a main

study. After all these modification, the questionnaire was administered before and

after the study to all research participants. Before administering the instrument, the

researcher briefed the students about the questionnaire filling to avoid students'

confusion and misunderstanding about items that may affect the reliability of scores.

Critical thinking questionnaire. I adapted questionnaire (Paul, 1992) to measure the

changes in critical thinking of the students. The questionnaire comprises of 15 items

on a four-point Likert scale and participants were required to select one option against

each item. The questionnaire items were based on indicators of each standard such as

clarity, accuracy, relevance, logic and fairness.

The indicators were not only to develop lessons for intervention but also used as

scoring tool for assessment of critical thinking. The responses of students were

analysed with the direction of 4 points scale ranging from agree, strongly agree,

disagree, and strongly disagree. The minimum score is 1 and maximum score for each

item is 4. The score for each item range from 1 to 4 respectively, giving a minimum

total score of 15 and maximum total score is 60. I made my scheme to interpret the

quantitative results and for the purpose of generation of the meaning from the data.

So, the cut off score is 30 and students who scored below this range are considered as

having weak critical thinking skills, those who achieved score more than 31 and less

than 46 are considered as having moderate critical thinking skills and those who

scored above than 46 are considered having strong critical thinking skills. The

- 64 -

obtaining score of the student shows their level of critical thinking level. The

cronbach’s alpha of the questionnaire is .74 which is considered good for reliability of

the scores (Gay & Airasian, 2003).

Critical thinking attitude questionnaire. Another critical thinking attitude

questionnaire was developed for the specific purpose of this research. The purpose

was to analyse the change in critical thinking attitude of students if any because of

intervention. The questionnaire was developed on the basis of Paul’s (1994) traits. It

consisted of 23 items with total score of 92 in accordance with 4 point score agree,

strongly agree, disagree and strongly disagree. The value of Cronbach’s alpha

reliability of this scale is .80. This questionnaire was given to the students twice times

before and after the intervention to choose one option according to their own point of

view. However, the differences between their scores were used to measure the change

in critical thinking attitude of the students.

3.4.2. Observation.

The purpose of the study was to observe the dynamic interaction of students

deduced from their verbal behaviour during intervention activities happened in a

natural setting. The purpose of the analysis of the classroom discourse was to provide

a descriptive account of specific behaviours of critical thinking reflected in a real

setting by the participants. According to Mason (2002 , p.32) "knowledge or evidence

of the social world can be generated by observing or participating in, or experiencing

"natural" or 'real life' setting, interactive situation and so on". It is considered viable

for class room discourse to utilise video recording to overcome the complexity of

student-student and teacher-students interaction in a social or natural settings. This

video recording can provide all details of verbal behaviours of participant

comprehensively. It captures all authentic moments in detail in order to bring about a

- 65 -

complete picture of a certain phenomenon. With these emerging characteristics it is

considered more significant than written observation sheets by which a certain

systematic plan is developed to help the researcher in recording data during the action

itself. Furthermore, video recording can help a researcher to develop the database

being used for different scenarios by providing a live version of thick and

comprehensive database. The researcher used non-participant observation techniques

through which she observed student's activities in the class room. Observation

methods are helpful for researchers in obtaining information about their feelings,

emotions, communication patterns and their social interaction (Schmuck, 1997).

Observation was recorded through video recordings. Two teaching strategies

were used in two different class rooms. Questioning was the first strategy used in one

class room and the other strategy was role play used in second class room. Students

participated in class room questioning sessions and they were observed and analysed

through their answers by using intellectual standards. In role play activity different

tasks were assigned to students to develop critical thinking. All activities were

selected from their English syllabus book recommend by the school. All behaviours

were monitored as data source for further data analysis. As, Spradley (1980, p.34)

explained that

Marshall and Rossman (1989) define observation as "the systematic description of

events, behaviors, and artefacts in the social setting chosen for study". Observation is

considered an important data collection tool in social research world. Through

observation a researcher can approach those hidden experiences that cannot be

"The research site and setting, of course, be selected best to answer the

research questions, but with an eye toward simplicity, accessibility, the

possibility of remaining relatively unobtrusive, permissibleness,

assurance that the activities of interest will occur frequently, and the

degree to which the researcher can truly become a participant"

- 66 -

explored through some other methods like interview or questionnaire. Observation

can be participant and non-participant; in participant observation a researcher

participates with the activities of the participants and in non-participant observation

the researcher stands a side and observes the experience of the participant. In the

study a participant observation is not suitable as a researcher has to observe and

evaluate the activities of children (Bernard, 1994).

Moreover, by keeping in view, the reactivity factor of students with the camera

exposure I tried to take some precautions to overcome this issue. The way that I

adopted to reduce reactivity was to spend substantial period of time with the

participants to make them comfortable with camera. By fulfilling the ethical

consideration, I visited the target school and got permission of students for

participation and videotaping in the study before starting the actual study. So in such a

way they were much aware about to be videotaped.

Another step that I have taken to reduce the reactivity effect was being present

the whole day in the school during the recording and most importantly having

videotaped an average of 13 lessons of the target group. Therefore, I had also an

option to reduce the irrelevant videotaped data if any, but actually I did not find any

irrelevant data during the intervention.

3.4.3. Field notes.

Field notes were taken during the intervention, when the researcher realized to

keep record of all important information regarding the behaviour, feelings, emotions

and identity of students. Such type of data collection helped the researcher to present

the data in detail without missing any part of information relevant to study. Some

notes were taken after the intervention when researcher felt problem in writing all

details during the intervention. As Loizos, (2000) note taking is a personal activity

- 67 -

that depends upon the research context, the objectives of the research and the

relationship with informants. The field notes helped me to understand the overall

situation and some events that occurred where the camera was not focused.

3.5. Data Generation

By making all relevant arrangement for the main study in March and April

2014, I decided to conduct actual intervention in mid Sep, 2014 due to some

constraints. First of all there were summer vacations from June to mid Aug in

Pakistan so students were not available for the study. Secondly, the new term was to

start in September and that time students are free from school course burden. Thirdly

teachers are willing to give their class for this intervention because they were briefed

that all tasks are developed from student's course book and they will not be burdened

to repeat the course. Fourthly, head of the institution and teachers were ensured about

the course completion of students and removed their fear of wastage of student's time.

Therefore, the permission of head and teachers for pilot study in the mid of Aug, 2014

and actual study in mid Sep, 2014 was taken. The actual study started for data

generation in mid Sept. 14 and ended in Dec. 2014.

3.5.1. Intervention.

Intervention of the study includes two parts, 1) development of critical thinking

and 2) examining the effect of questioning and role play on attitudes of students. In

the study, two teaching strategies questioning and role play were used in two different

classrooms to develop critical thinking among students. Paul’s standards were used as

teaching and analysing tool in both classrooms. For questioning strategy one format

of questioning was used (see section 4.1) On the other hand, role play strategy

includes two parts, script and debriefing. Students performed on given scripts and

their critical thinking was assessed through debriefing questioning. For the assessment

- 68 -

of critical thinking attitude, two pre and post questionnaires based on Paul’s trait

model were used (see Appendix 36 & 37).

Format of asking questioning. I used the patron of following questions during

intervention for questioning strategy. I do not give the information directly but engage

students in discussion by asking a series of thoughtful questions. I prepared all

lessons for questioning strategy based on the following questions. The sequence of

asking questions in each lesson was different but I used them as baseline to develop

the critical thinking among the students

i. Questions of clarification students opinions

(How does this relate to ...? What is your main point?)

ii. Questions that probe assumptions

(What are you assuming? What would happen if ...?)

iii. Questions that probe reasons and evidence

(Why is that happening? Are there any other reasons?)

iv. Questions of viewpoints and perspectives

(What is an alternative? What would someone who disagrees say?)

v. Questions that probe implications and consequences

(What are the implications of ...? How does ... effect ...?)

vi. Questions about the questions

(How important is this question? To answer this question, what questions

would we have to answer first?)

Format of role play. Role play was used as second teaching strategy in a class to

develop critical thinking among 4th grade students. All tasks are selected from text

book followed by school. Prior to class different scenarios were discussed. Teacher

briefed students about all roles. Students are divided in to small groups. Number of

- 69 -

participants in a role varies accordingly. Students were given scenario card with

written description of situation. Teacher briefly outlined the situation perhaps rest

students will discuss either in a group or in a class collectively. Written description

was in English but group discussion was done in native language. 4-6 students were

generally required for the role on voluntarily basis. Students were autonomous in

selection of their group members. The purpose of the activity was to involve all

students in activity for their better learning.

Each small group will identify what additional information they require to either

to understand the scenario or to play a role. Teacher, in response will briefly explain

the situation but will not disclose whole scenario beforehand. Some general rules

were told students to follow during role play activity

Everyone has the right to pass.

Students work together to solve problems.

Students take making mistakes as a natural part of learning.

Teacher provided them all ground rules to follow while acting a role. Students

were instructed about not to share any irrelevant information about themselves or

others. Teacher announced that every student will participate in the activity. The

purpose behind was to maximize the participation of students to benefit the activity.

One class period was used for the activity in which 20 minutes were given for role

play and the other 30 minutes were left for debriefing session. The other 10 minutes

were given to students to discuss their role card with their group members. Teacher

decided not to interrupt students from beginning to the end of the activity and

provided opportunity to students to dig themselves out of holes with their creation. If

one student makes a clear mistake, it is advisable to correct her after the play. Role

play is really essential for independent and reflective learning of students. Through

- 70 -

the activity students can learn those skills and content that they experienced difficult

through traditional teaching methods.

3.5.2. Generating the data.

In the present study I employed two strategies for data generation. Pre- and post-

questionnaire filled by the students to know the change in their critical thinking skills

by comparing the pre- and post-tests scores. The demerit of this method is that it can

employ large sample but cannot provide extensive detail of the process of interaction

among students. The second Pre- and post- questionnaire was utilized to get

understanding of student's attitude change before and after the intervention. Students

were assessed by their attitude scale scores individually.

The second method that I adopted for the study was student discourse as it

immerged in their interaction during the intervention (Van, 2006) .There is one

drawback of this method that a smaller sample is usually used, however, the

advantage of this method is that it can report thick and rich detail of the phenomena

being studied.After getting student's consent I practically started videotaping the

student's behaviors in the real classroom setting. Total 15 episodes of target group

were video recorded.

3.6. Data analysis

In this section, I explained the procedure how I analysed quantitative as well as

qualitative data. I provided the rationale and procedure of inter-coder reliability. I

used two types of data analyses approaches quantitative and qualitative; quantitative

data can only be used to explain the coding scheme of systematic observation but it

cannot answer the questions of meaning construction process in a natural setting as it

is not called dynamic system of interpretation of meanings in a social setting. One

advantage of quantitative analysis is that it can employ a large sample and analyse a

- 71 -

large amount of data in one time. The other approach of analysis for the study is

qualitative that heavily depends on detailed, rich and thick data of the classroom

discourse used for the study. It includes detail of any new issue or prospects that

emerge during the intervention (Mercer, 2008). Another worth noting effect of

qualitative data is its dynamic and persistent nature as it remains throughout the whole

process.

3.6.1. Analysis of video data.

The researcher starting point in analyzing the video data comprised of

videotaping of all sessions collected revealed that the teachers followed particular

behaviours in their practices. All verbal behaviours of students during the discourse

were examined and further transcribed. All transcripts were split into turns and each

turn by one speaker is considered one turn until or unless the other speaker starts

speaking. Some other helpful responses as 'yes', hum, ohh, were also considered a

turn. All transcripts by the speaker were numbered.

Transcript numbering

Figure 3.1. Transcript numbering

Episode numbering. In transcription the decimal numbering is used, the first number

(the whole part) represents the episode number sequentially as implemented in the

school and the second number (decimal part) indicates the turns of the conversation

between participants within the group. For example, in the above example 3 is

3

.5

Episode number

Sequential numbering of turns

- 72 -

showing the third episode implemented in the school and 5 shows the participant

speaking turn.

Although there were different models suggested in literature to evaluate critical

thinking skills but I used Paul (1994) model based on intellectual standards to analyse

classroom discourse as it was used to develop the critical thinking too. For the

classroom discourse I numbered all episodes sequentially e.g. Epi-1, Epi-2 and so on.

The video-taping is also a strong evidence of all episodes of the intervention that

all behaviours of students are recorded and reported comprehensively. All episodes

were done in school timings. Two techniques questioning and role playing were used

to elicit the critical thinking skills of students. I also provided a grid of all episodes

with number and implementation date (see table 3.1).

Table 3.1.

Discourse Trends in the Analysed Episodes throughout the Intervention in the

Questioning Classroom

Sr # Episode Date Nature of Discourse Task title Intervention

Type

1 E-1 18-08-14 Discipline Questioning

2 E-2 25-08-14 Weak Shopping Questioning

3 E-3 Questioning

4 E-4 01-9-14 Questioning

5 E-5 Questioning


7 E-7 Questioning


9 E-9 Questioning

10 E-10 22-9-14 Fair Cleanliness Questioning

11 E-11 Questioning

12 E-12 29-09-14 Moderate Grand Pa's

Garden

Questioning

13 E-13 Questioning

- 73 -

14 E-14 06-10-14 Moderate Earth day Questioning

15 E-15 Questioning

16 E-16 13-10-14 Moderate My country Questioning

17 E-17 Questioning


19 E -19 Questioning

20 E -20 27-10-14 Moderate Aeroplane Questioning


22 E-22 03-11-14 Moderate Safety rules Questioning

23 E-23 Questioning

24 E-24 10-11-14 Moderate Sun travels Questioning

25 E-25 Questioning


7 E-27 Questioning


29 E-29 Questioning

30 E -30 01-12-14 Strong Pollution Questioning

The level of critical thinking of students was measured through the percentage

of each standard either the percentage increases or decreases the level of critical

thinking will be changed accordingly. The quantification of each standard is done by

dividing each standard move with total moves of the discourse (see section 5.2.1).

3.6.2. A grid of role play episodes.

Table3.2

Discourse trends in the analysed episodes throughout the intervention in the role play

classroom

Sr. # Episode Date Nature of

Discourse

Task Intervention

Type

1 E-1 20-08-14 Fair Respect for feelings Role play

2 E-2 21-08-14 Role play

3 E-3 27-08-14 Moderate Respect for difference Role play

- 74 -

4 E-4 28-08-14 Role play

5 E-5 03-09-14 Moderate self-respect Role play

6 E-6 04-09-14 Role play

7 E-7 10-09-14 Moderate Respect for rules Role play

8 E-8 11-09-14 Role play

9 E-9 17-09-14 Moderate Telling a lie Role play

10 E-10 18-09-14 Role play

11 E-11 24-09-14 Moderate Telling a lie Role play

12 E-12 25-09-14 Role play

13 E-13 01-09-14 Strong Friendship Role play

14 E-14 02-09-14 Role play

15 E-15 08-10-14 Strong Friendship Role play

16 E-16 09-10-14 Role play

17 E-17 15-10-14 Strong Peer pressure Role play

18 E-18 16-10-14 Role play

19 E -19 22-10-14 Strong Cheating in exam Role play

20 E -20 23-10-14 Role play

21 E -21 27-10-14 Strong Good man and his son Role play

22 E-22 28-10-14 Role play

23 E-23 05-11-14 Strong The blind man and his

elephant

Role play

24 E-24 06-11-14 Role play

25 E-25 12-11-14 Strong Earth Day Role play

26 E-26 13-11-14 Role play

27 E-27 19-11-14 Strong The careless lad Role play

28 E-28 20-11-14 Role play

29 E-29 26-11-14 Strong God is great Role play

3.6.2. Analysis of questionnaire data.

Two questionnaires were used in the study to know the change in students’

critical thinking skills and students’ critical attitude due to the intervention. The data

of these questionnaires was used as an evidence of the productivity of the two

teaching strategies questioning and role play. Data from these questionnaires was

- 75 -

analysed through means and Wilcoxon test (see section 4.1.1). For the purpose of

quantitative data analysis MS Excel, 2007 and SPSS (Statistical Package for Social

Sciences) version 18 for windows were used.

3.6.3. Inter coder reliability.

Inter-coder reliability is an essential part of any content analysis that measures

"the extent to which the different judges tend to assign exactly the same rating to each

object" (Tinsley & Weiss, 2000). The basic function of inter-coder reliability is to

confirm the consistency among different codes. The purpose of inter-coder reliability

for the study was to ensure the consistency of different coders in classification of

different discourse among the episodes of the intervention. For the present study inter-

coder reliability was completed in two stages. Firstly, I discussed the coding and

categorization format with my supervisor and after getting his consent I further

trained my one of colleague for the categorization of all episodes.

According to the analytical framework of the study I categorized three episodes

and then discussed the whole process with my supervisor. After the discussion, my

supervisor further categorized those episodes according to the criteria and compared

with my findings and we got almost 77% agreements on those episodes. After that we

again discussed another episode categorization for resolving the non-matching issues.

After completing this process we achieved almost 86% agreement on the

categorization scheme.

For the purpose of inter-coder reliability of other episodes I trained one of my

colleagues and briefed her about the research purpose, research questions and analysis

purpose of the episodes. Moreover, I briefed completely the coding plan to her, after

this discussion my colleague and I categorized and compared the episodes according

to the framework and got almost 91% agreements.

- 76 -

3.7. Trustworthiness

The worth of any research depends upon its validity and reliability. In

quantitative research validity and reliability are used as springboard to ensure the

worth of data and generalizability of results. On the other hand, in qualitative

research, Lincoln and Guba (1985) substituted these terms with a new word

trustworthiness that is based on four fundamental principles: ‘credibility’,

'dependability', ‘conformability', and 'transferability'. This section explains how these

principles were achieved in the study.

3.7.1. Credibility.

According to Lincoln and Guba (1985) credibility is considered the most

significant part in achieving trustworthiness goals. Basically the idea of credibility is

to examine the congruence of the findings with reality (Merriam cited in Shenton,

2004). These authors suggested the following conditions to achieve to ensure the

harmoniousness of the recorded data for the study.

3.7.1.1. Prolonged observation engagement.

Prolonged observation engagement is considered a significant factor in

developing a trustworthy relationship between a researcher and the participants. To

achieve this objective I visited the target school for almost four months prior to the

data collection. I introduced myself to some of the key participants and spend some

times with them. By this way I won the trust of the key participants, teachers and the

other staff including the headmistress of the school. I considered it my achievement to

develop a strong rapport with my participants.

3.7.1.2. Triangulation.

Triangulation is used to ensure the validity of results of the study by using

various methods and approaches. It overcomes the complexity of research arise by

- 77 -

using only one method. It may include a variety of data, investigation techniques and

various methods of inquiry. Triangulation also enhances the scientific rigour of the

research (Bryman, 2016).

I followed the terms of triangulation by using different methods of research such

as questionnaires, field notes and observations (video recording) in the study. I tried

my best to minimize the risk of biasness and to achieve the neutrality of the results.

Tactics to help ensure honesty in information when contributing data, I had made it

very clear to the students that if they have any issue regarding video recording or

research participation then they have equal right to quit the study at any stage without

any hesitation. I adopted this way to ensure the willingness of the participant.

Moreover, I established friendly environment for the students to make them

convenient to share their ideas and experiences freely and frankly. By doing all these

steps, I achieved the successful results.

3.7.1.3. Iterative questioning.

I discussed previously, that I collected my data by using multiple sources such

as observation (video recording), field notes and two questionnaires to ensure the

trustworthiness of the data. I believe that video recorded date may shed light more

deeply to explore the behaviours of the participants if rewinding literately. I realized

during the intervention, that iterative questioning proved very helpful in removing the

hesitation and ambiguities of the participants regarding the question at issue. All these

steps that I used during the intervention helped me in getting thick and rich data.

3.7.1.4. Peer and debriefing expert.

I achieved expert debriefing in my study by attending continuous meetings with

my supervisors to get his feedback about my work. His reflective commentary helped

me to improve my mistakes in the study process. I also enriched my research

- 78 -

knowledge by sharing my data with my colleagues of relevant fields. Their comments

proved as launching pad to improve my data and findings. In the meanwhile, I

attended different research workshops and conferences to aid my findings of the

study. These steps proved pivotal pillar to refine my findings.

3.7.1.5. The researcher's reflection.

I prepared my own notes on weekly basis about the research process in which I

discussed different issues occurred during the study. These notes helped me to filter

the ambiguities and to get refined work.

3.7.1.6. Neutrality of the researcher.

In qualitative research the role of researcher in data generation cannot be

predicted passive but his / her fully attention and firm concentration is required for

ensuring the validity of the data. Neutrality of the researcher is key element of the

qualitative research. He/ she is required to overcome his/ her biases to make research

more reliable. To deal with all these issues I acted as an active teacher in the

classroom to interact lively and friendly with the participants to get their real consents

and it is also demand of design based research. I acted as stranger while analysing and

interpreting the data. The objective of the research was that questioning and role play

could be effective teaching strategies to promote critical thinking among students of

Pakistan. By doing all above efforts I tried to prove how it occurred actually and it

ensured further the credibility of the research.

3.7.2. Conformability.

In qualitative research conformability is perceived similar with objectivity

which deals with the extent to the conformability of the findings of the research by

people or different approaches. The researcher has tried his best to make it possible to

ensure that the findings, interpretations and conclusions are the result of participators

- 79 -

experiences instead of researcher or any other source (Shenton, 2004). To minimise

the researcher bias different data collection methods observation, video recording,

field notes and questionnaires were used in the study. The researcher has also

provided the protocol by explaining the research process, instrument development and

data analysis procedure in detail.

3.7.3. Transferability.

In qualitative research transferability deals with the applicability of the findings

in other contexts and can be traced through its sources. In the study, I honestly tried to

provide all details clearly by providing thick data of the participants and of all

research activities through multiple sources of data. I provided rich information to the

reader who wants to follow the findings or try to trace out the sources of the study.

The sufficiently rich data that I tried to provide may help the reader to comprehend

the portrait of the study and think about to replicate it with other context. Moreover, I

provided detailed literature review and discussion in which I presented the detail of all

verbal and non-verbal accounts of the research activities to make the reader able to

assume or infer about the interpretations and findings how these were incorporated in

the study.

3.7.4. Dependability.

Dependability shows the consistency of the findings that could be repeated by

any researcher in future. Therefore, thick description and extensive data provide the

complete picture of the study (Somekh & Lewin, 2005). Moreover, thick and rich data

ensures the criteria of dependability. In the study, to ensure the dependability, I

presented the detail of instruments and full procedure of methodology for data

collection. I also reported all observed events and behaviours presented by students

- 80 -

during the intervention. I have included extended information regarding participant

selection and whole research process to confirm the dependability of the study.

3.8. Ethical Consideration

This section presents a few essential ethical consideration related to this study.

Cohen, et al., (2007) pointed out informed consent, anonymity of participants and

confidentiality as key features of ethical consideration which ensure the safety of

participants from any mental, physical and emotional harm.

3.8.1. Informed consent.

This study was conducted in one Public girl’s high school of Lahore that is a

very famous city of Pakistan. I visited the headmistress of the school to get her

permission to conduct piloting in the period of May 2014 and later the actual study in

Aug, 2014. I briefed the objectives and some other details of the study to the

headmistress. After getting her approval I further explained the details of videotaping

of the participants during the study. I also explained her that participants are free to

quit the study at any stage if they feel any inconvenience during the intervention.

Secondly, I met with the participants before the start of the study and made them

clear about the objectives of the study. I briefed them that they are going to be

engaged in a study for the whole term. I made them clear that their answers will not

be used for any other purpose but to fulfil only my study purpose. I also assure them

that their teacher could not be able to access their answers and opinion shared for this

study. Lastly, I ensure them that they have a right to quit the study at any time

without any hesitation whenever they feel any inconvenience during the intervention.

3.8.2. Anonymity of participants.

I informed all participants and teachers who are participating in the pilot and

main study that their names and their identity will be kept confidential and their real

- 81 -

names will not be used in the thesis. I can use on the other hand some fictitious names

for the study purpose instead of their real names. I believe that fictitious names of the

school and participants will not affect the credibility of the study. The worth noting

and interesting fact was that all participants have no issue with the use of their real

names for the actual study. They were eager to publish their names in the study. By

knowing these facts, the ball was actually in my court that it depends on me either to

use their real names or fictitious names. I kept the confidentiality of the participants

by not using their names in the study.

3.8.3. Confidentiality.

The main sources of data used for the study are mainly depending on audio and

video recordings of the participants. I assured all participants that their video

recordings cannot be accessed by anyone at any cost other than the researcher and

their details will be kept highly confidential. I also ensured the participants that the

purpose of the research was never be to judge their attainments. On the other hand,

they have no issue with their shared opinions to be used openly for the research

purpose. I took responsibility of keeping secret the whole audio and video recording

of the participants in the present and in the future.

3.9. Summary

This chapter includes the research methodology used in the study; research

design emerged; techniques of data collection and data analysis; how the

trustworthiness was ensured and ethical considerations that have been taken

throughout the study.

- 82 -

Data Analysis

These next three chapters 4, 5 and 6 are concerned with analysis of data collected

from two classrooms to answer the research questions.

Chapter 4: It reports the extent of quantitative cognitive change occurred in students’

critical thinking in the result of intervention that consists of two teaching strategies;

questioning and role play in two different English classroom of Grade 4. Paul’s

standards were used to measure the change separately for each strategy through pre-

and post- critical thinking questionnaire filled by students. Therefore, this chapter

further divided into two sub sections:

Chapter 5: This chapter explains the analysis of classroom discourse emerged during

intervention and divided into three major sections, first deals the surface analysis of

all recorded episodes and second talks about the deep analysis of some selected

episodes in which critical thinking was very high or very low with the purpose to

explore the factors involved. Finally the last section about some factors that influence

on the productivity of intervention. Then I will elaborate some factors emerged from

the data which influence critical thinking of elementary students.

Chapter 6

It states about the change of students’ attitude occurred in the result of intervention.

Pre and post critical thinking attitude questionnaire was used to examine the change in

attitude of students. In this section Paul's (1994) intellectual traits like intellectual

empathy, intellectual precision, and intellectual autonomy were indirectly used for

students’ attitude analysis. I will describe the classification of discourse, interpretation

of discourse and criteria of discourse analysis.

- 83 -

Chapter IV

Quantitative Data Analysis

This chapter reports the extent of quantitative cognitive change occurred in

students’ critical thinking in the result of intervention that consists of two teaching

strategies; questioning and role play in two different English classrooms of Grade 4.

Paul’s standards were used to measure the change separately for each strategy through

pre- and post- critical thinking questionnaires filled by students. This chapter is

divided into two sub sections: (a) Questionnaire analysis of questioning classroom

and (b) Questionnaire analysis of role play classroom.

4.1. Questionnaire

I adapted questionnaire (Paul, 1994) to measure the change in critical thinking

of the students. The questionnaire comprises of 15 items on a four-point Likert scale

and participants were required to select one option against each item.

Table 4.1

Standards as Teaching and Analytical Tool

Sr.# Standard Indicators

1. Clarity Could you elaborate further

Could you give me an example

Could you illustrate what you mean

2. Accuracy How Could we check on that

How could we find out if that is true

How could we verify or test that

3. Relevance How does that relate to the problem

How does that bear on the

- 84 -

How does that help us with the issues

4. Logic Does all this make sense

Does your first Para fits in with your last Para

Does what you say follow from the evidence

5. Fairness Do I have vested interest in that issue

Am I sympathetically representing the viewpoints of others

Note. Source : Paul's model (1994)

The indicators were not only to develop lessons for intervention but also used as

scoring tool for assessment of critical thinking. It facilitated quick and valuable

assessment of students’ thinking. As mentioned earlier the responses of students were

analysed with the direction of 4 points Likert scale ranging from agree, strongly

agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. The minimum score is 1 and maximum score

for each item is 4. The cronback Alpha was .74.

The interpretation of scores: I made my scheme to interpret the quantitative results

and for the purpose of generation of the meaning from the data. I developed the

following kind of arbitrary explanation of the scores.

The students have a weak critical thinking, if the scores ranged below 30.

The students have a moderate critical thinking, if the scores ranged between 31-

45.

The students have a strong critical thinking, if the scores ranged above 46.

The score for each item range from 1 to 4 respectively, giving a minimum total

score of 15 and maximum total score is 60. The cut off score is 30 and students who

scored below this range are considered as having weak Critical Thinking skills, those

who achieved score more than 31 and less than 46 are considered as having moderate

Critical Thinking skills and those who scored above than 46 are considered having

- 85 -

strong critical thinking skills. The obtaining score of the student shows their level of

critical thinking level. The questionnaires were distributed to all students of two

classes. The researcher was present at the time of filling the questionnaires to avoid

students' confusion and misunderstanding about the items that may affect the

reliability of scores (see section 3.4. 2). The Cronbach’s alpha of the questionnaire is

.74 which is considered good for reliability of the scores (Gay & Airasian, 2003).

However, there was 100 percent return rate. Callahan (1995) explains that the content

validity deals with the opinions of experts on certain items of data tool or relevant

issues. Content validity provides useful information about the consistency of the

content items towards certain phenomena or variable.

In the next parts, I present the quantitative analysis separately of two classrooms; one

was used to implement questioning method and other for role play activities to

develop critical thinking.

4.1.1. Analysis of questionnaire in questioning classroom.

For the analysis of critical thinking questionnaire, I employed two statistical

techniques: descriptive and non-parametric Wilcoxon test. Descriptive analysis

simply provides the mean difference of pre- and post- questionnaire administered on

students. For the significance and reliability of scores with mean scores a

nonparametric Wilcoxon test was used.

4.1.2. Descriptive analysis.

A computer analysis was conducted to provide simple descriptive statistics of

the students’ responses. It provided the means and standard deviation of each item

before and after the intervention. The results are shown in Figure 4.1.

- 86 -

Figure 4.1. Mean difference of student's performance in pre and post-test of critical

thinking skills in questioning classroom

Mean difference of pre and post-test shows change in all intellectual standards which

proves improvement in critical thinking level of the students. Students improve their

critical thinking scores in favour of questioning strategy.

Non-parametric test Analysis

Mean scores of student's critical thinking shows only the difference of scores

for intellectual standards. However, I employed another inferential non parametric test

i.e., ‘Wilcoxon Signed Rank test’ that not only to present the significant differences in

students’ critical thinking but also to show the consistency of scores with the mean

scores appeared in descriptive analysis. The purpose of using both techniques was to

make more understanding about the change in the level of critical thinking among

students.

3.4

66

7

6.0

66

7

2.9

33

3

5.9

33

3 7.4

66

7

5.6

7.8

66

7

7.0

66

7

8.2

9.0

66

7

C L A R I T Y A C C U R A C Y R E L E V A N C E L O G I C F A I R N E S S

pre test post test

- 87 -

Table 4.2

Wilcoxon Signed Ranked Test Indicates the Difference among subscales of Critical

Thinking in Questioning Classroom

N Mean

Ranks

Sum of

Ranks

Z P

Clarity(pre)-

Clarity(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.10 .002

Positive

Ranks

13b 6.50 78.00

Ties 3c

Total 15

Accuracy(pre)-

Accuracy(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -2.82 .005

Positive

Ranks

10b 5.50 55.0

Ties 5c

Total 15

Relevance(pre)-

Relevance(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.42 .001

Positive

Ranks

15b 8.00 120.0

Ties 0c

Total 15

Logic(pre)-

Logic(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.11 .002

Positive

Ranks

12b 6.50 78.0

- 88 -

Ties 3c

Total 15

Fairness(pre)-

Fairness(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.40 .001

Positive

Ranks

14b 7.50 105.0

Ties 1c

Total 15

Note. a= (post< pre); b= (post> pre); c= (pre=post)

Wilcoxon test was conducted to evaluate whether participant showed difference

in the level of critical thinking scores before and after intervention. The results

indicated a significant difference in clarity (z=-3.10; p=.002), accuracy (z=-2.8;

p=.005), relevance (z=-3.42; p=.001), logic (z=-3.11; p=.002) and fairness (z=-3.40;

p=.001)., while the mean of the ranks in favour of level of critical thinking after

intervention was .00.

4.2. Analysis of Role Play Classroom


A computer analysis was conducted to provide simple descriptive statistics of

the students’ responses. It provided the means and standard deviation of each item

before and after the intervention. Difference in mean scores of students showed a

change in their critical thinking skills as they improved in all intellectual standards

and it can be considered an evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention.

- 89 -


thinking skills in role play classroom

Mean difference of pre and post-test shows change in all intellectual standards which

is an evidence of the improvement in critical thinking level of the students. Students

improve their critical thinking scores in favour of questioning strategy.

4.2.2. Non-parametric analysis.

I employed Wilcoxon Signed Rank test not only to present the significant

differences in students critical thinking but also to show the consistency of scores

with the mean scores appeared in descriptive analysis. The purpose of using both

techniques was to make more understanding about the change in the level of critical

thinking among students in role play classroom. The difference in the mean scores

showed that students improved their critical thinking scores after the implementation

of intervention. These results also showed the productivity of role play strategy in

promoting of CT among 4th grade

3.0

66

7

5

4

4.7

33

3 5.9

33

3

5.6

6.9

33

3

7.0

66

7 8.2

7.4

00

0

Clarity Accuracy Revelance Logic Fairness

pre test post test

- 90 -

Table 4.3

Wilcoxon Signed Ranked Test Indicates the Difference in subscales o Critical

Thinking in Role Play Classroom

N Mean

Ranks

Sum of

Ranks

Z P

Clarity(pre)-

Clarity(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.45 .001

Positive

Ranks

15b 8.00 120.0

Ties 0c

Total 15

Accuracy(pre)-

Accuracy(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.30 .001

Positive

Ranks

13b 7.00 91.0

Ties 2c

Total 15

Relevance(pre)-

Relevance(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.44 .001

Positive

Ranks

15b 8.00 120.0

Ties 0c

Total 15

Logic(pre)-

Logic(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.50 .000

Positive

Ranks

15b 8.00 120.0

Ties 0c

- 91 -

Total 15

Fairness(pre)-

Fairness(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.51 .000

Positive

Ranks

15b 8.00 120.0

Ties 0c

Total 15

Note. a= (post< pre); b=(post> pre); c= (pre=post)

Wilcoxon test was conducted to evaluate whether participant showed difference

in the level of critical thinking scores before and after intervention. Findings indicated

a significant difference in clarity (z=-3.45; p=.001), accuracy (z=-3.30; p=.001),

relevance (z=-3.44; p=.001), logic (z=-3.50; p=.000) and fairness (z=-3.51; p=.000).

- 92 -

Chapter V

Qualitative Analysis

This chapter explains the analysis of classroom discourse emerged during

intervention and divided into three major sections; first deals the initial analysis of all

recorded episodes (section 5.1) and second talks about the deep analysis of

comparison of few episodes from both classrooms separately in which critical

thinking was very high or very low (section 5.3). Finally the last section elaborates

some factors emerged from the data which influence critical thinking of elementary

students (section 5.4).

5.1. Analytical Framework

The Paul (2002) intellectual standards were used as an analytical framework to

examine the critical thinking of the project students. Paul framework consists of nine

standards: clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, significance

and fairness that are commonly used to develop and analyse the critical thinking. I am

taking five standards: i.e. clarity, accuracy, relevance, logic and fairness instead of

nine because it was difficult during analysis to mutually exclude of categorization of

discourse on the basis of other four standards i.e. Precision, depth, breadth and

significance.

It is assumed that continuous application of the intellectual standards produce an

intellectually disciplined critical thinker who is able to raise and formulate vital

questions and issues clearly, gathering and evaluating relevant information, openly

and fair –minded recognizing and assessing assumptions, implications and

conclusions and judging the authenticity of claims logically presented by authorities

about pre-existing beliefs and realities. Moreover, these standards help the students to

- 93 -

evaluate the worth of their own thinking more logically and rationally. An explication

of these essential intellectual standards follows:

Table 5.1

Standards as Teaching and Analytical Tool

Standard Indicators

1. Clarity Clarity: Understandable, the meaning can be grasped; to free from confusion

or ambiguity, to remove obscurities.

Clarity is a ‘gateway’ standard. If a statement is unclear, we cannot

determine whether it is accurate or relevant. In fact, we cannot tell anything

about it because we don’t yet know what it is saying. For example, the

question “What can be done about the education system in America?” is

unclear. In order to adequately address the question, we would need to have a

clearer understanding of what the person asking the question is considering

the “problem” to be. A clearer question might be “What can educators do to

ensure that students learn the skills and abilities which help them function

successfully on the job and in their daily decision-making?” Thinking is

always more or less clear. It is helpful to assume that we do not fully

understand a thought except to the extent that we can elaborate, illustrate, and

exemplify it. Questions that focus on clarity in thinking include:

Could you elaborate on that point? or Do I need to elaborate on that

point?

Could you express that point in another way? or Can I express that point

differently?

Could you give me an illustration? or Should I give an illustration?

Could you give me an example? or Should I provide an example?

Let me state in my own words what I think you just said.

- 94 -

Am I clear about your meaning?

I hear you saying “____.” Am I hearing you correctly, or have I

misunderstood you?

2. Accuracy A statement can be clear but not accurate, as in "Most dogs are over 300

pounds in weight."

How Could we check on that

How could we find out if that is true

How could we verify or test that

3. Relevance A statement can be clear, accurate, and precise, but not relevant to the

question at issue. For example, students often think that the amount of effort

they put into a course should be used in raising their grade in a course. Often,

however, the "effort" does not measure the quality of student learning; and

when this is so, effort is irrelevant to their appropriate grade.

How does that relate to the problem

How does that bear on the

How does that help us with the issues

4. Logic When we think, we bring a variety of thoughts together into some order.

When the combination of thoughts is mutually supporting and makes sense in

combination, the thinking is "logical." When the combination is not mutually

supporting, is contradictory in some sense or does not "make sense," the

combination is not logical.

Does all this make sense

Does your first Para fits in with your last Para

Does what you say follow from the evidence

5. Fairness Human thinking is often biased in the direction of the thinker - in what

are the perceived interests of the thinker. Humans do not naturally consider

the rights and needs of others on the same plane with their own rights and

- 95 -

needs. We therefore must actively work to make sure we are applying the

intellectual standard of fairness to our thinking. Since we naturally see

ourselves as fair even when we are unfair, this can be very difficult. A

commitment to fair-mindedness is a starting place.

Do I have vested interest in that issue

Am I sympathetically representing the viewpoints of others

Note. Source: Elder & Paul Model of Intellectual standards, 1994

The researcher not only used the above standards as a base line to develop the

lesson plans for intervention (teaching through two strategies: questioning & role

play) but used as a framework to analysis the discourse emerged in the result of

intervention. The researcher did not develop the lesson plans other than from the book

content described in the school's scheme of work. Beginning with these five

intellectual standards set the stage for the development of critical thinking and for

appreciating the essential role in human reasoning.

The discourse emerged during classroom interaction tells the change in student's

critical thinking and describes how students move from unclarity to clarity,

inaccuracy to accuracy, illogic to logic and unfairness to fairness due to the

intervention which is considered an evidence for effectiveness of the intervention.

The next part deals the initial analysis of all episodes recorded throughout the

intervention in two class rooms of 4th grade elementary students. It helped to

understand the nature of different discourses used by children during the intervention.

5.2. Initial Analysis

My initial analysis aims to offer results of the intervention in quantitative and

graphical forms by categorizing episodes into different levels of critical thinking. I

have divided Initial analysis in to two parts: Part A; deals questioning class room

- 96 -

analysis and Part B; deals role play class room analysis; all episodes recorded

throughout the intervention from two class rooms were analysed to describe the

overall picture of the intervention. This type of analysis helped to understand the level

of critical thinking through discourse used by children during the intervention. The

discourse is taken as an intellectual analytical tool to analyse the change in student's

critical thinking. It describes how students move from unclarity to clarity, inaccuracy

to accuracy, illogic to logic and unfairness to fairness due to the intervention which is

an evidence for effectiveness of the intervention. The researcher did not develop the

lesson plans other than from the book content described in the school's scheme of

work (see section, 3.2).

5.2.1. Part A: Initial analysis of questioning classroom.

Qualification to Quantification: The following procedure is adopted to calculate the

percentage of discourse on each standard.

I transcribed all the episodes.

I systematically categorised the discourse emerged during questioning session on

the basis of Pauls standards. I not only identify the clarity, accuracy, relevance,

logic and fairness turns from the episode but unclarity, inaccuracy, irrelevant,

illogical and unfairness turns too. I categorised all discourse on the basis of

standards.

I counted the total number of turns for each episode and total turns for each

standard.

I used the following formula to find the percentage of discourse emerges for each

standard. For example in episode-1 there were 2 turns of clarity and 4 turns of

unclarity, therefore, total turns number of clarity and un-clarity turns in whole

episode is 6. Here I find the percentage of clarity standard in whole episode.

- 97 -

Percentage of Clarity Turns in a episode =

Clarity

( Total number of Clarity turns in the episode+Total Number of Unclarity turns in the episode)×

100

Similarly above formula is used to analyze the percentage of discourse used for

each standard.

Step-4: I used the formula to find the average percentage

Average =

% of Clarity Turns +% of Accuracy Turns +% of Logic Turns +% of Relevance Turns +% of Fairmindedness Turns

( Total Number of Standards used to analyse the episode)×

I presented the results of the intervention in quantitative and graphical forms by

categorising episodes into different level of critical thinking that helped to

understand the nature of different discourses used by children during the

intervention.

Criteria to interpret the scores: For the purpose of generation of the meaning from

the data, I used the following criteria to declare the type of episode.

The students have a very weak CT, if the percentage is between 0- 20

The students have a weak CT, if the percentage is between 21- 40

The students have a fair CT, if the percentage is between 41--60

The students have a moderate CT, if the percentage is between 61-80

The students have a strong CT, if the percentage is between 81-100

The episode is considered weak, fair, moderate and strong if three out of five

standards meet the specific score range. I accept that it has no strong scientific and

statistical background. It is simply a kind of arbitrary explanation of the scores.

5.2.2. Results of case I: Questioning classroom.

The objective of my initial analysis of questioning classroom is to offer results of the

intervention in quantitative and graphical forms by categorising episodes into the

- 98 -

three types of discourse according to the analytical framework. However, the initial

analysis shows that questioning is a productive strategy to increase critical thinking.

The intervention period spreads over whole academic term that consists of 60 classes.

There were four classes in one week according to the school timetable but school

management allowed me two classes for intervention in a week. I video recorded

every second class in one week so I reported here recorded and analysed episodes

only. I used episode instead of class in whole document (see table 3.1).

Percentage scores of each standard: The following graph shows that the percentage

scores of each standard of all episodes over the whole period of the intervention

Figure 5.1. Discourse trends in the analysed episodes throughout the intervention in

questioning classroom

Fig 5.1 shows the level of critical thinking in each episode of the questioning

classroom, which can help the reader to understand what level of critical thinking

emerge by students, interaction and how the critical thinking changed among students.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

clarity%

accuracy%

relevance%

logic%

fairness %

- 99 -

In the next section, I will report the initial analysis of all recorded episodes.

Table 5.2

Discourse Trends in the Analysed Episodes throughout the Intervention in the

Questioning Classroom

Sr # Episode Date Nature of Discourse Task title Intervention

Type

1 E-1 18-08-14 Discipline Questioning


3 E-3 Questioning

4 E-4 01-9-14 Questioning

5 E-5 Questioning


7 E-7 Questioning


9 E-9 Questioning

10 E-10 22-9-14 Fair Cleanliness Questioning

11 E-11 Questioning

12 E-12 29-09-14 Moderate Grand Pa's

Garden

Questioning

13 E-13 Questioning

14 E-14 06-10-14 Moderate Earth day Questioning

15 E-15 Questioning


17 E-17 Questioning



20 E -20 27-10-14 Moderate Aeroplane Questioning


22 E-22 03-11-14 Moderate Safety rules Questioning

23 E-23 Questioning


25 E-25 Questioning


7 E-27 Questioning

- 100 -


29 E-29 Questioning

30 E -30 01-12-14 Strong Pollution Questioning

Table 5.3 shows that first four episodes were weak and the episodes from 11to 29

were moderate according to the discourse analysis criteria. Only one episode-30 was

strong.

In initial analysis first, I reported the detail of quantification of all turns by using the

framework. Secondly, I presented the detail of classroom discourse. I am not

considering the teachers’ turns for analysis used during the episodes because

researcher is concerned with students’ critical thinking.

5.2.2.1. Episode-1 (weak).

Qualification to quantification: There were total 50 turns in total in the first episode,

in which 5 of clarity & 2 of unclarity, 2 of accuracy & 1of inaccuracy, 2 of relevance

& 1 of irrelevance, 5 of logic &5 of illogic, and 0 of fairness & 0 of unfairness turns.

Task: In the episode, teacher discussed the meaning and importance of discipline.

Interpretation: It was the first lesson so researcher as a teacher briefly introduced

herself and requested to the students to introduce themselves. The purpose was to

create cheerful and friendly environment in the class. Teacher announced the topic of

first lesson "discipline." She started her lesson by initiating the knowledge based

question (what is meaning of discipline). Students showed reluctance in answering

this question; it may be due to their first interaction with their teacher. However,

teacher encouraged them "you can share any idea about discipline”. Although at the

start of the first episode, teacher set a context by repeating question several time. In

response to teacher question, one of the students raised her hand to answer but her

answer was unclear, as it does not give true meaning of disciple (see Appendix 1, 1.1-

- 101 -

1.5) for example a student shared just discipline is a good thing, as teacher further

inquired about the goodness of discipline, the class could not elaborate it clearly or

justify with any relevant example. Teacher realized vagueness and ambiguity of

students about discipline, so teacher posed some examples from real life context to

elicit the missing information. As teacher asked a non-directional question to explore

implication from students, "if you come late in school, what will happen"? In the

response of the question, students were smiling and murmuring with each other and

did not dare to share with teacher what was in their minds. Teacher again asked them

about penalty of coming late. After some pause, one student responded "we will be

fined". It was very difficult to decide for teacher either they know about it or feeling

hesitate to answer (see Appendix 1, turns 1.8-1.12).

She asked the class to share some example from their real life context about the

importance of discipline. Students again were silent and failed to provide real life

evidences to elaborate discipline. After feeling their ambiguity and unclarity she

asked them with assumption based questions, for example she asked, "just imagine

what happens if your parents are not at home". Two students said together, "teacher

we will enjoy a lot" and the other class laughed. No I'm asking you what happens in

your kitchen, in your drawing room, will you keep everything maintained in the

absence of your parents, she persistently asking them. Then one student said, no

teacher we will destroy everything in kitchen, in our bed room and in our drawing

room. Yes, that’s called indiscipline, if you will not follow the decorum of your home

and disturbed the order of everything then a mess will be created everywhere (see

Appendix 1, turns 1.13-1.16).

When students are not getting the concept of discipline very well and were

feeling difficult to linking it with real life contextual examples. Teacher used their

- 102 -

religious belongingness context because all the students belong to same community

who is running this Universe …. …. There is only one Allah (God)". She continued

discussion by asking them other question, ok "what happens if there is more than one

God"? One student straightforwardly said " no, teacher, there is only one God, it is

impossible to have two Gods. Teacher insisted her, but if there are two Gods, then

what happens? Then one of the student said, "They will fight with each other".

Teacher appreciated her and said what more will happen with us? Hum, --students

took time in thinking and after discussing with each other one said, teacher one God

will send us in a heaven and the other will send us in hell" . The whole class amused

with the answer. No one exchanged more answers and teacher clarified them with

example that if there will be two Gods, then one will decide one thing and the other

can take different decision so in a result, the whole universe will be disturbed. There

is one God, so there is discipline in our universe and everything moves with its order

and pace decided by God (see Appendix 1, turns 1.19-1.33). Teacher connected the

discipline idea with the absence of teacher in the class, students shared logical

examples as it relates with their own context. Further, teacher connected God's

presence with teacher presence in the class to explain the idea of discipline. Students

exhibited clarity of the meaning of discipline (see Appendix 1, turns 1.34-1.50).

The time was over, students were a bit comfortable about the concept discipline

but not exactly what I was expecting. They were not open to answer and elaboration.

One third time of the class was spent in the clarification of the meaning and

importance of discipline. Most of the time, teacher autonomy was observed. Teacher

tried to involve students to speak up or learn from classroom discussion, but students

seem anxious and confused throughout the class. Students seem less participant and

less involved in the discussion. Although, they were listening teacher talk quietly and

- 103 -

attentively but they showed difficulty in answering questions. It may be due to their

lack of self-confidence and first interaction with teacher. There showed little clarity

and accuracy in their responses as they could not elaborate discipline with appropriate

and relevant examples. They could not provide logical inferences of importance of

discipline. Although, teacher persistent encouragement, feedback and negotiation

persuaded them to participate in class room discussion but a few of students tried to

answer the questions and most of them remained quiet and silent in the class. The

reason may behind be their classroom culture where only syllabus questions are

appreciated but challenging questions were not encouraged. Students may be habitual

in rote memorization of factual information and this dead question culture stops their

thinking so they assumed the present questioning technique as new teaching strategy.

5.2.2.2. Episode-2 (Weak).


in which 1 of clarity & 7 of unclarity 2 of accuracy & 6 of inaccuracy, 1 of

relevance & 1 of irrelevance, 1 of logic & 2 of illogic, and 1 of fairness & 1 of

unfairness turns.

Task: In the episode, grammar rules of lesson shopping were practiced.

Interpretation: In this episode students provided inaccurate, irrelevant and illogical

examples in the response of questions asked. They could not relate their answers with

real life context. They scored low in all intellectual standards due to some reasons that

may be assumed for their poor performance. As mostly students belong to middle

class (see section 1.1) where their native languages are Urdu or Punjabi for

communication, however, English language is used rarely. So, the language barrier

may be one of the factors in the development of their critical thinking. They were very

weak and feel difficulties even in pronouncing very simple words like light, weight,

- 104 -

things etc. They were not grasping the meaning of difficult words, feeling shy,

looking bored and uninterested, as a result they answered inaccurately. For example,

when they were asked about the idea of ‘as white’ as they gave illogical examples

about the colour of water (see Appendix 2, line 2.21-2.29). However after teacher's

clue, they clarify the idea of ‘as white as’. But when teacher asked them again to give

the examples from real life context, they failed to explore ideas from multiple

perspectives. They exhibited weak fairness skill by showing selfish attitude towards

the idea of power (see Appendix 2, turns, 2.43-2.48).

The discourse during the episode was mostly consisted of teacher’s initiation

which supported very little in emergence of critical thinking behaviour. However,

students’ participation was minimal. They did not reflect on the content presented in

the class. One of the reasons might be that students had fear of the rejection of the

ideas by their peers and teacher. The other reason might be classroom questioning

context with which students are unfamiliar. They looked less engaged and more

dependent on teacher's instructions. On the other hand, the teacher tried to provide

open, supportive and democratic classroom environment where opinions of students

were welcomed in a free and disciplined manner, but students could not participate in

such supportive environment that is considered the essence of developing critical

thinking skills and attitudes. Although students were a bit stimulated by teacher's

probing questions but they were unable to critically resolve dilemmas, judge

propositions about knowledge or take stands on issues independently. It can be

assumed that the thinking process was low but it made the students to rethink on

every concept that was difficult for them.

Overall trend of discourse was teacher led. Teacher tried to put instructional

reins on student's shoulders but students neither clarify their own ideas and nor

- 105 -

increase their level of cognitive and behavioural engagement. Their unclarity and

inaccuracy of ideas did not promote most effective subsequent instructional moves.



in which 3 of clarity & 5of unclarity, 2 of accuracy & 3of inaccuracy, 1of relevance

& 1 of irrelevance, 1 of logic & 2 of illogic, and 1of fairness & 2 of unfairness turns.

Task: In the episode, teacher continued the previous lesson shopping and discussed

those grammar rules which were not discussed in the previous class.

Interpretation: Teacher started her lesson by initiating the question, do you know the

difference of ‘much and many’? There was no response from students and they

remained quiet. After noticing their reluctance teacher modified the question and

asked again; what is the meaning of ‘much’ and what is the meaning of many?’

Students involved in discussion with each other. One student raised her hand but

abruptly down it. It seems that she was confused in answering the question." Go

ahead Mahira, share with us what you want to share", teacher motivated her. She

looked around the class and said with embarrassment" umm, I want to share some

thing but not sure either it is correct or not" other children began to laugh. Teacher

encouraged her, no problem, you can share any your idea with us, and even anyone in

the class has the agency to share anything comes in their mind. We should not laugh

at anyone, we all are learning from one another, as I am learning from you and you

are learning from your friends and the teacher. Mahira answered many means a lots of

things’ but she did not tell the meaning of ‘much’. Her answer was partially correct

but teacher appreciated her “Oh good”. We find the meaning of much from any other

students. So one of the students responded ‘lots of things’ (see Appendix 3, turns 6.1-

6.7).

- 106 -

Teacher provided the list of items from their course book to match items with

much and many. Students were still confused in matching items with both concepts.

So the teacher further posed the question to get clarity of both items. She asked

comprehension question and developed the context, you have some bananas and milk

in the pot. What term will you use for bananas and what term will you use for milk

and gave them wait time/pause but after 20 seconds. There was no response from

students so she added her remarks for clarity, many are used for countable things in

numbers and much is used for uncountable things in numbers. When she got no

response she provided a clue by asking implication question, "Imagine if you go for

shopping in a superstore then how will you get fruits and milk? One student shared

her experience that she bought 12 bananas and 1 kg milk so bananas can be many and

I think milk can be much". Oh great, teacher applause her, yes it is a true example of

much and many (see Appendix 3, turns 6.8-6.21).

She asked other students to share their any of experience to buy items with

many and much concept. Students seem still reluctant in sharing their ideas. They

might be afraid of being ridiculous by their class fellows for making mistakes.

Teacher asked them to present any other example from real life context because she

wanted them to comprehend the meaning of many and much and make them able to

apply their information in multiple perspectives. In the meanwhile, two students

exchanged hot talk while presenting real context examples. Teacher intervened and

resolved their conflict by providing her feedback (see Appendix 3, turns 6.18-6.21).

Teacher moved forward to introduce another grammar term how to use ‘can or

cannot’, she asked a logical question, why birds can fly and cannot swim? One

student commented illogically, "Because birds live in the air". No, birds live in the

nest instead of air, the other student contradicted with the student. Teacher repeated

- 107 -

the question, you are right birds live in the nest but why they cannot swim? After

some discussion with each other one student answered with poor justification, because

birds are not fish". So do you think that fish can fly? Teacher counter questioned her?

No teacher fish cannot fly because it has no wings to fly, another student answered

logically. Yes, true, it means birds have wings to fly so they don’t have features like

fish to swim in the water; teacher clarified the difference between fish and birds (see

Appendix 3, turns 6.29-6.40). In today's episode, most of time teacher clarified the

concepts and student's participation was minimal. Although, students did not show

much of clarity and accuracy of concepts but one thing observed hopeful that students

were trying to participate in the discussion by contradicting with each other. They did

not show independency of decisions instead showed dependency on teacher's

feedback. Many researchers say that in learning second language, students face a lot

of pressure specifically in grammar part. So may be the performance of students

hindered due to this fact.




& 2 of irrelevance, 4 of logic & 6 of illogic, and 2 of fairness & 3 of unfairness turns.

Task: In the episode, students were taught the meaning and importance of shopping.

Interpretation: Teacher started the discussion about shopping with openness and

friendly attitude as shopping was real life general topic so she expected some

common knowledge information about it. Teacher asked the students "did you ever go

for shopping "? A half of class said" yes" in a chorus. Oh, that’s good, teacher showed

excitement and further asked then what did you shop? Mostly students said, we get

our favourite food items such as juice, biscuit and chips. Teacher probed more

- 108 -

reasoning questions to explore their understanding of shopping. "Can you tell us why

do we shopping"? Students remained busy in murmuring, after some wait time one

student replied, we do not do shopping but our parents do shopping", and why do your

parents do shopping? Teacher continued the decorum of discussion, our parents do

shopping because they have money" One student replied with smiling face, so if you

will be given money, will you spend whole money in shopping? Teacher inquired her

because she is interested in telling them multiple purposes of shopping. Student said,

yes teacher I will spent the whole money in buying my favourite cake and biscuits.

But if spent whole money, then how could you do shopping for some other items in

future"? Teacher asked her, teacher I will think about to how I could get more money

for shopping. Teacher tried to bring students on track to participate logically and to

draw their attention towards the importance of money and shopping but students

showed shallow thinking by giving superficial answers and deep thinking was missing

in their answers (see Appendix 4turns 8.1-8.16) .

Teacher asked them the other question to explore their fair-mindedness, by

asking if they do shopping for their siblings. Students looked each other and smiled

but not answered at once, after some murmuring, a few of them said with some

embarrassment, no teacher, we always do shopping for ourselves. Teacher asked them

the reason of not doing shopping for their siblings, but no solid reason they shared.

Teacher pointed out their selfishness and advised them to give gifts to their siblings

then they will respect them more (see Appendix 4, turns 8.16.8.17).

Teacher further inquired them about the most frequently visited places of their

shopping, some said, they usually visit to super stores and some did shopping from

their nearest shops. Teacher asked them the rationale for doing shopping from big and

small stores but students could not justify their answers as some said they only do

- 109 -

shopping from big stores because their parents go there but actually they failed to

provide the justification of their visit in these shopping places (see Appendix 4 turns

8.27-8.35). Teacher provided them a assumption based scenario to assume if they

have 300 rupees then how could they manage the money to shop for their necessary

kitchen households when these are near to finish. Although students shared their

views but they could not justify the money reasonably. One said she will buy only rice

because she like only rice the other said she will buy bread and butter and not

interested in getting more things (see Appendix 4, turns 8.36-8.45).

Teacher asked them other question to probe their views and perspectives. She

asked about the usefulness of sale items and asked them the reason and utility of sale

items. Students said their parent do shopping from sale to get items at cheap rate and

don’t bother the utility value of items. Teacher probed more them "do you think sale

items are durable? One student illogically said, "Teacher we don’t need durability but

we need cheap rate items only. But if cheap items are not durable and good brand

items on regular price are durable, then we should prefer regular items teacher

supplies help when she felt their unclarity (see Appendix 4, turns 8.46-8.51).

In the episode, although students' participation was improved but they only

shared basic knowledge based answers. They showed poor accuracy and relevance

skills as they could not provide accurate and relevant examples to justify their

answers. Moreover, they could not understand the nature of the questions and

illogically provided reasons and evidences. They also showed little fair mindedness

by showing selfish attitude towards their siblings. Teacher facilitated students to

construct knowledge by their own. She provided them opportunities to improve their

long term retention of knowledge. Although students could not provide logical

- 110 -

inferences of their answers but they learnt from their teacher and peers answers about

shopping which will aid their knowledge about shopping in future.

5.2.2.5. Episode-10 (Fair).


in which 5 of clarity & 4 of unclarity, 3 of accuracy & 2 of inaccuracy, 3 of


unfairness turns.

Task: In the episode, teacher discussed the importance of "cleanliness".

Interpretation: She posed knowledge based question by asking about the meaning of

cleanliness. Students said in a chorus, cleanliness means to clean ourselves. Teacher

probed ‘do you think that cleanliness means only to clean ourselves?’ Teacher

initiated the other sequential question in order to expand the meaning of cleanliness.

One student cries after a pause "no teacher we should clean our school bags as well"

and other student posed an illogical answer that we should also clean our school by

not playing in the ground. However one student contradict with him and said grounds

are built in school for play, so it is difficult to avoid grounds for enjoyment. Student

could not provide logical inference for this question (see Appendix 5, turns 10.1-

10.8).

Teacher shared a scenario with them to increase their clarity towards the topic"

for example she said “imagine you are playing a football match in the ground and

there are wrappers and used bottles everywhere so can you play smoothly? After a

long discussion one student said "we will call a sweeper to clean the ground. Is it not

better to clean ground by yourselves instead of a sweeper? (see Appendix 5,turns

10.9-10.14).Teacher tried to inculcate the importance of cleanliness among them. She

asked another implication and evidence inquiring question "ok let me know how

- 111 -

could we clean our classroom, give some examples? Students put relevant examples

by saying, we should throw toffee wrapper, used papers or any used item in to dustbin

instead of throwing on floor. (See Appendix 5, turns 10.14-10.21).Teacher connected

the idea of cleanliness and asked; how could we clean our homes as well. Students

presented some accurate and relevant examples from real context to clean their

houses. Teacher then relates the idea of cleanliness with the cleanliness of the country

to broaden the scope of the perspective. Students looked confused in answering the

question therefore they took time some time. However, teacher encouraged them to

share any idea and therefore student came up with relevant idea that it is not fair to

spit on roads. Teacher appreciated her and asked more accurate and relevant

examples. In the response, students shared many relevant and logical examples such

as; we should not throw trash in the streets; we should not make dirty our gardens and

play grounds by throwing used papers and food item (see turns Appendix 5, 10.30-

10.34).

The overall trend of the discourse was fair not weak. In the episode, student's

participation was satisfactory. Students provided accurate, relevant and logical

examples in which few of irrelevant and illogical. They showed the clarity of the topic

but showed weak performance whenever they have to interlink the idea in a broader

perspective. They could not present divergent thinking. Although challenging and

open ended questioning, discussion and motivating dialogue of teacher help them to

scaffold effectively since, the exploration of student's ideas was minimal. In

comparison with previous episodes students showed better performance.

Teacher used exploratory talk to enables students to try out their ideas and to

arrange information and ideas into different patterns. It was less teacher led and more

student centre discourse.

- 112 -

5.2.2.6. Episode-12 (Moderate).

Qualification to quantification: There were total 61 turns in total in the first

episode, in which 8 of clarity & 1 of unclarity, 5 of accuracy & 2 of inaccuracy, 3

of relevance &1 of irrelevance, 5 of logic & 1 of illogic, and 2 of fairness & 1 of

unfairness turns.

Task: In the episode, students were introduced the importance and advantages of

gardens.

Interpretation: Teacher started lesson by giving the introduction of the topic

"grandpa's garden". In the start of the lesson teacher asked a reasoning question; why

do we make gardens? Few students replied; “to grow flowers and plants” similarly,

some others said “to grow fruit trees”. Teacher motivated them to discuss the benefits

of garden. She showed friendly attitude to make students convenient to share any

example from everyday life. She created such learning environment that motivates

students to engage in critical reflection and evaluation of thought to render judgment

based on logical evidence. After discussing with each other students shared some

more advantages of gardens accurately such as we get greenery and flowers from

garden (see Appendix 6, turns 12.1-12.10).Teacher asked about the uses of flowers

and trees to students. Students clearly described the use of flowers and trees (see


Teacher asked the question about another aspect" can we use garden for money

making? Students could not understand the nature of question and remained quiet. By

observing their ambiguity teacher asked them a question with different angle "did you

ever buy flowers from shop for presenting gift to your friend? A few of them said

with excitement, "Yes teacher we presented flowers to our friend on her birthday”

(see Appendix 6, turns 12.48-12.58). Teacher explained the benefit of flowers as

- 113 -

many people use their gardens and nurseries for business. People buy flowers for

different occasions such as weddings, birthdays, and even for funerals. Students

looked deeply engaged in listening and comprehending her comments.

By setting the example, students get opportunity to learn through an effective,

reflective and logical response from the teacher. For promotion of critical thinking, it

is considered an effective method of teaching to provide student's evidence supported

real context answers. In the episode, although teacher is persuaded students to move

from convergent thinking to divergent thinking by framing questions in to broader

spectrum. However, she was keeping her discussion within the context of the subject

matter with herd in the strays of variety of opinions. In the discussion, students were

eagerly participating and did not seem bored or disengaged. Teacher is providing

them opportunity to think, organize and share their thoughts meaningfully.

The overall trend of critical thinking of students was moderate. In the episode,

students participated enthusiastically. They shared their opinions without hesitation

and fear of rejection by teacher. Teacher stimulated students' reasoning process

through probing and thought provoking questions. She probed them for clarification,

accuracy, deeper explanations from multiple sources and justification. Moreover, she

enables them to provide sound evidence based judgment depended on in-depth logical

interpretation of relevant content. Students looked confident in presenting their views,

in addition contradicting other's opinions with logical justification.


Qualification to quantification: There were total 55turns in total in the first episode,



unfairness turns.

- 114 -

Task: Teacher discussed the importance of "Earth day".

Interpretation: Teacher asked the first question about the planet in which we are

living. One student calls it "ground" instead of earth, but in the same time the other

student called correctly "earth" and logically related with planet. Teacher asked them

to tell the names of other planets except earth. Students recalled few names of planets

but they could not explain the similarities and difference of earth with other planets.

By knowing of their difficulty, teacher asked them by another way to improve their

comprehension “what are the characteristics of earth”. On the response of her

questions, students shared their bookish knowledge, as earth is the only planet in the

universe on which life is possible. This is the only planet in which oxygen and water

is available for survival. In contrarily with other planets like Mars, Venues, Plato

these two elements are missing (see Appendix 7, turns 14.1-14.11).

Teacher explored their knowledge about the protection of earth by asking two

main questions, "how we are destroying our earth" and how can we safe earth from

environmental hazards"? Students shared different accurate and logical opinions in

answering these questions. For example, they said like that we are destroying our

earth by polluting our environment by not following the environmental safety

measures by spreading poisonous smoke of factories and vehicles. They also shared

about unhealthy attitude of people in promoting environmental pollution. They

suggested some ways to control environmental pollution to safe earth (see Appendix

7, turns 14.12-14.23). Teacher asked them about the ways of cleanliness of house and

country. Students shared some logical and fair responses to relate hose and country

cleanliness. One of them was of the view that cleanliness of houses and country is not

our responsibility but it is duty of sweepers. Teacher corrected her by explaining the

importance of cleanliness for everyone (see Appendix 7, turns14.31-14.43).

- 115 -

Teacher further asked them about the "earth day". Students showed unclarity

towards the term, so teacher facilitated them by asking some other probing questions.

Students were also unclear about the celebration of that day. Teacher increase their

knowledge and reasoning by associating the earth day with real context examples (see


The overall trend of the discourse was moderate, as students were not fully

equipped with relevant knowledge to justify their answers in response to some

implication questions. They responded accurately and logically to other logical

questions. They also showed fairness skill by suggesting ways to protect earth from

environmental hazards created by humans.


Qualification to Quantification: There were total 33turns in total in the first episode,



unfairness turns.

Task: Teacher discussed the importance of "My country"

Interpretation: Teacher started the lesson by asking knowledge based question, "Do

you know the meaning of Pakistan"? Students answered quickly in chorus, "it means

pure land". She initiated another question to analyse the clarity of students towards

the topic “what was the purpose of making the country Pakistan" but students

appeared unclear as they were quite. However, teacher rephrased the question with

some modification after observing their ambiguity, before partition of Indo Pak which

nation was in majority? One of them said, Hindus were in majority and they are

enemies of Muslims, he added more information. How could you say that Hindus are

our enemies," teacher asked her a question to make logical connection with the

- 116 -

previous question. I watched an Indian movie in which a Hindu Villon tortured

Muslims badly, student shared evidence from media source Ok, can anybody wants to

add more examples with us, she looked at the class with interrogatory tone to extend

their thinking and share further evidence for their ideas. Yes teacher, I also read from

my social study book, that Hindus tortured Muslims that’s why Pakistan came as

separate home land for Muslims, the other student shared evidence from one authentic

source (see Appendix 8, turns16.1-16.10).

Ok good, so you mean to say that Pakistan came into being because of bad

conduct of Hindus, teacher encouraged and revioced the question to check in with

student whether what was she said properly heard or interpreted by the teacher and

other students. Yes teacher they are not our friends, students collectively confirmed

the answer. Do you have the other reasons for making Pakistan a separate home land?

.Teacher asked other exploratory question in order to know all possible answers from

students. Students did not answer at the moment and teacher provided them wait time.

Students took almost 5 -10 seconds but nobody took initiative in sharing answer. So

teacher asked some other question to know their comprehension about other reasons

of partition but students showed unclarity in telling reasons (see Appendix 8, turns

16.11-16.14). Teacher asked about the difference between Muslims and Hindus in

religion, customs and rituals to bring students on track in connecting with the previous

question. Students shared some correct and some incorrect information. After wards,

teacher clarified their misconceptions by adding information in their information.

Teacher did not help them directly but indirectly tried to elicit answers from students.

Teacher asked students further questions about resources of Pakistan. Students

showed clarity and accuracy while answering such questions. They also present some

irrelevant examples but with other connected questions they provided some other

- 117 -

logical examples as well. The class time was ended so the rest discussion was left for

the other day (see Appendix 8, turns 16.16-16.33).

5.2.2.9. Episode- 18(Moderate).

Quantification to qualification: There were total 31turns in total in the first episode,



unfairness turns.

Task: Same topic my country was discussed

The episode 18 is considered moderate. In the episode, although students fully

participated, yet they showed some ambiguity in application based questions. They

presented moderate logical and relevance skills. Students used evidences in justifying

their answers. They showed comprehension while giving arguments in supporting

their answers.

In the episode, the same topic "my country" was discussed. In the episode,

teacher asked students to summarize and synthesize the previous day lesson. Students

discussed different points about the purpose and resources of Pakistan. Teacher used

student thinking to propel further discussion for today's lesson. Students shared their

last day learnt information with examples accurately. Such type of discussion help

students to build on their thinking through sharing of ideas, move unclarity to clarity

to both teacher and students, and at the same time, conceptual and procedural

knowledge deepens. Students shared difference of northern areas people with other

province people by providing reasons. For example when teacher asked them the

reasons of their white complexion, some students believed that it was because of

drinking milk, some thought it due to cold weather (see Appendix 8, turns 18.8-

18.12). In the meantime, the role of teacher was active listener as she can make

- 118 -

decisions about the effectiveness of dialogue delivered by students to facilitate further

talk. After students sharing of their knowledge teacher asked the class about the

authenticity of the information. Teacher asked them further questions about the

difference of people living in different provinces of the country regarding their

profession. Students accurately and logically explained the differences. They showed

unclarity in one question when teacher asked about "how people of northern areas

have other differences, students could not rationally justified the answer and simply

said" because they eat corn and nuts. The other students contradicted with her and

said and shared that northern people take nuts for energy to protect themselves from

cold weather (see Appendix 8, turns 18.14-18.20).Teacher helped them in removing

their unclarity and inaccuracy by relating these differences with different weather

conditions. She also asked them about the justification of eating different nuts in

winters and not in summer, students showed partial understanding towards this logical

question, they only shared that we eat nuts because of winter but what is actual benefit

of eating nuts in winter , they could not answer properly.

The overall trend of discourse was moderate, as students participated with

involvement. They shared everyday examples accurately but they also showed

unclarity and inaccuracy in defending some answers. The context was supportive for

rich critical thinking led discourse in which students enjoy the whole learning process

by participating, thinking and rethinking by putting counter questions, sharing ideas

with each other, learning from teacher as well as from students.


Qualification to quantification: There were total 31turns in total in the first episode,


& 1 of irrelevance, 2 of logic & 1 of illogic, and 3 of fairness & 1 of unfairness turns.

- 119 -

Task: In the episode, teacher discussed the features and importance of "Aeroplanes".

Interpretation: Teacher started the lesson by asking introductory question about the

topic "Aeroplane". Did you ever travel by aeroplane? No Teacher, we never

travelled. In the result of such response teacher asked; what is name of our national

airline? It was silence in the class that shows none of them travelled by aeroplane, and

even did not know about the national airline. However, teacher explained about the

national airline and then posed other logical question; “why do we travel by aeroplane

instead of cars and buses"? One of them replied irrationally but quickly; aeroplanes

are bigger than buses and cars. Teacher asked another linking question, “Do

aeroplanes and cars run with the same speed?” One of the students responded, No

teacher; aeroplanes are faster than cars and one can reach quickly to its destination by

aeroplanes. For more clarity and analysing the consensus of whole class teacher

asked; "do you agree with her answer"? Yes; Students response was positive this time

(see Appendix 9, turns 20.6-20.10).

After the comprehension of the first concept teacher moved towards other

reasoning question" why aeroplane can fly and cars and buses cannot fly"? One

student said because aeroplanes are made to fly and cars are made to run on roads.

The other student contradicted rationally with the student, no teacher aeroplane can

fly because they have wings and cars have not. Another student shared logically that

because the machinery of aeroplane is different from the car's machinery (see

Appendix 9, turns 20.11-20.14). Teacher plays a neutral role during the discussion as

she provides opportunities to students to remove their misconceptions through such

productive discussion. Students’ participation showed their engagement and

understanding with content and class activities. Students also participated in

discussion to get credit from the teacher and their fellows. Teacher further initiated

- 120 -

other relevant and logical questions regarding the difference of fares between road

transport and aeroplane. Students exhibited clarity by explaining the difference of

fares. She also asked them difference between the passenger and warship plane.

Students differentiated both accurately by putting accurate and logical examples as

"passenger planes are used for common man travel and warship is used in wars". She

also asked them the difference of travel between plane and ship .Students showed

reasoning while answering as "there is difference of amount of time between them"

they also shared some other relevant examples. Students also showed unfairness in

response to one question, teacher asked them' if you get one ticket of plane and you

find your friend sick and needs to travel by plane and she could, not afford travelling

expenses, so what you will decide either will u go or give tickets to your friend to

travel" one of them responded hurriedly, " no teacher I will not lose the opportunity to

go through the plane. Teacher advised them to take care of needy people by sharing

different real life examples (see Appendix 9, turns 20.25-20.30).

The trend of the discourse was moderate. Students showed involvement and

eagerness towards class room discussion. The classroom context was supportive to

encourage student's sharing of ideas. The discourse patron was rich in which students

remained busy in thinking, talking, agreeing, and disagreeing. Student's thinking was

shaped by the tasks in which they involve and by the nature of learning context.

Although students performed well yet they showed unclarity and irrationality towards

some questions; they also showed weak performance in fairness.




- 121 -

relevance &1 of irrelevance, 2 of logic & 2 of illogic, and 1 of fairness & 1 of

unfairness turns.

Task: In the episode, students were taught "safety rules about traffic".

Interpretation: Teacher repeats the practice of previous episodes by introducing the

lesson "safety first "from the text book. She asked some knowledge based questions to

know the understanding and perspective of the students. Students expressed clarity of

safety. She posed other implication questions about road sense such as" do you know

how to cross the road safely? Students shared multiple answers "Yes, we should cross

the road with elders, Teacher we should cross the road very carefully and don’t see

here and there, we must see around and if there is one way traffic then we should wait

for the red signal to cross the road" and we should not cross the road with old people"

.Teacher probed other reasoning question, "ok if do not cross the road carefully then

what happens? Student responded immediately, we may get an accident". Students

shared multiple perspectives in response for example one said irrationally, "We

should cross the road quickly then we can save out time" No teacher the other one

contradict with her logically, "we should not cross the road quickly because it may

cause accidents as cars are coming with high speed" (see Appendix 10, turns 22.5-

22.8).Teacher was silent and letting students to discuss freely to boost their self-

confidence. She posed other questions about traffic to elicit more reasons from

students. Why signals are placed on roads? "They are placed because they give light

at night to help people cross the road one student said illogically". No teacher

(contradicts with the student) signals are not placed for this purpose but give signal to

vehicles to move or stop. Teacher asked the perspective of other students by asking

their agreement or disagreement with the answer. Students expressed their positive

responses which showed their agreement. Teacher asked them other logical and

- 122 -

relevant questions to explore reasons of other traffic problems influencing road safety

such as "why do people ignore signals? Why zebra crossings are made for? What is

the purpose of bridge? (see Appendix 10, turns 22.9-22.35)

A few of them in the beginning, could not provide clarity, relevance and rational

justification of the answers and simply said that zebra crossing are made for animals

crossings and traffic rules are made only for elders not for children, moreover ,

bridges are made for only motorcycle ride and old people. But the other student

contradicted and provided accurate answer by sharing that bridges are made for all

people's safety. Teacher further asked them about home safety. Students in return

shared clear and accurate examples (see Appendix 10, turns 22.41-22.50).

The trend of discourse was moderate. Classroom context was encouraging and

supportive for promotion of critical thinking as students showed agreement and

disagreement with each other's responses which promote the development of their

own perspectives. Students also showed unclarity, inaccuracy, irrelevance,

irrationality and lower fairness in response to some implication nature questions so

the episode remained moderate and not changed in to strong episode.



in which 7 of clarity & 4 of unclarity, 3 of accuracy & 1of inaccuracy, 2 of


unfairness turns.

Task: In the episode, students were taught about the "sun travels" in different parts of

the world.

Interpretation: Teacher started the lesson "The sun travels" by initiating introductory

questions, "do you know where does the sun rise and where does sun set? Students

- 123 -

showed comprehension in response. Teacher posed assumption based question by

asking students to assume what will happen if there is no sun? Students shared some

accurate and some inaccurate answers. For Example there will be darkness

everywhere and nobody can do any kind of work. On the other hand they are a bit

logical as student said there will be severe cold everywhere and nobody can survive.

Sometime students enjoy off task answers "we will enjoy long holidays in sun

absence” (see Appendix 11, turns 24.3-24.6).

Teacher asked an exploratory logical question "do you think that sun rises in the

same time for all countries"? One student responded with unclarity that "Yes teacher

God has created sun to go every country", the other student contradicted "no it is not

true, sun rises in different timings in different countries as my uncle lives in Germany

and there Sun rises 4 hours later than Pakistan ". Teacher turned them to thinking

towards the reasoning of different timings of Sunrise and Sunset in different

countries. In response, one of the students connected it with countries timings (see


Teacher continued discussion by probing questions such as “why does sun not

appear at night and moon in the daytime”? However, students provided rational

justification for their answers but they were illogical and inaccurate in few. Some are

in favour of advantages of sun for providing heat and energy to humans and animals

but some argued about the negative effects of Sun heat by putting a relevant example

"heat stroke" yes wonderful, teacher appreciated her comments. Teacher asked about

the effectiveness of Sunlight for plants but students exposed difficulty in explaining

the question. When there was no response from students, teacher indicated towards

real context to answers. In the end, teacher examined their fairness by asking that how

your parents can get rid of scorching heat in summer. They were weak in fairness as

- 124 -

they prefer sitting at cool place instead of doing work with "mama". The overall trend

of the discourse was moderate. Students shared some difficulty and confusion while

sharing ideas. They also put some irrelevant examples in defending their arguments.

They also showed marginal fairness.





unfairness turns.

Task: In the episode, students were taught different grammar rules from the previous

lesson "Sun travels". Teacher started the lesson by saying that we will practice

grammar rules that were used in the previous lesson "sun travels".

Interpretation: Teacher initiated question by asking rhyming word of "cow".

Students shared inaccurate examples say, crow, bow, row grow etc. However, the

teacher gave the opportunity to the students to discuss with each other but one of the

students shared correct example of ‘how’. Teacher further asked about the difference

of meaning of "well". Students know the one meaning of well that was "good" but

they were unclear about the other meaning of ‘well’. However, Teacher provided

different examples of well from their book source. She provided them a list of

matching words in two given boxes from their text book and instructed to match the

words with what Snow and Sun provides. However, students matched pairs with

accurate options (see Appendix 12, turns 26.11-26.20).

She further explored them about the benefit of milk, one student shared

inaccurate example by saying that milk has white colour. The other student

contradicted with her and shared the other benefits of milk as it provides us energy

- 125 -

and calcium. Teacher explored further logical questions such as "do you know the

meaning of energy?" "Yes teacher it means power "What type of power it means"

teacher asked the logic of power. "It means when we have energy then we can do

everything one student provides logic". Teacher again connected the idea with other

questions like, can you explain it with example? Yes teacher meat gives us energy to

fight against disease. Ok, wonderful, she admired her sharing (see Appendix 12, turns

26.19-26-24). By discussing the grammar rules, she posed a new question by asking

the reasons of travelling through different means of transport such as by bus, car, and

train? Students showed clarity accuracy, relevance and logic by providing exact

answers. With continuum of the discussion, teacher moved towards the next question

by asking them about the commonality among dogs, cats and birds? One student

illogically said that they are all animals, the other students contradicted with her by

accurately distinguishing the features and characteristics of birds and animals (see

Appendix 12, turns 26.25-26-44).

The trend of discourse was moderate. Students improved their performance in

grammar acquisition as in the beginning episode they presented weak performance.

The reason might be their long interaction with questioning strategy. The other reason

may be the implicit nature of grammar teaching as teacher did not force students to

memorize grammar rules explicitly instead encouraged them through probing

questions , real life examples and open discussion.


Qualification to quantification: There were total 45 turns in total in the episode, in

which 4 of clarity & 5 of unclarity, of accuracy & 9 of inaccuracy, 1 of relevance &

3 of irrelevance, 2 of logic & 0 of illogic, and 4 of fairness & 1 of unfairness turns.

- 126 -

Task: In the episode, some other remaining grammar rules from the previous lesson

"Sun travels" were practiced.

Interpretation: Teacher started grammar practice with compound words. "Can you

make cycle as a compound word? Students shared multiple unclear and in accurate

responses such as "teacher it is my cycle", It can be your cycle", in the meanwhile one

student shared accurate answer with appropriate example, "Oh I know the answer

(very excitedly) its bicycle". Teacher appreciated her “Wonderful” for answering. She

asked “what is the name of that process in which items are made from the used

material. One answered “new bottles" however another student contradicted, "No

teacher it is called recycle”, Oh yes teacher it now can be used to complete the word

cycle, recycle she repeated the word. Oh excellent, yes it is the accurate example of

recycle, teacher encouraged her remark (see Appendix 13, turns 28.1-28.11).

Teacher asked about the characteristics of lion and sparrows by using fill in the

blanks orally. Students shared multiple clear and logical answers. Students showed

unclarity about the use of fox skin initially, but with discussion of their fellows they

get clarity of the ides. Students shared relevant and accurate examples in explain the

use of fox skin. Teacher also appreciated her answer and put another question,

complete the other sentence, “such as lion is a --------------animal, sparrow” is a -------

---bird, Students eagerly shared multiple perspectives by saying, "Lion is a dangerous

animal, Lion is a beautiful animal, "Sparrow is a small bird, Sparrow is a innocent

bird”. Students shared their negative feeling for crow by saying logically, "Crow is a

dirty bird because he always tease small birds, crow is a naughty bird as he snatched

food from other birds", teacher also asked about different use of fox skin, initially one

student shared illogical example as "fox skin is used for eating", did anyone eat fox

skin or meat ever the other student asked the whole class, it is dirty, students showed

- 127 -

bad feelings for its skin. Teacher fox skin is not used for eating but used for some

other purposes such as for shoe making, for bag making and for making leather

jackets as well, I taught from my social study book lesson, one student presented

evidence from authentic source (see Appendix 13, turns, 28.21- 28.33).

Teacher posed the other question, "can you give the examples of as slow as----,

student metaphorically criticized one of her class fellow, "Yes teacher it is as slow as

Zarina (her class fellow) (laughing the whole class) because she does her work very

slowly". Teacher pointed out her mistake by saying her conduct is unfair to taunt

anyone. Teacher asked them for some other good examples, students were murmuring

with each other with smiling face as they resembled each other as slow as---. One

student shared accurate example, "teacher the right example is as slow as tortoise" and

as slow as ant. Teacher further asked them to provide examples on as fast as-----in

response, students shared numerous accurate and logical examples from real context.

Such as, as fast as I can run, as fast as horse, as fast as lion (see Appendix 13, turns

28.38- 28.48).

Overall trend of the discourse was moderate. Students showed some unclarity,

inaccuracy and irrationality while presenting their idea but they improved their

performance in grammar practice by sharing many relevant, accurate and logical

examples. Although student showed unfair attitude in response of a few questions as

they used metaphor negatively for portraying one's behaviour but they improved their

responses.

5.2.2.15. Episode-30 (Strong).



- 128 -


unfairness turns.

Task: The objectives of the lesson were to discuss the meaning of pollution, types of

pollution and ways to keep the environment free from pollution.

Interpretation: Teacher asked students the meaning of pollution, one student said, it

means trash scattered all around. The other student contradicted with her by

presenting her idea, "no teacher it means dirty environment. But I also means like

that, the first student insisted on her remark correct, in the meanwhile the other

students also discussing about pollution together. They negotiated different meanings

of pollution with teacher and with each other. In such context, negotiation process is

crucial in fostering critical thinking of students in which students become critical in

their opinions in analyzing and evaluating each other's ideas. Actually, in critical

thinking context, students go through the process of constructing new knowledge,

inquiring, exploring and thinking rationally (see Appendix 14, turns 30.1-30.8).

Teacher put a knowledge based question to explore the types of pollution.

Students showed clarity by sharing their bookish knowledge about the question. One

said air pollution while the other said environmental pollution. Teacher asked them

about to elaborate these types. In responses, students provided logical examples such

as cars and factories smoke make air environment polluted. One student extended the

meaning by connecting air pollution with environmental pollution by saying that the

smoke produced from transport vehicles and factories produce poisonous gases that

pollute the whole environment (see Appendix 14, turns 30.1-30.15).

Teacher inquired them for further types of pollution. Students took some time

for thinking and sharing ideas with each other. After discussion for a few minutes, one

student shared one evidence based example "yes teacher there is another type of

- 129 -

pollution, water pollution as I saw from national geographic documentary on T.V. I

came to know that when people throw trash, used utensils in the water, it spoiled the

water quality. Yes teacher, and fish can die with polluted water, another students gave

logic. What other sources can pollute water? Teacher asked a question to explore

maximum knowledge from students. Students again kept busy in thinking for some

time , then one of them said , teacher , I think fish and crocodile make water polluted

because of their dirty wastages". No its not correct information, the other student

contradicted with her, water is their home so how could they pollute it, she further

asked her"? So you tell me then where they go for their toilet purpose? She asked her

in return. Hummm, I think crocodile comes out the water for toilet and after getting

free they go to water, after thinking and with some confusion she replied. Ok, and

what about fish, where they go, if they go outside water, they will die, she asked her

logically but in sarcastic tone. The whole class was looking busy in thinking and

enjoying the talk of both students. The second student has no justification for her

question about fish (see Appendix 14, turns 30.16-30.34). When no other student

provided any other comment, the teacher intervened in the discussion and asked them

to assume a situation of seashore and let her know what other things can make water

polluted?

Students engaged in deep thinking and murmuring with each other, at once, a

student appeared with accurate example, oh we forget that boats and ships also pollute

the water by throwing their smoke, oil and trash. Student's applause by clapping and

seemed agreed with her justification .Teacher endorsed her for her relevant answer.

Additionally, the other student shared another relevant example, teacher people also

make water polluted by throwing eatables when they came on seashore for enjoying

picnic. Oh, yes, it's true, yes people do, they should not pollute environment for other

- 130 -

humans and animals but to keep all used stuff in waste bin, all other students showed

their fair-mindedness. Teacher asked another reasoning question, "How could we

prevent our environment from pollution? The whole class was interested in answering

by raising their hands, teacher allowed them to share one by one, one said , we can

prevent our environment by not throwing trash on roads, streets an public places, the

other said, we should not burn wastage in open places to control air pollution.

Similarly, some other students shared rational and accurate answers for controlling

pollution (see Appendix 14, turns 30.35-30.56).

The episode is considered strong as the class room discourse stimulates the

cognitive presence and critical thinking among students in number of ways. As

students became interested in classroom activities, were fully motivated to ask and

discuss questions and explore answers from multiple sources, were encouraged to

learn, to construct meaning from the discourse, to think critically in drawing

conclusion and implementing knowledge in multiple context. Their participation was

maximum and they shared ideas openly and freely. Another positive thing was

observed that, students not only answering the questions of teacher but they were

contradicting with each other with logical justification and putting counter questions

on each other remarks. It was student led discourse in which students enjoy the

autonomy of making decisions by themselves.

5.2.3. Part B: Initial analysis of role play classroom.

My surface analysis of role play classroom aims to offer results of the

intervention in quantitative and graphical forms by categorising episodes into the

three types of discourse according to the analytical framework. The surface analysis

shows that role play is a productive strategy to increase critical thinking but it depends

on many other factors.

- 131 -

The intervention period spreads over whole academic term that consists of 60

classes. There were four classes in one week according to the school timetable but

school management allowed me two classes for intervention in a week. I video

recorded every second class in one week so I reported here recorded and analysed

episodes only. I used episode instead of class in whole document.

My initial analysis consists of graphical presentation that depicts the scores of each

standard used to assess the level of critical thinking of students in all recorded

episodes according to the criteria defined in (see section 5.2.1).

Qualification to quantification: the purpose of generation of the meaning from the

data, I used the following Steps.

Step-1: Role play episode consist of two parts (i) transcription of performance (the

discourse used during role playing by the students) (ii) debriefing session (The

discourse emerged during whole class discussion by the teacher’s questioning).

Stept-2: I used debriefing discourse for analysis of critical thinking of students by

using analytical framework. I systematically categorised the discourse emerged during

debriefing session on the basis of Pauls standards (See section 4.AF). For example, I

not only identified the clarity turns from the episode but unclarity turns too. Similarly

I categorised all discourse on the basis of standards.

Step-3: I used the following formula to find the percentage of discourse emerges for

each standard. For example in episode-1 there were 2 turns of clarity and 4 turns of

unclarity, therefore, total turns number of clarity and un-clarity turns in whole episode

is 6. Here I find the percentage of clarity standard in whole episode.

𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐓𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐞𝐩𝐢𝐬𝐨𝐝𝐞

=Clarity

Total number of Clarity and Unclarity turns in the episode× 100

- 132 -

Similarly above formula is used to analyse the percentage of discourse used for each

standard.

Step-4: I used the following formula to find the average percentage of one episode

average percentage CT in one episode

=% 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐓𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐬 + % 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲 𝐓𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐬 + % 𝐨𝐟 𝐋𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜 𝐓𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐬 + % 𝐨𝐟 𝐑𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐓𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐬 + % 𝐨𝐟 𝐅𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐓𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐬

𝟓

5.2.4. Results of case II: Role play classroom.

This section provides an explicit rendering of all recorded episodes .It presents brief

description of the classroom discourse of all episodes.

Figure 5.2. Discourse trends in the analysed episodes throughout the

intervention in role play classroom

0 20 40 60 80 100

Epi 1 fair

Epi 3 Moderate

Epi5 Moderate

Epi 7 Moderate

Epi 9 Moderate

Epi 11 Moderate

Epi 13 strong

Epi 15 strong

Epi17 strong

Epi 19 strong

Epi 21 strong

Epi 23 strong

Epi 25 strong

Epi 27 strong

Epi 29 Strong

fairness %

logic%

relevance%

accuracy%

clarity%

- 133 -

Fig 5.2 shows the level of critical thinking in each episode of the role play classroom,

which can help the reader to understand what level of critical thinking is emerged by

students’ interaction and how the critical thinking changed among students.

Table 5.3

Discourse Trends in the Analysed Episodes throughout the Intervention in the Role

Play Classroom

Sr # Episode Date Nature of Discourse Intervention Type

1 E-1 20-08-14 Fair Role play

2 E-2 21-08-14 Role play

3 E-3 27-08-14 Moderate Role play

4 E-4 28-08-14 Role play


6 E-6 4-09-14 Role play


8 E-8 11-09-14 Role play


10 E-10 18-09-14 Role play


12 E-12 25-09-14 Role play

13 E-13 1-09-14 Strong Role play

14 E-14 2-09-14 Role play


16 E-16 09-10-14 Role play


- 134 -

18 E-18 16-10-14 Role play

19 E -19 22-10-14 Strong Role play

20 E -20 23-10-14 Role play

21 E -21 27-10-14 Strong Role play

22 E-22 28-10-14 Role play


24 E-24 6-11-14 Role play


26 E-26 13-11-14 Role play


28 E-28 20-11-14 Role play


30 E -30 27-11-14 Role play

Table 5.2 shows that first episode was fair and the episodes from 2 to 10 were

according to the discourse analysis criteria. The other episodes were moderate and

strong in which students presented strong critical thinking skills.

5.2.4.1. Episode 1 (Weak).

Qualification to quantification: The status of the episode is fair. There are 39 total

turns in debriefing session. Among these turns, 2 clarity and 6 unclarity turns, 3

accuracy and 2 inaccuracy turns, 2 of logic and 2 illogic turns, 4 relevance and I

irrelevance turn and 3 fair and 3 unfair turns observed.

Task: Students were briefed about the role to play. They were asked to play role on

"respect for feelings". In the first Episode in role play classroom students showed

reluctance and shyness while exchanging dialogues with each other. As Amber

- 135 -

became confused in exchanging dialogue with Kalsoom and reflected difficulty in

understanding, imagining and playing the role. She took more time in imagining and

performing the role of her character (see turns 1.1-1.7). In later discussion, she

improved her confidence in explaining the meaning of "respect for feelings" with

Kalsoom (see turns 1.8-1.26).

Interpretation of debriefing session: After role play, a debriefing session was

conducted in which questions were asked to know the clarity, accuracy, logic,

relevance and fairness of students towards the topic. In the beginning students

provided irrelevant and illogical examples while answering different questions .For

example when teacher asked students about the meaning of "respect", they provided

unclear and irrelevant answers by relating respect with happiness. They did not

understand the nature of question.(see Appendix 15, turns 1.1-1.6). After probing of

teacher one of the students provided clear meaning of respect as taking care of others

.After the clarity of meaning of respect teacher asked the meaning of "respect for

feeling". Initially students showed unclarity and inaccuracy while explaining respect

for feelings but in the meanwhile one of the students answered accurately the meaning

of "respect for feelings" (see Appendix 15, turns 1.7-1.115).

The next question teacher asked about the real life examples of respect. Student

presented mostly accurate relevant examples in describing respect. Then teacher

asked them to provide examples of respect and disrespect from their school and home

context. Students provided some logical and illogical examples from real context. (see


Then teacher asked them to provide examples from their classroom context

about respect. Students provided some accurate and logical examples while describing

respect (see Appendix 15, turns 1.28-1.31). In the end teacher asked them about their

- 136 -

understanding of "respect for feelings". In response students presented some unclear

and some accurate examples. (See Appendix 15, turns 1.32-1.39)

In the session students showed fair performance in all intellectual standards.

Students seemed reluctant and shy while performing a role and answering the

questions in debriefing session. Teacher encouraged them for their efforts and tried to

remove their shyness by telling them that role play activity is a fun and it will not be

evaluated.

There can be assumed some reasons for fair CT skills exhibited by the students

in the episode. First, students showed hesitation while playing a role that can be

considered as normal attitude as they first time participating in acting. Second,

students may find difficulty in imagining the situation of the role they need to play.

Third, they may find shortage of words to explain the situation. They may be clear in

their ideas but little bit hesitant to share with others. Mostly students talked in lower

voice that was showing their shyness. Another reason can be assumed that they may

have limited word bank to explain the situation as role play was a novel experience

for them .Forth, they may be afraid of making mistakes while playing a role. Fifth,

they may be hesitant of speaking and acting the role because of peer criticism.

Finally, the teacher may not clearly describe the role to the students or may she not

support and facilitate the students properly.

5.2.4.2. Episode 3 (Moderate).

Qualification to quantification: The status of the episode was moderate. There were

30 total turns. Among these turns, 1 clarity and 1 unclarity turn, I accuracy and 1

inaccuracy turn, I logic and I illogic turn, 2 relevance and 1 irrelevance turn, 2

fairness and 1 unfairness turn observed.

- 137 -

Task: "Respect for differences" was the topic of role play activity. The objective of

role play was to create awareness about respecting the differences in opinions among

people. Teacher provided students a card in which their role was written. Three

students from the class acted as Amjad, Ali and Faheem to present respect for

differences.

Interpretation of debriefing session: After the role play, teacher initiated questions

in order to get feedback of students. They showed unclarity and unfairness in the

beginning, yet they provided some other clear accurate and relevant examples from

real context. They took time in understanding the concept of differences among

people (see Appendix 16, turns 3.1-3.6). After teacher probing they became clear and

put accurate, logical and relevant examples. Teacher provided them the context to

imagine the miseries of those who are different from us. In response, students showed

fair attitude towards them who are different from us in any context either physically

or mentally (see Appendix 16, turns 3.7-318). In the episode students appeared more

confident in playing the role in contrast with first episode in which they seemed

confused in presenting their roles. The reason may behind be their interaction with

role play activity increased in three episodes.

In today's activity, students learnt that differences among people are not strange

but these are the part of their lives. These differences can be either mentally,

physically, emotionally and socially. In order to perform the given role, students

consulted and collaborated with each other. This consultation and collaboration

enhanced their social talent. As daily life problems were acted out in role play so it

helped students to resolve their real life problems. Role play activity can be

considered an effective approach because it may develop students’ abilities to acquire

and apply new knowledge in real-life settings.

- 138 -


Qualification to quantification: There were 16 total turns, among these turns 2

clarity and 1 unclarity turn, 2 accuracy and I in accuracy turn, 2 logic and 0 illogic

turn, 1 relevance and I irrelevance turn, 2 fairness and 1 unfair turn observed.

Task: One group of students was selected for the role play. Teacher briefed students

about the role play topic "self-respect".

Students played their roles as customer and manager of a shop. They showed

their understanding about self-respect by reflecting it in the act out of given

character's roles. They showed logic by giving reasons to prove their claims in this

episode students learned that respect does not hurt or humiliate others but it means to

treat others the way you would like them to treat you. Whereas, self-respect means to

be proud of yourself for doing a right act.

Interpretation of debriefing session: Teacher asked questions in the end of the role

play activity. Students showed ambiguity in understanding the concept self-respect in

initial turns. First, teacher asked the meaning of respect, students showed ambiguity in

describing respect.

Then teacher asked about the meaning of self-respect. They put unclear and

irrelevant examples while explaining the meaning of self-respect (see Appendix 17,

turns 5.1-5.6). Class room discourse was more students led as most of the time

students involved in participation of classroom activities (see Appendix 17, turns 5.6-

5.15). Students learned the importance of self-respect through collaboration with each

other.

The status of the episode was moderate. Through role play participant and

observant both improved their learning. Observation of roles helps in understanding

the concept of self-respect. Role play provides opportunity to less confident and shy

- 139 -

students to participate in discussions more openly and confidently. By part, students

were encouraged to challenge the point of views of others with logical reasoning as

role play works as ice breaker to improve their self-confidence.


Qualification to quantification: There were total 37 turns, in which 5 clarity and 3

unclarity turns, 3 accuracy and I inaccuracy, 2 logic and 2 illogic , 5 relevance and 0

irrelevance, 3 fairness and 2 unfairness turns observed.

Task: All tasks are developed from class 4 course book. . Today teacher discussed

the third part of respect “Respect for Rules,” The objective of the topic was to draw

attention on the significance of rules and consequences for not following rules in daily

life.

Interpretation of debriefing session:

The purpose of this activity was to unfold the significance of rules in our life.

Students learnt that if they will not follow the rules their life will not be disciplined.

Initially students showed unclarity in understanding the importance of rules in daily

life. Students appeared clear in understanding the significance of rules, when teacher

related it to games. Students willingly shared their information with teacher (see

Appendix 18 turns 7.7-7.13). In response to the next question posed by teacher

students shared their knowledge about importance and advantages of rules. Students

presented accurate, logical and fair-minded examples from real context (see Appendix

18, turns 7.15-7.30).

Role play helps students to improve themselves from their mistakes and it also

enables them to learn from others experiences. It helps in improving their motivation

as they participated enthusiastically, self-confidence when they overcome their

shyness and communication skills during dialoguing. They get more clarity about the

- 140 -

importance of rules in daily life by modelling and observing the character. They also

learn how to rebuild their thinking by imagining the role of others and then acting out

on it. We can never be unbiased about others if we do not consider how others think.

Student may engage in the process of critical thinking by playing the role on an actual

situation and it enhances their logical ability. Students learnt through role play, that

initially rules may seem restrictive but in future they can produce better outcomes.

Moreover, by encouraging the implementation of rules through role play promote

effective talking among students and may provide scaffolding for both teachers and

students.


Qualification to quantification: There were total 15 turns in which , 2 clarity and 1

unclarity, 2 accuracy and 1 inaccuracy, 2 logic and 1 illogic, I relevance and 0

irrelevance ,2 fairness and 1 unfair turn observed.

Task: Topic of role play was "telling the truth". She gave one scenario on "telling lies

in a class room" to students to perform. Students were also told about the objectives

and ground rules of the activity. Students were divided into two small groups. Each

group was assigned a role to perform. Group I was assigned a title "telling lies in a

class". Three girls were supposed to perform as class fellows and one girl acted as

class teacher. The role play started with a class room situation.

Interpretation of debriefing session: After the role play activity teacher asked them

questions about today's session to examine their learning. Students showed moderate

critical thinking in the session. In the start, they did not answer clearly and accurately

about the purpose of speaking the truth. They also showed weak fairness while

defending themselves for telling lies in some critical situations. On the other hand,

they shared relevant and accurate examples in favour of truth (see Appendix 19, turns

- 141 -

9.6-9.16). Students were motivated to speak truth in any situation of daily life. They

also learnt a lesson how lies can create mistrust among each other. Teacher led

debriefing helps students in assimilate the meaning of learning experience and

promote critical thinking by providing feedback on their performance as well as their

mistakes. Role play helps them to learn from their mistakes while enables them to

learn from others.



total 16 turns in which 2 clarity and 1 unclarity, 3 accuracy turn and 0 inaccuracy

turns, 2 fairness and 1 unfair turn observed.

Task: Importance of truth was topic of today's role play. Students were divided in to

two groups. In group 1, there was one teacher and one student and in the second group

there were three students sharing stories of their personal life. Teacher provided each

group role play card and briefed all instructions.

Debriefing Questions: After the role play, teacher asked questions to students in a

debriefing session. The status of episode was moderate as students looked confused in

presenting accuracy in continuum of role at some places. Teacher asked students

about the importance of truth and its application in their real life. Students presented

unclarity and illogic in the start while differentiating truth and lie concept. In the

meanwhile, after some discussion they provided accurate and relevant examples from

real context (see Appendix 21, turns 11.1-11.12). Moreover, today's activity

discouraged imaginary fabricated stories created by students instead it promotes the

value of truth in their lives. Teacher also advised them to speak truth and do not cheat

others for any cause. By having sympathetic and empathetic feeling, they can put

themselves in other shoes to visualize the miseries of others (see Appendix 21, turns

- 142 -

11.13-11.14). It encourages the development of critical thinking by imagining,

thinking and suggesting workable plans in resolving daily life issues.

5.2.4.7. Episode 13 (moderate).

Qualification to quantification: There were 10 turns in which 1 clarity and 1

unclarity turn, I accuracy and 1 inaccuracy turn, 1 logic and 1 illogic, 1 fairness and 1

unfair turn observed. The status of the episode was moderate.

Task: Teacher selected a fairy-tale mediation story from the text book for role play.

The purpose of the activity was to explore the reasons of misunderstanding in

friendship relationship and how can a person re-establish healthy relations with each

other. Teacher distributed scenario card among 4 students who were voluntarily

selected for the role. She also briefed them about ground rules such as be honest, no

name calling and no interruption to follow during the whole activity.

In the role play , students performed as Goldie locks and baby bear who were

best friends in the past but now have not on good terms with each other. One student

acted as mediator who was called by these friends for resolving their issue.

Interpretation of debriefing session: Teacher asked them questions about the role

played. The status of the episode was strong. Students showed little unclarity and

inaccuracy in understanding the friendship concept. They presented strong critical

thinking skills by presenting clear, relevant and logical examples from their context


Through the story acted by students, they learnt that how misunderstanding put

them in trouble and how can they solve daily routine problems. Teacher asked

students about the role of friends in their personal lives. Students shared their personal

experiences with teacher. Students showed unfairness while relating friendship with

- 143 -

sharing of gifts. But teacher clarified them that in any case they should sacrifice for

their friends.

5.2.4.8. Episode 15 (moderate)


total 13turns in which 2 clarity and 1unclarity, 1 accuracy and 1 inaccuracy, 1 logic

and 2 illogic, I relevance and 1 irrelevance, 1 fairness and 1 unfairness turn observed.

Task: Teacher assigned the role play topic to one group of students. She announced

that today we will learn the" importance of friendship "through role play. Teacher

asked the volunteers from class to participate in the prescribed role. Five students

were selected from these volunteers for the role. In the role play, one student is

supposed to act as teacher and other four students are expected to act as students.

Interpretation of debriefing session: Students performed role play with clarity and

accuracy but could not justify the reasons of their unjust acts in making other people

in trouble. When teacher asked them questions to know their understanding, they

showed lack of fairness while defending their wrong actions true and do not bother

weather these are right or wrong. They also put some wrong examples in justifying

the difference between good and bad friendship. Role play provides them a complex

challenging environment and authentic task that enables students in developing

healthy social negotiation and sense of shared responsibility as a part of learning.

5.2.4.9. Episode 17 (moderate).

Qualification to quantification: The status of the episode was strong. There are 13

turns in which 1 clarity and1 unclarity, 1 accuracy and 1 inaccuracy, 1 logic and 2

illogic, 1 fairness and 1 unfair turns observed.

Task: Teacher announced the topic "peer pressure" for role play. Students were asked

about their consent in playing a role. 5 those students from the class were selected for

- 144 -

the role play who did not act before. Teacher provided them with role play card and

instructed them what to play.

Interpretation of debriefing session: After the activity teacher asked students about

peer pressure. Students defend their friends illogically. They want to do any act to

please their friends (see Appendix 25, turns 1.1-1.3). In next turns they presented

relevant and logical examples from their context (see Appendix 25, turns 1.4-1.12).

Teacher also suggested them to protect themselves from bad company of friends. In

the role play teacher provided opportunity to students to learn a moral lesson that how

friends influence your personality and you have to bear the consequences after all.

Analysis indicated that although students in the role displayed instances of reflection,

contextual perspective and logical reasoning, yet they showed inaccuracy while

exchanging the dialogue in reflecting the characters with each other. The positive side

of the role was to share a moral lesson of bad friends influence on other students.

Students observed the role very keenly enjoyed the activity throughout the episode.

The other encouraging fact of the role play was to give chance to those shy students to

participate that did it never before. It helped them to remove their shyness and

increase their self-esteem and worth. They also learnt how to tackle such kind of

complex problems they will encounter in real life.

5.2.4.10. Episode 19 (Strong).

Qualification to quantification: The status of the episode was strong. There were

total 13 turns in which 1 clarity and 2 unclarity turns, I accuracy 0 inaccuracy turns, 1

logic o illogic, 1 relevance and 1 irrelevance, 1fairness and 1 unfairness turn

observed.

Task: Teacher introduced the topic of role play activity. The topic of today's role play

was "cheating in exam". 6 students were selected for this role. One student acted as

- 145 -

class teacher and the other 5 acted as students sitting in exam hall. Teacher briefed

them about their role and provided them scenario card with role play details.

Interpretation of debriefing session: Teacher asked students what they have learnt

from the situation. Students showed unclarity in understanding the hazards of cheating

rather they were insisting on the permission for cheating for minor tasks. Later teacher

clarified the importance of hard work and condemn cheating. Then teacher explored

their views about the consequences of cheating on their life. Students clearly and

accurately shared real life examples. They shared examples of their other friends and

family members who suffered due to cheating (see Appendix 26, turns 19.2-19.12).

Through this activity, teacher tried to communicate a moral lesson to students to build

up positive competencies for exam success and to avoid cheating.

The role play process provides live examples of human behavior that serves as

vehicle for students to gain insight of their attitudes, feeling, and perceptions, to get

solutions of practical problems through subject matter activities and to get subject

matter knowledge in a variety of ways.


Qualification to quantification: The episode was strong. There were 11 total turns in

which 1 clarity and 0 unclarity, 1 accuracy and 0 inaccuracy, 1 logic and 1 illogic, 1

relevance and 1 irrelevance, 2 fairness and 1 unfair turn observed.

Task: Topic of today's role play was "Good man and his son". Teacher selected the

moral story from the text book to convey a positive message to students to increase

their understanding about real life issues. She instructed students about role and has

given them a scenario card. 6 students voluntarily selected from the class for the role.

One girl is required to act as old father, other acts as a son, 4 other students acted as

- 146 -

passer-by. Students were given some time to think about role. In the given time they

made an artificial donkey to use in the role.

Interpretation of debriefing session: After role play, teacher asked students about

the message of role play activity. Students shared multiple opinions. They showed

clarity and accuracy while explaining the participation of people in our decisions. In

the meanwhile, one of the students showed unclarity and unfairness in understanding

the nature of question as she was supporting her friend's decisions whether these are

right or wrong instead of relying on her decisions (see Appendix 27, turns 1.5-1.1.10).

Through the role play activity students learn that we should not rely upon others

gossip as it is not possible to please everyone. Instead we should take our decisions

wisely that serves our interests (see Appendix 27, turn1.10). They shared accurate and

logical examples in response. Role play provides students real life problems to

interact to understand and to make their own decisions. It provides them autonomy of

thought and decisions to use in their real context.


Qualification to quantification: The status of the episode was strong. There were 13

total turns in which 2 clarity and 1 unclarity turn, 2 accuracy and 1 inaccuracy turn, 2

relevance turns, 1fairness and 1 unfairness turn observed.

Task: Teacher announced the topic "the blind men and elephant" .She asked students

consent to participate. 7 students were selected for playing the role. 5 students are

working as blind men, one is acting as guide and the other is acting as elephant

mahuat (elephant trainer). Teacher provides them a scenario card and all other

instruction about the role.

Interpretation of debriefing session: Students learnt through this moral story that

they should always consult with each other before trusting on facts and making

- 147 -

decisions. In the start of the activity, students showed unclarity in understanding the

message of the role pay. However, they became clear after sharing with their fellows

(see Appendix 29, turns 23.1-23.8). In the role play, students communicated with each

other fluently as role play helps them to enunciate their words properly to present

their voices when they speak. During role play, students repeat their dialogues

through this repetition and by exchanging dialogues with each other increase their

fluency of language whatever they use for communication. Moreover, role play

activity is ideal for mixed ability groups of students. Those students whose language

ability is limited can be given a few lines to read and exchange, in addition, are given

the opportunity to use nonverbal cues through body movements and facial expression.

Teacher asked questions in the end of the activity, students showed strong

critical thinking in all standards. Teacher asked them to share their personal stories

relating to the topic. One student shared a personal story about her friend. Students

shared their comments accurately and logically. They showed clarity in understanding

the moral of the story and liked the moral with real life examples (see Appendix 29,

turns 1.5-1.6).


Qualification to quantification: The status of the episode was strong. There were

total 20 turns in which 2 clarity 2 unclarity turns, 2 accuracy and 0 inaccuracy turns,

2 logic and 1 illogic turn, 1 relevance and 1 irrelevance turn, 1 fairness and 1 unfair

turn observed.

Task: Teacher announced the topic "Earth day" for role play. She provided them

scenario card and briefed about the process what and how to play a role. Teacher

asked 4 students to participate voluntarily in the play. One student was supposed to

- 148 -

present air pollution, second student was acting as environment pollution and third

student was presenting water pollution.

Interpretation of debriefing session: After the role play, teacher asked about the

meaning of pollution, students showed difficulty in understanding the meaning of

pollution. However, teacher persuasion enables them to share correct meaning of

pollution (see Appendix 31, turns 30.1-30.7). Teacher asked about differences among

types of pollution. Students showed clarity and accuracy by providing supportive

examples. In the meanwhile, teacher has to intervene when two students, exchanged

hot talk with each other while describing sources of pollution (see Appendix 31, turns

30.29-30.35). They logically suggested some other ways to control pollution (see

Appendix 31, turns 30.37-30.51). Through role play students learn about the meaning

and importance of earth day and environment safety. Students performed confidently

in the role play. They exchanged accurate and logical dialogues with each other. They

were given only a brief script about the role otherwise they performed role by

imagining and thinking. As, by imagination of roles students involve in a complex set

of thinking that enhance their cognitive and behavioural development. Moreover,

when students work together and practice imaginary play, they negotiate role with

mutual agreement on different terms with each other. It promotes their social and

cooperative skills; they learn how to control their impulses to respect others decisions.


Qualification to quantification: There were total 14 turns in which 2 clarity and 1

unclarity turn, 1 accuracy and 1 inaccuracy turn, 2 logic and 1 illogic turn, 2 fairness

and 2 unfairness turns observed.

Task: Topic of today's role play was "the careless Lad". 4 students are selected from

class to participate in the play. One is acting as lad, other is acting as poor potter, third

- 149 -

student is acting as a father of lad, and 4rth student is acting as a boy to break pots.

Some necessary pots were already set for the play on stage.

Interpretation of debriefing session: Teacher asked questions to students after the

role play activity. Students learn through role play that everything in a life is not a

fun. We should take care of other belongings as we care ours. It increases their fair-

mindedness. Teacher asked students to share relevant examples from real context.

Two students exchanged accurate and logical examples from real context to show that

we should take care of needy people (see Appendix 32, turns 27.6-27.9). Teacher also

asked them about the moral of the story played in a role. She also asked them about

other consequences of doing wrong with people. Students accurately presented

examples. They also exhibited strong fairness by admiring the work of poor and

deserving people by saying "we should not ignore poor people because of their

poverty but acknowledge their work by giving them true reward for their work. (See

Appendix 32, turn 27.8). Role play promotes empathetic feelings among individuals

for poor and needy people. By involving in active learning environment, role play

enables students to transfer and apply their knowledge in real context which foster

their critical thinking as they independently assume the role situation, imagine

carrying on the role and taking appropriate decisions in handling the current issue.


Qualification to quantification: There were 17 total turns in which 2 clarity and 1

unclarity, 5 accuracy and 0 inaccuracy turns, 2 logic and o illogic turns, 2 relevance

and 0 irrelevance , 2 fairness and 0 unfairness turns observed.

Task: Topic of the role play was "God is great". The objective of the play was to

explore the blessings and greatness of God. Three students were selected voluntarily

- 150 -

from the class. One was required to act as a king and the other two were supposed to

act as beggars. Teacher briefed them about the procedure of role.

Interpretation of debriefing session: Teacher asked students about the greatness of

God. Students shared accurate and logical examples. They shared their examples from

religious context (see Appendix 33, turns 29.6-29.12). Students learn through the act

that God is the creator and provider of everything and no one can give anything to

anyone against God's wish. The story helped them in strengthening their religious

beliefs. They shared different relevant quotes about beggars (see Appendix33, turns

29.10-29.14). Role play enables students in making connections between their own

knowledge and experience with real world .Role play is true example of

constructivism and student centred learning as students can construct their own

meaning by participating in real life situations within classroom setting. Marlowe and

Page (2005) compare constructivist theory with traditional theory in five areas , first ,

students construct their knowledge in real context rather mere receiving it, secondly ,

they comprehend and then apply knowledge instead recall, thirdly , constructive

approach focus on thinking and analysis rather memorization and lastly, constructivist

emphasized active learner instead passive .

5.3. Deep Analysis

This section presents the deep analysis of selected episodes to present how

intervention presented the context for developing critical thinking. It is consisted of

detailed analysis of selected episodes to present the context for learning. The

rationale behind choosing these episodes was the nature of discourse and the

performance of students in the class .This section talks about the deep analysis of

some selected episodes from both classrooms in which critical thinking was very high

or very low with the purpose to explore the factors involved. The analysis showed the

- 151 -

change in the level of critical thinking among students due to the effect of

intervention.

In both project classrooms, the level of critical thinking was weak at the start of

intervention, mostly moderate in the middle and increasingly strong in the end of the

intervention. As noticed in the intervention that in role play classroom the students got

strong level of critical thinking earlier than in questioning classroom. There might be

many factors that impact the enhancement of critical thinking but I identified, for

example, teacher’s role and social context during the implementation of intervention

were emerged, which are analysed in the next section (see section 5.6).

The analysis of data revealed that the strong level of critical thinking among

students during intervention helped them to better understanding of the tasks in hand.

To provide a more general consideration of the effects of the intervention programme,

I present three episodes from the questioning classroom Epi-2, Epi-28 and Epi-30 (see

Table 4.1) to offer a more detailed analysis of the nature of students’ interaction. I

have selected the first and last episodes, which portray the weak, moderate and strong

level of critical thinking respectively. In the same lines, I have selected three episodes

(Epi-1, Epi -7 and Epi-29) from role play classroom to present the detailed analysis of

classroom discourse. The first Episode has been selected to show the critical thinking

level in the start of the intervention. The other two episodes have been taken from the

middle and end of the intervention. The episode 1 presents fair, episode 7 shows

moderate and the episode-29 presents strong critical thinking level. The episodes are

presented sequentially, which displays how the level of critical thinking changes

during intervention.

- 152 -

5.4. Deep Analysis: Evidence from Questioning Classroom

This section describes about the deep analysis of three episodes (Epi-2, Epi-28 & Epi-

30) separately. Moreover, in the end of the section, I compare all those aspects that

make the difference in classroom discourse.

5.4.1. Turn by turn analysis of episode 2.

In the second episode, grammar rules were taught to the students. Students mostly

appeared un-responded in initial turns of the episode to provide the meaning of one

grammatical term "as white as". For example, teacher asked about the meaning of "as

white as". Instead of giving response, students remained quiet and looked busy in

murmuring with their class fellows. After observing their unclarity, teacher probed

them with another question to elicit answer of the term by asking students to provide

examples of white colour from real context rather "as white as" (see Appendix 2,

turns 2.1-2.3).

Students’ shared unclear answers in a response by saying my shirt is white and my

scarf is white. Teacher asked the other question to realize them their mistake and to

help them indirectly in understanding the term by telling that shirts and scarf have

many other colours (see Appendix 2, turn 2.6). Teacher repeated her question by

asking examples from context about the term "as white as". Students did not respond,

were sitting passively with bowing heads, murmuring with their fellows. It showed

their disinterest and lack of motivation in classroom activities. In next turns (see

Appendix 2, turns 2.10-2.19) students shared some other inaccurate and unclear

examples. They looked helpless in providing relevant examples. After realization of

their ambiguity and confusion teacher asked students to find examples from their

home. The purpose behind was to make them comfortable in relating examples from

their context. In response of the question, one of the students shared another

- 153 -

inaccurate example of water and white shirt. After teacher's correction student

admitted her mistake (see Appendix 2, turn 2.21-2.30) that water and white shirt are

not similar in colour. Teacher probed students to explore more examples from their

kitchen as she felt they can easily explore items from kitchen that are always white.

After persistent probing of teacher, one of the students presented one accurate

example of milk as white as. After the example, another student shared another

relevant example "yogurt" that is always white (see Appendix 2, turns 2.30-2.35).

After sharing two relevant examples, students presented again some other inaccurate

examples such as lions are white. After teacher's inquiry, student accepted that lions

are not found only in white colour but also found in brown colour (see Appendix 2,

turns 2.39-2.42). In the end of the episode, students presented unfair example by

saying that lions should kill all other animals because lion is the king of the jungle

(see Appendix 2, turn 2.39-2.48).

Students took more than half of the class time in understanding the term, looked bored

and unmotivated .Majority of students appeared less participant. They appeared shy,

apprehend did and less interested in learning grammar rules. Although, teacher

persuaded them by probing at many places to motivate them for class participation.

But in the end of the episode only few turns show their participation (see Appendix 2,

turns 2.31-2.37).

5.4.2. Turn by turn analysis episode 28.

In episode 28, the same task, grammar rules were practised. The status of the episode

was moderate. In the episode, students showed unclarity in the beginning of the

episode when they were asked about to make adjective of the word "cycle". In the

beginning, students appeared unclear as they shared "my cycle, your cycle" but could

not make cycle as proper adjective. Teacher asked them to describe "cycle" as a

- 154 -

process, one of the students provided an accurate example by giving the example from

her book that it is called recycle (see Appendix 13, turns 28.2-28.11).

Teacher asked students to fill in the blanks by telling the characteristics of different

animals such as lion is---------sparrow is and crow is--. Students showed clarity in

filling the blanks and presented disliking for crow as a naughty bird who teases other

birds. They appeared unclear in answering about the use of fox skin in daily routine.

One of the students said as it is used for eating, but in the meanwhile, other students

contradicted with her by providing accurate references from T.V documentary and

their course book that the skin is used for bag, jacket and shoe making (see Appendix

13, turns 28.23-28.27). Students were confidently presenting their own point of view

and contradicting the claim whenever they found it inaccurate or illogical. They

overcome their hesitation, apprehension and shyness in participating classroom

activities. They showed clarity, accuracy and logic in explaining different

grammatical terms. Students exhibited fairness while considering bad act of people

who killed fox for getting her skin to use for different purposes. Students showed

sympathy for all animals and expressed their disliking for animals killing to get their

skin. One of the students defended her claim by providing a religious quote of Prophet

(Peace be upon him) who loved animals.(see Appendix 13,turns 28.28-28.34).

In the next turns, teacher asked about the use of two other grammatical terms such as

"as slow as" as fast as". In response, one student used metaphorically as slow as for

her class fellow for her slow work in the classroom. Students enjoyed her comment,

however other students provided some other accurate examples from their context

such as slow as ant and tortoise. (see Appendix 13, turns 28.38-28.45). Students

looked more motivated in presenting their ideas in the classroom.

- 155 -

5.4.3. Turn by turn analysis of episode 30

It was the only one episode in which students exhibited strong critical thinking. They

were confident in participation of classroom discussion. The topic of the lesson was

"pollution". Teacher started the lesson by asking the meaning of pollution from

students. Students provided unclear answer in response. Teacher intervened and asked

again about the meaning of pollution. Students described pollution as garbage

produced by humans and animals scattered all around. Teacher endorsed them for

their accurate and relevant examples (see Appendix 14, turns 30.1-30.9). She asked

them about the types of pollution. Students shared accurate examples from their

context in defining different types of pollution. They shared different types of

pollution such as earth pollution, air pollution and water pollution. Further, they

explained each type of pollution accurately by providing clear and relevant examples.

They identified one cause garbage that created earth pollution and destroyed our

environment (see Appendix 14, 30.9-30.15).

Teacher asked them to describe air pollution in the next turns. Initially, one student

shared unclear example that birds are responsible for air pollution. The other student

contradicted with her by asking "how can birds pollute air", but she could not justify

her answer. The other students shared logical and accurate examples from the context

that cars , buses and factories produced poisonous smoke that in turn create air

pollution.(see Appendix 14, turns 30.19-30.22).

Teacher asked the next question about water pollution. Students shared multiple

answers in response, they think that people pollute water by throwing their garbage in

the water. Teacher inquired them about some other factors that can pollute water.

In response, one student shared an illogical example that animal's leftover pollute

water. There was an argumentative talk observed between two students. The other

- 156 -

student challenged her claim that sea animals are responsible in polluting water. In her

opinion, water is homeland of sea animals so how could they come out of water for

their toilet. She shared logical example of fish that it comes out of water then will die.

The whole class enjoyed their talk and also learned through their dialogues. Teacher

intervened in the discussion by observing their unclarity and asked them other sources

of water pollution. Students took some wait time to think and then one of them shared

accurate example from T.V documentary, that ships and boats pollute water by

throwing their dirty fuel and garbage in the water (see Appendix 14, turns 30.26-

30.36). Then teacher asked them some preventive measures to protect environment?

Students shared multiple solutions to protect environment such as to keep trash in

dustbins rather spreading on roads and in streets. To avoid littering on roads and to

stop burning trash to control air pollution (see Appendix 14, turns 30.35-30.41).

Teacher asked them about the protection of school and country environment. Students

established a link between school environment and country environment by saying

that if we will clean our school environment then in return it will protect the whole

environment. They suggested some ways to protect school environment to place trash

in dustbins rather spreading in the grounds. Teacher further probed them to explore

their fairness by asking about, "is it fair that people throw trash in the streets in order

to clean their houses". Students presented fairness skills by condemning people to

pollute their environment (see Appendix 14, turns 30.42-30.47).

One of the students suggested that if we follow some rules it will protect our

environment, teachers asked her about how rules can protect our environment? She

looked embarrassed and did not share any logic about the application of rules in

environment protection (see Appendix 14, turns 30.51-30.53).

- 157 -

Other students recommended some suggestions for environment protection such as to

shift animal farms and factories outside city to avoid animals' trash and factories

poisonous smoke (see Appendix 14, turns 30.54-30.56).

Students showed clarity, accuracy logic and fairness towards the topic. They were

clear in applying relevant and logical real context examples in the classroom context

while defining pollution. Their strong critical thinking enable them to think beyond

classroom setting to broader real life settings .They showed strong argumentative

skills in justifying their claims for example when teacher asked students to identify

those factors which can pollute the environment, students presented conclusion after

exchanging different arguments with each other. They explained all pollution types

with accurate and logical examples. Student's classroom participation was maximum

and teacher's involvement was minimal which shows positive social context that is

significant to achieve higher level of achievement and higher level of cognitive

learning.

5.4.4. Comparison of episode-2, episode-28 and episode-30.

After discussing all three episodes separately, in the section, I will present the

comparison of three episodes (Epi-2, Epi-28 & Epi -30) to understand the shift of

discourse among students during the intervention. I selected these episodes because

students’ level of critical thinking in these episodes was different.

In the beginning of the intervention, in Epi-2, the level of critical thinking of

the students was weak almost in all standards. For example in Epi-2 students

presented unclarity, inaccuracy, irrelevance, illogic and unfairness while applying

grammar rules in matching different items, in recognizing and using prepositions in

different scenarios. In contrast, in Epi-28, when grammar rules were practiced again.

Students showed ambiguity initially in making adjective of cycle. Later, they showed

- 158 -

moderate critical thinking skills. Students were asked questions about different

grammar applications such as matching words and the use of prepositions.

On the other side, Epi-30 is in only one episode out of 30 episodes in which the level

of critical thinking was strong. Students showed strong critical thinking in almost all

intellectual standards.

In Epi- 2, students were ambiguous in responding knowledge based, reasoning

and logical questions. They could not understand the idiomatic nature of ‘as white as’,

although they provided the meaning of ‘white’ with some examples but could not

establish the link into mind the logic of the idiom. They showed unfamiliarity with the

term and in spite of teacher's clues and encouragement, they could not answer about

one chunk of ‘as white as’.

In Epi-28 , they showed better performance by actively engaged in interactive

activities of class while practicing both communicative and critical thinking skills , by

contradicting with each other, by probing in to the intellectual standards of clarity,

accuracy, relevance and fair-mindedness better than before.

Similarly, in Epi-30, they showed clarity in determining the significance and

relevance of arguments and ideas. Students actively participated in class discussion.

They showed ability in identifying inconsistencies and errors in thinking and to

recognize and appreciate logical evidences. They shared their answers through

collaboration and cooperation with each other. For example when teacher asked about

pollution and its different types, students preferred to collaborate and finally they

arrived on accurate and relevant results with consensus. They also shared arguments

with each other to defend their opinions (see Appendix 14, turns 30.9-30.36) .

In Epi-2, their participation in classroom discussion was minimal. A few of

students participated in classroom activities but others sit passively in the classroom

- 159 -

showing boredom and disinterest in classroom tasks. Class room context was teacher

led as most of time teacher probed question for incitation of discussion.

In contrast, in Epi-28 and Epi-30, the active involvement in classroom activities

provides students a chance to improve their self-consciousness, comprehension about

their abilities and also about their limits or shortcomings in learning. It works as a

road to self-improvement as learners and as individuals. Classroom context was

student led and every student has an equal chance of participation. Analysis showed

that critical thinking classroom context in certain ways provides opportunities to

students to arrive on best possible solution of the problem. As critical thinkers always

approach problems in a clear and relevant way (Paul, 2006).

In Epi-2, they took the whole class period in understanding one grammatical concept

‘as white as’ (See Appendix 2, turns 2.1-2.30). In Epi- 28 and Epi -30 students took

less time in comprehension of grammatical terms in comparison with Epi-2 where

they took long time in understanding terms. In Epi-2 they could not establish

relationship of classroom knowledge with real context. In episode-28, students

understood the link between ideas and put efforts in determining whether the ideas

and arguments present the entire picture. They also provided evidences to prove their

claims in comparison with E-2 where students looked mostly dependant on teacher's

answers and did not challenge any idea. In Epi-30 students not only provided

evidence of their claim but they drew conclusion after contradiction and challenging

each other.

In Epi 2, teacher failed to achieve her course objectives due to student's

unclarity of ideas. Students behaved passively in the class, they were not interactive

with teacher as well as with students. She could hardly teach only one grammar term

and the others are left undiscussed because of unclarity of students. As critical

- 160 -

thinking requires active and interactive environment to flourish and it cannot be

promoted in passive and disengaged learning context. After persistent efforts of a

teacher by providing clues and probing, they hardly gave one or two examples from

their context (see Appendix 2, turns 2.31-2.37). In comparison with Epi-28 and Epi-

30 student's active participation make it easy for teacher to complete her classroom

tasks in time.

It is observed in the study that through probing and interactive discussions teacher

created such thinking class room where critical thinking is promoted and where

language is used as learning tool for free and meaningful communication. Critical

thinking might be described as the ability to engage in reflective and independent

thinking. Students participated as active learner in class room discussion by rigorously

question ideas instead merely accepting them at a face value.

Overall in comparison with Epi-2, in Epi-28 students improved their critical

thinking in all standards with the passage of time. Although, they showed some

inconsistencies and errors in reasoning and logic yet they become confident in

presenting their ideas and contradicting other's illogical and irrelevant beliefs about

realities. On the other side in Epi-30 students showed less errors and unclarity in

understanding the concepts and fully participated in all activities. They exhibited the

ability to present their answers from multiple perspectives, to determine fairly the

merits of different angles of the question, to identify accurately common elements in

different statements to structure the description of problem and to suggest the

appropriate solution in a reasonable and realistic manner. Students expressed their

cognitive skills such as confidence, logical reasoning, applying intellectual standards,

open mindedness, inquisitiveness, predicting and transforming knowledge in other

relevant perspective skilfully.

- 161 -

Analyses showed that teacher created open and democratic environment in all

episodes which all students have equal chances of participation. In Epi-2 students

showed unfamiliarity with the context in comparison with Epi-28 and Epi-30 where

they looked well-adjusted with environment. It is shift of their native or traditional

classroom context to new social context where students and teacher both have

freedom to present their ideas openly. As, Foote, Vermette and Battaglia (2001)

argues that reciprocity is a big obstacle in developing open and liberal context for

social interaction. In comparison, critical thinking is a mutual learning process in

which both teachers and students through interaction involve in making consensus

about different problems by using multiple lenses. In the study teacher motivated

students with probing to participate in classroom discussion. It is observed that

students follow the teacher’s traits , for example teacher critical and helping

behaviour made them not only facilitator for one another but they were not taking the

things as granted too , as a result it helped to improve teaching and learning process.

Students engaged in thought provoking discussion on certain issue by sharing

multiple arguments with each other to explore the answer of the question. In the

episodes, students looked much confident in arguing with each other, the whole class

was engaged in learning process either they are participating or simply observing (see

Appendix 14, turns 30-30-34) Everyone seemed busy in thinking, talking, listening,

arguing and sharing their point of views openly. They learn through procedural

thinking process in which depth is more important than coverage, therefore the

classroom environment reflects entirely different context than traditional class room

where coverage is more important than depth. In contrasting with Epi-2 and Epi- 28,

students improved their sequence of time and language barrier by quickly answering

and fluently discussing and arguing with each other.

- 162 -

5.5. Deep Analysis: Evidence from Role Play Classroom

Three episodes Epi-1, Epi-7 and Ep-29 have been taken from the data to report

detailed analysis of student's learning. These episodes were selected on the basis of

their different critical thinking level in order to present the holistic picture of the

intervention.

5.5.1. Episode-1.

Rationale: The reason behind choosing the episode was status of the episode. In the

episode, students displayed fair critical thinking while playing a role and answering

questions in debriefing session. It was the only one episode in which students

displayed fair critical thinking. Another reason to select the episode to show the effect

of the intervention on the level of critical thinking of students from beginning to the

end.

Task: of the role play activity was to shed light on the importance of respect for

feeling in the class room.

Role play Scenario: The status of episode 1 was fair. Students were briefed about the

role to play. They were asked to play role on "respect for feelings". Students showed

reluctance and shyness while exchanging dialogues with each other. They reflect

difficulty in understanding, imagining and playing the role. They took more time in

imagining and performing the roles of different characters. They could not present the

comprehensive picture of entire role. For example when Kalsoom was claiming to be

the best player, Amber looked confused in answering her question. She took time to

adjust with context (see Appendix 15, turns 1.1-1.6). After initial turns Amber looked

bit more confident in performing the role as she advised Kalsoom to not make a fun of

other people (see Appendix 15,turns 1.7-1.26).

- 163 -

Debriefing session

Similarly, in debriefing session, students showed unclarity of meaning of respect. One

student related respect with happiness. She could not justify her answer after teacher

probing (see Appendix 15, turns 1.1-1.6). After discussion with teacher and students

in the class one student provided the right answer that respect means to take care of

others.

After discussing the meaning of respect teacher further probed them to provide the

definition of respect for feelings. Students provided unclear answers while defining

respect for feelings in initial turns. In the meanwhile, other students shared logical,

relevant and accurate examples from real context (see Appendix 15, turns 1.12-1.15).

Teacher inquired them to give examples of respect from home and school context.

Students shared accurate, logical and fair examples from their context. Most of them

were of the view that we should take care of others belonging and use them after

getting their permission (see Appendix 15,turns1.16-1.30). In the end, when students

clearly defined respect, teacher asked them about "respect for feelings" . Students

clearly and accurately defined the term (see Appendix 15,turns 1.32-1.39).

5.5.2. Episode-7.

Rationale: The reason behind choosing the episode was status of the episode. In the

episode, students displayed moderate critical thinking while playing a role and

answering questions in debriefing session. The purpose of this activity was to unfold

the significance of rules in our life.

Task: Task of the role play activity was to discuss the "respect for rules in the class

room.

Role play Scenario: In the play three students were selected to play roles .Two of

them played role as beggars and one student performed as a king. The king tested the

- 164 -

beliefs of two beggars about God through giving them different opportunities of

money. In response beggars showed their consent for God's blessings.

In the episode 7, students showed moderate critical thinking. In the episode, the

purpose of role play activity was to unfold the significance of rules in our life.

Students learnt that if they will not follow the rules their life will not be disciplined.

Although students Maryam and Rabia looked motivated and fully engaged while

role playing. Therefore, Maryam looked sometimes confused and reluctant during the

activity. She showed inaccuracy while exchanging dialogues. Moreover, students put

some illogical and irrelevant examples during question session. They also showed

lack of fairness while presenting some ideas for example teacher asked them (see

Appendix 18, turns 1.1-1.7)

Through role play activity students get more clarity about the importance of

rules in daily life by modelling and observing the characters today. This manipulation

of thought enhances their critical thinking skills. As they are not merely delivering the

dialogues but actually they are learning how to transfer their previous knowledge to

derive new meaning of the phenomena.

Role play was interesting and really a worthwhile activity for both students and

teachers as students and teachers looked engaged in the activity for whole time. In this

activity students not only improve their social learning experiences by lively interact

and act but they also improve their communicative skills by sharing dialogs with their

peers. Role play promotes their critical thinking skills as well when they comprehend

the meaning of the context and try to convince others logically.

After the role play activity, a whole class debriefing session was conducted to

get feedback of students towards the question at issue. In debriefing session students

showed confusion in answering the question 'how rules make us friendly". After

- 165 -

teacher persuasion, students get clarity of the importance of rules. (See Appendix 18,

turns 7.1-7.7).

In the next turns, teacher related rules with games to elicit more accurate answer

from students as they showed unclarity towards rules importance. Students presented

accurate and relevant examples while imagining game (see Appendix 18, turns, 7.8-

7.14).Teacher asked them the advantages of rules. Students shared that rules make us

punctual and disciplined. Teacher also asked them the consequences of not following

rules. In response, they shared that they will be punished for not following rules (see


Teacher also corrected students' views as they do not like rules for them but

recommended for others. She said rules are made for the betterment of us (see


Debriefings, especially when led by instructors, helped students assimilate the

meaning of the learning experience and support the development of critical thinking

by providing insights on students’ interventions, as well as their mistakes (Smith,

2005). Students learnt that if they will not follow the rules their life will not be

disciplined. Through role play activity students learnt the consequences of in

disciplined life.

5.5.3. Episode-29

Rationale: The reason behind choosing the episode was different status of the

episode. In the episode, students presented strong critical thinking while playing a role

and answering questions in debriefing session. Another reason to select the episode

was to discuss those focal points that change the level of critical thinking of students

from weak to strong level.

- 166 -

Task: Task of the role play activity was to give awareness to the students about the

blessings of God.

Role play scenario: Gina’s class was taking a trip to a special museum. This museum

had a collection of antique carousel horses. Guide warned all students not to touch

anything without permission otherwise you will bear the consequences.

In Epi-29, students showed strong critical thinking. Students were organized

into a small group to act on "God is great ". In the role play activity they learned

about true beliefs of God. Students acted their roles as king and two beggars. In this

episode, students performed their roles accurately. They were not hesitant in

performing the roles of beggars. During role play, students worked in groups and

learnt collaborate. They learned respect by accepting point of views of others. It can

be assumed that experiential learning provided targeted practice and feedback to train

skills of learners acting out roles in case scenarios. They provided authentic

justifications for their statements for example, when they were asked about the

punishment for beggars; they quoted religious thoughts by saying "beggars will be

recognized with black mark on their forehead in the day of judgment" (see Appendix

33, turns 29-10-29-11). In the episode, students shared their religious thoughts while

explaining beggars' role. They were clear about God's punishment for beggars. They

also quoted Prophet (peace be upon him) to show his disliking for beggars (see

Appendix 33, turns 29.10-29.14). Students also shared their views about how to

please and thank to Allah.

Those students who did not participate in role play, they observed the role

played by other students. Observation of roles helped them in strengthening their

beliefs in God. Although, they are not participating in the role but indirectly they are

benefitted by the actual activity to improve their knowledge, skills and attitudes.

- 167 -

During the activity, all students (both participants and observers in class) were

engaged. It may be said that the role play activity provided active learning

opportunities that engage both the effective and cognitive processes of the learners.

5.5.4. Comparison of episode-1, episode-7 and episode-29.

I have chosen three Epi-1, Epi-7 and Epi-29 from role play class room to report

here the different level of critical thinking among students. The level of critical

thinking of students among these three episodes was fair, moderate and strong

respectively.

In the episode 1, students presented fair critical thinking. In the other two episodes

Epi -7 and Epi -29 the level of critical thinking was moderate and strong respectively.

In the episode1, students performed their roles on the topic of "respect for feelings".

In the episode, students showed nervousness and hesitation in performing the role, in

the start of the activity, but in the middle and last turns they became more confident in

presenting their roles. During Role Playing part they reflected difficulty in

understanding, imagining and playing their role. They took more time in imagining

and performing the roles of different characters. They could not establish link

between their thinking and actions (see turns Appendix 15, turns 1.1-1.6).

In other these two episodes, students performed roles very confidently. Although in

Epi-7 they showed unclarity in the start of the episode while performing a role and

describing respect for rules in debriefing session (see turns1.1-1.6). They showed

more clarity and accuracy when teacher relates rules with games that may stimulate

their thinking in joining previous knowledge with current knowledge. They put

accurate and relevant examples from real context. They defend their roles logically


- 168 -

In the Epi-29, students demonstrated two different believers, one who has blind

faith in God and the other who trust on king for monetary benefits. Through the

activity students learn the benefits for true believer of God. They showed empathy

towards the negative characters when they feel ashamed on their mistakes. The role

play stimulates the imagination of the students and enhances the cooperativeness and

empathetic sense of students. Students showed confidence and motivation in

exchanging dialogues with each other to present a comprehensive picture of the

context. They presented clarity, accuracy and logic while communicating with each

other.

In Epi-1, in debriefing session, teacher asked them first the meaning of respect which

they could not define when they were asked independently (see Appendix 15, turns

1.1-1.6). They were confused and provided irrelevant and illogical examples while

answering different questions. However, after discussion with each other, they

provided accurate answer of respect which shows that thinking is driven through

mutual consent and collaboration (see Appendix 15, turn 1.6-1.7). Teacher brain

storms their ideas of respect first before directly asking the meaning of respect for

feelings. They provided relevant and accurate examples in explaining the importance

and advantages of rules in later turns.

In comparison with Epi-7, students showed unclarity in the earlier question,

importance of rules. They showed interest and clarity of the idea of significance of

rules when teacher linked it with real context. She asked them about the importance of

rules while playing a game. Students in response presented clarity and accuracy while

sharing ideas. Role play strategy enhances the clarity about the importance of rules in

daily life by modelling and observing the characters today. The manipulation of

thought facilitated to enhance their critical thinking skills. As they are not merely

- 169 -

delivering the dialogues but actually they are learning how to transfer their previous

knowledge to derive new meaning of the phenomena.

In Epi-29, students shared their religious beliefs clearly and confidently. They showed

unclarity only in one turn; otherwise, they showed clarity and accuracy in the whole

episode. They did not present any kind of hesitation and shyness rather showed

confidence in defending their beliefs. They openly discussed their ideas with each

other. They did not feel any problem in communication with each other.

.Role play was worthwhile strategy to improve critical thinking or both students and

teachers. As students improved their social learning experiences by interaction and

communication skills by sharing dialogs with their peers.

In addition, Role play aids intellectual development and creativity of students.

Students looked empowered in thinking and learning for themselves. They become

autonomous and inquisitive thinkers, who pose questions, investigate reasons and then

believe. As students exchanged not only written dialogues but they share relevant

ideas of real context. The positive aspect of role play observed in the study was that

by participating in a role students improved their confidence by talking openly in

discussions. They used real talk in which reciprocity and cooperating is maximum and

dominance is minimum. Students shared numerous implications and consequences of

their reasoning and justifications in debriefing sessions Debriefings, especially when

led by instructors, helped students assimilate the meaning of the learning experience

and support the development of critical thinking by providing insights on students’

interventions, as well as their mistakes (Smith, 2005). Moreover, role play get

students involve in collaborative learning where students cross through the process of

knowledge construction. In collaborative learning, through social interaction paves a

way towards cognitive change in student learning. In contrast with fair and moderate

- 170 -

episodes in Epi-29 students improved their learning, communication gaps and self-

confidence in. They may be accustomed with strategy with the passage of time that

improves their critical thinking. As they become critic of their own thinking by

correcting their mistakes and erroneous thinking.

5.6. Factors Influencing Critical Thinking

5.6.1. Teacher's role.

Teacher's role is very important factor in determining students learning.

Teacher's communication play major role in creating learning contexts in the

classroom. Their way of talking conveys a message about how learning and talking is

to be done in the classroom. This section consists of segments of transcripts that

explain the relationship among different variables of the teacher's role during

intervention in the study.

The following extract includes the detail of teacher's role that she played to

facilitate students during the intervention. These segments of the transcripts show how

the teacher facilitates students to promote their critical thinking during the

intervention. These transcripts were chosen to explore the effect of teacher on

student's critical thinking skills intentionally or unintentionally.

5.6.1.1. Teachers’ scaffolding through probing questions.

The following extracts of transcripts present the role of teacher when she

intervened to take some actions during intervention. The following extract was taken

from the episode 1 shows how teacher scaffolds students through probing questions to

bring them on right track when they were unclear about the meaning of discipline.

- 171 -

Table 5.4

Extract from Episode-1

Turn Speaker Talk

1.2 T Dear students what do you know about discipline?

"Silence" no answer (students were bowing their head down and not

answered) 1.3 T Repeated the question

But students were smiling and seemed reluctant in answering

1.4 T (Encouraging students by saying that you can share any idea what

you want) 1.5 S2 Hun (thinking) ) and looking at her class fellows ,

I think teacher ,discipline is good thing 1.6 T How can you say it is good thing can you elaborate it?

1.7 S2 (Huun I think it is ...(thinking but not answered)

(Silence from the whole class) 1.8 T Ok let me share an example of school discipline with you that if you

come late in the school what will happen?

(giving clue) (Murmuring and sharing with each other)

1.9 T Don’t you face any penalty of being late?

(Repeat question with different words)

1.10 S4 (Hunnnn), I think we will be punished.

(after a pause she replied) 1.11 T Why do you come late in the school?

(Silence)

1.12 T Yes share any reason of being late in school? You can share any idea

without hesitation

(Motivated them)

(No answer),

1.13 T Ok just imagine, what happens if your parents are not at home.

(Linking question with home discipline)

(Probed them with another question) 1.14 S2 Teacher we will enjoy a lot

(laughed the whole class) 1.15 T No I'm asking you what happens in your kitchen, in your drawing

room, will you keep everything maintained in the absence of your

parents 1.16 S3 No teacher we will destroy everything in kitchen, in our bed room

and in our drawing room.

(replied with embarrassment)

1.17 T So this is an example of indiscipline….you see how things become

messy without discipline

(she related the example with the concept of discipline)

- 172 -

In the above extract teacher was probing students to make them clear about the

concept of discipline. When students appeared unclear about the meaning of

discipline, teacher asked them questions from their real school and home context to

remove their ambiguity. After teacher's persuasion students shared right answer about

discipline (see Appendix 1, turn1.16-1.17). In such a way teacher probing helped

students to realize their unclarity by themselves and put efforts to resolve ambiguity.

The teacher's role in such context might be also taken as motivator to evoke the urge

among students to find the solution of the problem and enable them to rely upon their

thinking rather on teacher.

The sequences in Table 5.5 taken from the episode 6 describes the role of teacher by

helping students after realizing that students are unable to distinguish two

grammatical terms many and more .

Table 5.5

Extract from Episode 6

Turn Speaker Talk

6.2 T Do you know the meaning of many and much

S9 (Students discussing with each other ) Mahira looked around the

class, raised her hand but abruptly put down her hand, as she

looked confused in answering the question.

6.3 T Mahira do you want to say something?

6.4 S9 Hunnn, (reluctant in answering)

teacher actually I , m not sure about the answer so I'm not

interested in answering and she again looked towards her class

fellows for some assistance

6.5 T (Encouraging her),

- 173 -

oh don’t be hesitant , we all will appreciate your answer , so share

it with us and don’t bother if it is wrong

6.6 S9 Smiled and said, teacher I think many means, a lot of things and

what much means, I don’t know?

6.7 T Ok fine, (motivating her)

You have given the perfect answer of many and we will explore

the answer of much from other students.

In the above extract, teacher helped students when they looked confused in

many and much. One of the students partially answered by only providing the

meaning of many and showed unclarity about the meaning of much. In turn 6.5,

teacher admired Mahira for her half answer (meaning of many) in order to encourage

classroom participation but she asked other students the meaning of "much" in later

episode. In order to create critical thinking classroom environment, teacher needs to

act as facilitator to encourage discussion and free thought process, as well as to infuse

the particular opinion that thinking always generates further new questions rather than

ends with a right answer.(Halx & Reybold, 2005; Arend, 2009). Teacher scaffolds the

students through probing questions to prompt thinking of students, not doing the

thinking for them. Teacher gives scaffolds to give students the skills to move forward.

It showed that such type of probing questions persuaded them to think critically and to

give the real life examples to explain the concept of discipline

5.6.1.2. Teacher intervenes to manage the classroom situation.

The sequence in Table 5.8 taken from the Episode-6 provides an example of the

teacher intervention to manage the class room situation when two students were

exchanging hot talk with each other.

- 174 -

Table 5.6

Extract from Episode-6

Turn Speaker Talk

6.8 T Ok, I ,m providing you the list of items and you are supposed to

match them with many and much concept it will help you

understanding the concept of much and many

6.9 T Can you differentiate the items with many and much idea, if there

are some bananas and milk what would you use for the both?

6.10 S1 How many milk and how much bananas….

6.11 S3 (No teacher, she is wrong)

It is like how many oranges and how much milk as I bought milk

and oranges yesterday from the shop

6.12 S2 (At once Norin added her remark )

But teacher is asking about bananas not about oranges? So why are

you giving this wrong example?

(She looked at Mahira arrogantly)

6.13 S6 Yes bananas and oranges are two different fruits so how can we

count in a same way

6.14 S3 I think bananas and oranges both can be counted in numbers so

we can say how many oranges and how many bananas".

6.15 S2 yes (seemed satisfied)

we can also count any other fruits and vegetables as well

6.16 S7 It's like ,how much cherry and how many juice

6.17 T No we can use many for all measurable things that can be counted

in numbers and use much for quantity of things in number like

- 175 -

how much,,

6.18 S4 Teacher is it right example? (asking with some confusion)

how many yogurt and how much chairs

6.19 S7 (laughing sarcastically)

oh no you are giving wrong example how could we count yogurt

and how can use much for chair,( ha ha ha, laughing the whole

class)

6.20 S2 (Looking at s4 angrily ) ,

Said ok then you should give the right example if you know more

than me?

6.21 T (Intervened) after observing the hot talk of students and said,

oh don’t fight with each other , yes S2 is right we can use many

only for those things that can be numbered and much for those

things that are in quantity like milk, yogurt ,and water

6.22 S3 Teacher I think it will be like , How many buckets and how much

water

6.23 T (encouraging)

Yes exactly , well done , you have given the right example

The above extract exemplifies an important role of the teacher as an organizer/

manager in the classroom. The teacher handled both students problem skilfully by

advising them the solution of the problem. After teacher's clarification of the

difference between "many" and "much" S3 presented one relevant example from the

real context to clarify many and much concepts. At a glance, the episode shows that

teacher managed the problematic situation arose in the class with mutual

- 176 -

understanding of teacher and students. Such example presents that a teacher can

perform duel duties as an academic expert and as a manager in the classroom when it

is required (Johnson & Johnson, 1990).

5.6.1.3. Teacher helps students in subject matter.

The sequence in Table 5.9 taken from the Episode-22 shows the role of a teacher

helping the students with the subject matter.

Table 5.7


Turn Speaker Talk

22.34 T What is the purpose of bridge?

22.35 S7 Bridges are made for motor cycles

22.36 S8 No teacher (contradicts) bridges are made for old people only as

they cannot cross the roads

22.37 S1 Bridges are made for animals protection as they will get an accident

if they go through roads

22.38 T No it is not true, bridges are made only for humans safety , there

are side roads for animals crossing

(corrected them)

In the above extract, teacher provided students assistance by directly mentioning

their mistake about the use of bridge. At the stage, she did not wait for more answers

from other students and facilitated students by providing direct answer. She could

have provided indirect help by probing more questions in order to elicit the answer

from students. This help might look as negative facilitation in lowering the level of

critical thinking as students were not involved in finding out answers rather got

- 177 -

instant help from teacher. In the segment, teacher showed two different types of

behaviour, one she has provided direct help to students and the other she provided

indirect help in identifying their mistakes in answering the question. Analysis showed

that whenever students were challenged by the teacher question, they looked more

engaged in critical thinking process in finding out the solution of the problem (see

Appendix 10, turns 22.38-22.48). On the other hand, when teacher provided them

direct answer of the question, they gave up thinking in finding the answer of the

question.

5.6.1.4. The Teacher initiate reciprocal question.

In the extract, which is taken from Episode -8, it can be seen a different structure of

talk initiated by the teacher by providing the students a scenario to assume and apply

the required information to draw the conclusion.

Table 5.8


Turn Speaker Talk

8.36 T Ok let you assume you have 300 rupees and you have to select

some toys, some grocery items and some bakery items from shop,

how could you manage your money?

8.37 S1 I will buy rice for 200 rupees and juice for 150 rupees and will

give 50 rupees to beggar

8.38 S2 I will buy juice for 50 rupees, chocolate 50 rupees,

And 100 rupees for video game

8.39 S3 And I will buy bread and butter for whole money and not

interested in getting more things for anyone.

8.40 T What will you do for 100 rupees that is left

- 178 -

8.41 S2 Hunnn(thinking) teacher I don’t know

8.42 S3 I will spend 100 rupees on noodles, 100 rupees for ice-cream and

100 rupees will take as my pocket money, (laughed the whole

class)

8.43 S9 And I will spend 100 rupees for books, and 200 rupees for

younger brother toy

8.44 S1 I will get gift for 300 rupees for my grand pa

8.45 S9 I will buy my favorite doll house for the whole money, my mom

will buy gifts for my younger brother

Teacher and students exchanged dialogues to draw conclusion. As students

shared examples of different items in justifying the assumed amount of money.

Whenever, they showed unclarity in justifying their answers, teacher probed them to

connect them towards the solution of the problem. In this example, teacher motivated

students to use their knowledge in practical setting. Students, in response tried to meet

the requirement of the question. In the example, teacher provided students a thinking

platform to apply classroom knowledge in real setting, to promote productive help to

students in resolving daily life issues. This context is different from the instructional

context that is widely used in usual classroom where teacher asked routine questions,

students replied and then teacher evaluated (Turner, et al, 2002).


This section compares the class room context in different episodes of

questioning and role-play, to show for each type the discourse patron that emerges

from student's interaction during the intervention. Extracts of transcripts are used to

exemplify the behaviour of students in different context.

- 179 -

Analysis showed that in the earlier episodes of Questioning class room students

exhibited weak critical thinking. In these episodes, the discourse was mostly teacher

led; students were less participant and unmotivated (see Appendix 1, episode 1). With

the passage of time, being familiar with class room context and with long interaction

of questioning, students improved their critical thinking skills (see Appendix 2,

episode 10). In the earlier episodes, they mostly accept teachers and their fellows’

explanations of the answers and did not pose any doubt to teacher's knowledge but in

the middle and in the last episodes they became more critical in contradicting the

responses of teacher and other students. In these episodes the context of classroom

was student led. Teacher created open environment in the class in which students

were motivated to discuss, challenge and discern the previous beliefs with logic and

reasoning. Such context might bring change in student's critical thinking and attitude.

On the other hand in role play, class room students showed hesitation and

reluctance in role play and class participation in earlier episodes. Yet the situation was

better than questioning classroom as they did not show weak performance in role play

episodes but show fair, moderate and strong critical thinking respectively. They

looked more involved in role play classroom context rather questioning classroom.

They eagerly participated in role play episodes and accept it as a fun rather a

disciplined academic activity.

The segments of the transcripts taken from questioning and role play episodes present

the change in student's thinking and performance in different social contexts.

i) The extract of a transcript shown in the table 5.11 is taken from the Episode-8,

illustrates the context of the discourse emerged between teacher and student.

- 180 -

Table 5.9

Extract from Episode -8

Turn Speaker Talk

8.10 T So if you will be given some money, how will you spend the money?

8.11 S6 Yes teacher I will spend the whole money in buying my favourite cake

and biscuits. (saying happily)

8.12 T You will spend whole money for yourself and will not spend on your

family?

Silence, discussion with smile with each other

8.13 S6 Hunnn, I don’t know, I'm not interested in doing shopping for my

younger sister.

8.14 T But if spent whole money now, then how could you do shopping for

some other items you need later?

8.15 S5 teacher I will think about to how I could get more money for shopping

8.16 S8 Hunnn, I don’t know, I'm not interested in doing shopping for my

younger sister

(Says with some embarrassment)

8.17 T Why?

Because she always fight with me

8.18 S9 I think I will buy the most important items with that money and will

not waste my money on useless things……………

8.19 T Ok let me know, how can we save our money in shopping?

8.20 S8 We can save money by taking less items as required

8.21 T But what will you do when left items you need at home?

- 181 -

8.22 S8 Hunn (thinking) but not answered

8.23 S3 We can save money by not buying toys

8.24 T If don’t buy toys then what would you want to buy to save money

8.25 S8 Hunnn, I think….

(but not answered, silence)

8.26 T Yes anyone wants to share any idea of saving money in shopping…..

(She repeats her question)

(Silence, students remained busy in discussion)

The above extract shows how teacher initiated assumption based referential question

to stimulate thinking of students to apply their unknown knowledge to draw the

conclusion. Referential questions are used to elicit more diverse answers from the

respondents by involving them in critical thinking process to provide their own ideas

rather recollected previous information (Ellis, 2012). In the extract, it can be seen that

only teacher and students both were engaged in talk, however, students were not

interactive with each other. They are not contradicting or arguing the responses of

each other rather focusing more on presenting their own point view. Although, teacher

provided open, supportive and encouraging class room context for class participation

yet students only discussed with each other whenever they felt ambiguity in

answering the question but they did not present mutual consent and most of them

remained unclear.

ii) The extract in table 5.13 taken from the Episode-14 shows different comments

shared by students in response to the question of "celebration of Earth day".

- 182 -

Table 5.10

Transcript of Episode 14

Turn Speaker Talk

14.49 T Ok how can we celebrate earth day?

14.50 S6 By celebrating parties

14.51 S2 No teacher (contradicting) by cleaning our homes and schools

14.52 S5 Yes teacher we should go in the streets that day and cleans

our streets by removing trash from streets in such a way we

celebrate that earth day

14.53 S1 But teacher if we clean our streets than what sweepers will

do? They will take rest then

14.54 S4 Yes it means to clean our earth from trash and garbage

14.55 S3 We should clean our homes by ourselves on earth day in such

way we can celebrate that day

In the above discussion students were asked by the teacher about the way of

celebration of Earth Day. Students disagreed with each other about the celebration of

the day. One student was of the view to celebrate that day by arranging parties as she

might thought Earth Day same with party celebration. In the meanwhile another

student opposed her by relating the celebration of Earth Day with cleaning of houses

and schools. This discussion develops more clarity among students about the

celebration of "Earth Day".

iii) The extract in table 5.6 taken from the Episode-5 shows different comments

shared by students in response to the question of "safety on roads".

- 183 -

Table 5.11

Extract of Episode 22

Turn Speaker Talk

22.4 T Ok if do not cross the road carefully then what happens?

22.5 S5 we may get an accident

22.6 S3 We should cross the road quickly then we can save ourselves

from accidents

22.7 S2 No teacher (contradicts)

we should not cross the road quickly because it may cause

accidents as cars are coming with high speed

22.8 T Yes you are right

22.9 T Ok let me know, why signals are placed on roads?

22.10 S6 They are placed because they give light at night to help people

cross the road

22.11 S1 No teacher(contradicts)

signals are in three different colours and red signals are for cars,

orange is for bus and green is for motorcycles

22.12 S8 No teacher (contradicts)

I go in a car with my father and he told me that green signal is to

go, red means to stop and orange means to wait or start

In the above extract teacher asked students about the safety on roads. Students

showed both types of responses clarity and unclarity regarding the road safety.

Teacher asked the question of if do not cross the road carefully then what happens?"

one student of the class said "we may get an accident. In the meanwhile another

- 184 -

student added her comment by saying "We should cross the road quickly then we can

save ourselves from accidents". But the other student showed dissatisfaction with her

answer and said "No teacher (contradicts) we should not cross the road quickly

because it may cause accidents as cars are coming with high speed". Teacher put

another relevant question in the class "Ok let me know, why signals are placed on

roads?" Students shared diverse views in response to this question. One student of the

class replied "They are placed because they give light at night to help people cross the

road". The other student involved in the discussion by sharing her views as she said"

No teacher (contradicts) signals are in three different colours and red signals are for

cars, orange is for bus and green is for motorcycles". But the other student

contradicted her view by saying "No teacher (contradicts) I go in a car with my father

and he told me that green signal is to go, red means to stop and orange means to wait

or start". That is actually correct answer that she shared with teacher and the class.

Although students were presenting alternative point of views about the problem

at discussion. However, “a student’s preference to solve problems by generating many

solutions and employing a strategy of thoroughness and attention to detail is

associated with a higher critical thinking disposition” (Friedeln et al., 2008,). In its

most simplistic form, critical thinkers are those who possess the ability to analyse and

evaluate information (Duron, Limbach & Waugh, 2006). According to Rudd, Baker

and Hoover (2000). Critical thinking is a reasoned, purposive, and introspective

approach to solving problems or addressing questions with incomplete evidence and

information and for which an incontrovertible solution is unlikely.

iv) Extract of the transcript shown in the Table 5.15 is taken from the Role play class

room Episode-1 presents

- 185 -

Table 5.12

Extract of Episode -1

No Speaker Talk

1 T Do you understand what respect means?

1.1 S3 Hunnn, it means to make you happy….

1.2 T How could you relate happiness to respect?

1.3 S1 Teacher, I think if u r happy it means we respect you

1.4 T Do you agree with Salma's justification of respect?

(Asked from whole class)

(Whole class was busy in discussion)

1.5 S3 Teacher, we should not disrespect our teachers…

1.6 T Yes we should respect our teachers but I, m asking you the

meaning of respect that you learnt today from the role play?

(she insisted on the question)

1.7 S6 Teacher I think we should take care of others means respect

(After some discussion, Mahira replied)

1.8 T Good and what does respect for feelings mean?

1.9 S4 We should become good friends …

1.10 S9 Hummmm, yes if we are good friends we will respect each

other….

1.11 S7 No teacher it means to take care of feelings of others..c

1.12 S8 Yes I saw a T.V drama in which one friend presents a gift to her

friend on saying sorry

1.13 S1 Yes teacher as we observed in a role that we should not calling

others with bad names…

- 186 -

1.14 S4 But I think we can call our friends with any name I saw a movie in

which children used many names for their friends….

1.15 S8 Oh yes , respect also means to do work of our elders and do not

show reluctance to follow them

In the above extract, students responded to teacher's question with multiple

responses. Yet most of their answers were unclear and illogical. They did not

understand the depth of the question. Students were more participative in role play

classroom in comparison of questioning classroom. They might take role play less

traditional and novel teaching strategy to observe and participate in it. To them, the

class room context was different; it looked less formal and stiff different from

traditional classroom. Students did not behave as receptive of question initiated by the

teacher but they tried to participate in the discussion without caring it is wrong or

right response.

Table 5.13

Extract from Role Play Class Room Episode -5 , Debriefing Questions

No Speaker Talk

5.1 T What did you learn from today's activity

(No answer, Kept busy in discussion)

5.2 S7 Hunnn, teacher I think we should not steal anything from any

where

5.3 S9 No we should feel ashamed on our doing and should not repeat it

in future

5.4 S8 No in the play , Salma felt ashamed of stealing

5.5 S1 Yes , once I went to a big store and I picked one Pac of biscuit but

- 187 -

forget payment, I felt so upset so i went there in the next morning

and paid money

5.6 S8 Yes my brother also ate chocolate from the store and forget

money

5.7 S5 If he ate chocolate what did he feel like?

5.8 S8 He said I brought only one chocolate from a big store so they will

not bother it

5.9 S5 But he should feel guilty about his act , as it is unfair to steal

anything either a small or big in size

5.10 S10 It is true if we will take care of others belongings , they will

respect us in return

5.11 S2 Yes because if we will take care of others belonging they will

take care of us in return

In the above extract students showed moderate critical thinking level. They

contradicted with unclear and irrelevant examples presented by students to justify the

role play activity. The topic of the role play activity was "self-respect". Teacher

inquired about the act of the participant who stole one item from the store and get

embarrassed after reaching at home about her act of stealing. In the next day she

returned back the stolen item to the shopkeeper with apology. Such kind of behaviour

was presented in the play as the concept of "self-respect". Students were asked about

the morality of the act. Some shared their personal examples from real context to

answer the question. Initially some of them appeared with unclear and irrelevant

examples but after sharing other examples by other students they get clarity of idea of

- 188 -

self-respect. It was seen that in the episode, students were contradicted confidently

with each other to present their own point of view.

5.6.3. Comparison social context in questioning and role play classroom.

Analysis showed that in questioning class room context students took more time in

adjustment (see Appendix A, Episode 1). Initially they appeared less interested and

less engaged in classroom activities but gradually they improved their confidence,

motivation and interest in later episodes that also improved their critical thinking

skills (see Appendix 12, Episode 12) One reason in questioning class room might be

the fear of answering questions on the spot in comparison, in role play they were

given think time to prepare themselves for acting and debriefing questioning session.

Another reason might be taken as students take questioning more stiff and disciplined

academic activity rather role play is taken as less structured and more fun activity.

- 189 -

Chapter VI

Attitude Analysis

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a general view of students’ critical

thinking attitude towards teaching strategies. Paul’s (1994) traits model was used to

measure the change separately for each strategy through pre- and post- critical

thinking questionnaire filled by students. The results are presented in two sections: (a)

Questionnaire analysis of questioning classroom and (b) Questionnaire analysis of

role play classroom.

6.1. Critical Thinking Attitude Questionnaire

An attitude questionnaire was developed by using of Paul’s traits for the specific

purpose of this research and was taken as evidence of the shift of students' attitude

developed during the intervention (see Appendix 34). The purpose of the

questionnaire was to analyse the change in attitude of the students if any because of

the intervention. The developed questionnaire was consisted of a set of 23 items with

total score of 92 in accordance with 4 point Likert scale and participants were

required to select one option against each item. The questionnaire consists of a set of

items about intellectual traits like intellectual humility, intellectual autonomy,

intellectual integrity, intellectual courage, intellectual empathy and intellectual

perseverance. The questionnaire was given to the students to answer twice, before and

after the intervention and difference between their responses is used to measure the

attitude change of the students.

The questionnaire items were developed by using of the following indicators of each

trait.

- 190 -

Table 6.1

Intellectual Traits as Analytical Tool

Trait Indicators

1. Integrity I always stick with my beliefs either they are wrong

I always respect others as much as myself

I always accept my faults and try to improve my mistakes

2. Humility I never proud of my knowledge

I never feel ashamed in taking help from others in problem

solving

I always rely on my knowledge -

3. Courage I never accept wrong opinions under pressure

I always willing to correct my wrong beliefs

4. Empathy I always try to protect my point of view when I disagree

with others

I always show sympathy for my opponents when they

disagree with me

5. Perseverance I always show patience in difficult situations

I always accept challenge and finish my task

6. Autonomy I always take decisions independently

I face problem alone and never care about criticism of

others

The indicators were also used as scoring tool for assessment of critical thinking

attitude. It facilitated quick and valuable assessment of student thinking. As

- 191 -

mentioned earlier the responses of students were analysed with the direction of 4

point Likert scale ranging from agree, strongly agree, disagree, and strongly disagree.

The minimum score is 1 and maximum score for each item is 4.

The interpretation of scores: As said earlier the responses of students were analysed

with the direction of 4 point scale ranging from 1-4 with the direction of agree,

strongly agree, disagree and strongly disagree. However, negative items were

reversed as positive items and scores were calculated with 3 points but on the other

hand, negative items were being scored as 1.

For the purpose of generation of the meaning from the data I used the following

criteria. I also reported that the way I adopted to differentiate the categories of attitude

has no strong scientific and statistical background. It is simply a kind of arbitrary

explanation of the scores.

The students have a weak attitude, if the scores ranged below 44.

The students have a moderate attitude, if the scores ranged between 45-66.

The students have a strong attitude, if the scores ranged above 67.

6.2. Questionnaire Analysis - Questioning Classroom

In this part, I present mean difference of students to compare the scores in pre

and post critical thinking attitude questionnaires in order to know the effectiveness of

the strategy.


The descriptive statistics provide general information about each trait. They also

support the comparison of students’ critical thinking attitude before and after the

intervention. It provided the means and standard deviation of each item before and

after the intervention. The results are shown in figure 6 is depicting the change of

critical thinking affectively.

- 192 -


thinking intellectual attitude in questioning classroom

Figure 6.1 shows that, after intervention, the respondent’s critical thinking

attitude changed in favour of questioning teaching strategy. The overall mean score

of all traits changed from weak attitude to strong attitude. This increasing trend in

each trait was observed for every statement in this category.

6.2.2. Non-parametric test analysis.

Although, mean scores of student’s critical thinking attitude shows only the

difference of scores for intellectual traits. However, I employed another inferential

non parametric test i.e., ‘Wilcoxon Signed Rank test that not only to present the

significant differences in student's critical thinking but also to show the consistency of

scores with the mean scores appeared in descriptive analysis. The purpose of using

both techniques was to make more understanding about the change in the level of

critical thinking among students.

7

9

7.5

33

3

7.1

33

3

7.3

33

3

7.3

33

3

9.3

3

10

.6

9.2

66

7

8.9

33

3

8.6 8.6

66

7

I N T E G R I T Y H U M I L I T Y A U T O N O M Y C O U R A G E P E R S E V E R A N C E E M P A T H Y

pre assessment post assessment

- 193 -

Table 6.2

Wilcoxon Signed Ranked Test indicates the Difference among Subscales of Attitude

Before and After the Intervention in Questioning classroom

N Mean

Ranks

Sum of

Ranks

z P

Integrity(pre)-

Integrity(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.46 .001

Positive

Ranks

15b 8.00 120.0

Ties 0c

Total 15

Humility(pre)-

Humility(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.53 .000

Positive

Ranks

15b 8.00 120.0

Ties 0c

Total 15

Autonomy(pre)-

Autonomy(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -2.96 .003

Positive

Ranks

11b 6.00 66.0

Ties 4c

Total 15

Courage(pre)-

Courage(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 00 -2.83 .005

Positive

Ranks

10b 5.00 55.0

- 194 -

Ties 5c

Total 15

Perseverance(pre)-

Perseverance(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -2.70 .007

Positive

Ranks

9b 5.00 45.0

Ties 6c

Total 15

Empathy(pre)-

Empathy(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -2.84 .004

Positive

Ranks

10b 5.50 55.0

Ties 5c

Total 15


Results indicated a significant difference in integrity (z=-3.46; p=.001),

humility (z=-2.96; p=.003), autonomy (z=-2.96; p=.003), courage (z=-2.83; p=.005),

perseverance (z=-2.7; p=.007) and empathy (z=-2.84; p=.004).The means of the ranks

in case of each subscale, were appear to be in favor of post assessment while the mean

of the ranks in favor of pre-assessment was .00.

6.3. Questionnaire Analysis - Role Play Classroom

The critical thinking attitude questionnaire was also given before intervention

and after the intervention to all students in another class room to assess their level of

critical thinking skill. Researcher was present throughout the time to guide students in

filling the questionnaire.

- 195 -


Difference in mean scores of students showed a change in their critical thinking

attitudes as they improved in all intellectual traits and it can be considered an

evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention.


thinking attitude in role play classroom

Figure 6.2.presents the results of the pre and post-test scores which shows visible

improvement in all traits. Change in mean scores of all traits provides an evidence of

the success of the intervention.

6.3.2. Non-parametric analysis.

I employed Wilcoxon Signed Rank test not only to present the significant

differences in the scores of student's critical thinking attitude but also to show the

consistency of scores with the mean scores appeared in descriptive analysis. The

purpose of using teaching technique was to make more understanding about the

change in the level of critical thinking among students in role play classroom.

7.9

33

3 9.4

7

6.5

33

3

6.1

33

3

6.3

33

3

3.2

66

7

9.1

3

10

.73

9.4

8.6

8.6

8.5

33

3

Integrity Humility Autonomy Courage Perseverance Empathy

pre assessment post assessment

- 196 -

Although mean, standard deviation is showing the difference of scores of

students in pre and post Questionnaires, hence, I used Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test to

get reliable statistical explanation of the results.

Table 6.3

Wilcoxon Signed Ranged Test indicates the Difference among Subscales of Attitude

Before and After Intervention in Role Play Classroom

N Mean

Ranks

Sum of

Ranks

Z P

Integrity(pre)-

Integrity(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.31 .001

Positive

Ranks

13b 7.00 91.0

Ties 2c

Total 15

Humility(pre)-

Humility(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.27 .001

Positive

Ranks

13b 7.00 91.0

Ties 2c

Total 15

Autonomy(pre)-

Autonomy(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -2.96 .003

Positive

Ranks

13b 7.00 91.0

Ties 2c

Total 15

Courage(pre)- Negative 0a .00 .00 -2.83 .005

- 197 -

Courage(post) Ranks

Positive

Ranks

12b 6.50 78.0

Ties 3c

Total 15

Perseverance(pre)-

Perseverance(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -2.70 .007

Positive

Ranks

12b 6.50 78.0

Ties 3c

Total 15

Empathy(pre)-

Empathy(post)

Negative

Ranks

0a .00 .00 -3.42 .001

Positive

Ranks

15b 8.00 120.0

Ties 0c

Total 15


Findings reveal a significant difference in integrity (z=-3.31; p=.001), humility

(z=-3.27; p=.001), autonomy (z=-2.96; p=.003), courage (z=-2.83; p=.005),

perseverance (z=-2.70; p=.007) and empathy (z=-3.42; p=.001).The means of the

ranks in case of each subscale, were appear to be in favor of post assessment while the

mean of the ranks in favor of pre-assessment was .00.The difference in pre and post

scores of students in CT attitude questionnaires showed the effectiveness of the

intervention. It further supports the one of the objectives of the research that

intervention affects the attitude of students.

- 198 -

Chapter VII

Discussion

The study investigated two questions; first was "are questioning and role play as

teaching strategies viable and productive in developing critical thinking skills among

elementary students of Pakistan? The second question was explored in the study "does

critical thinking influence the attitudes of students? To give an answer to these two

questions, the approach does not evaluate the direct evidence of learning impact in an

experimental model in a traditional way but through the indirect evidence of its

effects on student interactions and their attitudes. The study focuses on two

classrooms from one public school of Pakistan and these classrooms are taken as case

studies where an intervention was implemented to find the impact of questioning and

role play as teaching strategies in promoting critical thinking skills and critical

thinking attitude of the students.

It is important to report that all activities were organized in a usual classroom

context. In the intervention, I tried to follow the same school timetable and the

scheme of work described by the school. Therefore, all tasks selected from the

student's course book were designed by the researcher. The objective behind was to

approach the data in as normal as possible classroom conditions which is one essential

element of design based research. The study highlighted some factors which emerged

during the intervention in a normal classroom conditions and presented a whole

picture of teacher student interaction towards a process of meaning making and

acquisition of knowledge.

After briefing the introduction, I present the detail of the forthcoming chapter.

I discuss in the light of results of analysis:

- 199 -

The intervention and its usefulness for elementary schools of Pakistan

Discussion on episodes selected from the data

Discussion on quantitative analysis

Discussion on attitude

The factors emerged during intervention are , teacher role, student's autonomy

in thinking, communication skills, change of context and subject knowledge

The attitude questionnaire and its implication for Pakistani elementary Schools

I will also highlight the interplay of critical thinking skills and attitude among

students.

7.1. Impact of Intervention

The results of the study showed that intervention including questioning and role

play; two teaching strategies proved effective in developing critical thinking among

students at primary level. The Potential productivity of intervention is evident in the

form of critical thinking in which students attained more clarity, accuracy, relevance,

logic and fairness of concepts through probing and challenging questions and mutual

activities of role play.

Interaction: The intervention provided an opportunity to students to share ideas with

each other and construct new knowledge. As a result, students became more confident

in presenting their own point of view in joint activities. Students presented better

ways of coping with real life issues by working together. The results are in line with

Mercer and Littleton's (2007) findings that knowledge is not individual property but

depends on the mutual contribution of the community who use cultural tools as

languages, relationship patterns and institutions to achieve such purpose. They assert

that intellectual achievements and failure of children are not their individual

discoveries but relates with culturally situated social interaction. Research presented

- 200 -

facts that if interactional strategies such as pair work and role play used more

frequently in class room; students are likely to improve their class room participation

and educational attainment (Brown & Palincsar, 1989) .Communication skills: The

students communication and critical thinking skills improved over time (see table

5.1). Intervention provided a context where students participated openly in class

activities, share ideas with each other and giving alternatives as solutions of the

problems. Such context helps students in developing reasoning skills and critical

thinking attitude (see table 6.2). The findings of Paul (2006) are consistent with my

findings. He argues that questioning and role play strategies enable students to share

ideas clearly and accurately, to argue and deal with each other rationally and fair-

mindedly. Such behavior transforms them into critical thinker. Concisely, the findings

of the study showed that intervention affected the critical thinking and attitudes of the

students strongly. Moreover, it promoted social, communication and collaborative

skills among students that further lead to enhance their critical thinking.

Impact of questioning on critical thinking. The obvious impact of questioning

strategy in promoting critical thinking among students provides encouragement to use

questioning technique in elementary schools of Pakistan. In the first episode of the

intervention students appeared confused and reluctant in participating the classroom

activities. They seemed unclear and inaccurate while answering different questions in

the first half of the intervention as compared to the other half of the intervention when

students used more relevant, clear and logical answers. One of the most obvious

hurdle students faced in the earlier episodes was language barrier as their subject was

English. Students showed moderate critical thinking with an improvement in their

English language skills in later episodes. However, they showed strong critical

thinking in only one episode. Before presenting a detailed account of the six episodes

- 201 -

(3 episodes from each case) presented in the analysis, I would like to highlight those

aspects that proved effective in bringing improvement in critical thinking and

attitudes of students over the duration of this intervention.

Analysis revealed a change in student's performance as students showed

moderate and strong critical thinking skills in the later episodes in contrast with

earlier episodes where they displayed weak and fair critical thinking. They get more

clarity of content by sharing relevant, accurate and rational examples from real life

context in later episodes. Students enhanced their confidence by interacting with

classroom activities and with teacher and their peers. They developed critical thinking

attitude to critically examine the opinions of other students during intervention and

did not move next until all other students of the class became fully satisfied with

alternative views.

Impact of role play on critical thinking. In role play, students learn to share ideas

with each other and it enhances their social learning skills (Jones, 2007). Like

questioning in the earlier episodes of role playing classroom students looked confused

in playing different roles, communicating with each other and making social bond ,

however, with the peer interaction and assistance of teacher they improved their

confidence that may be seen in later episodes by presenting more clarity, accuracy and

logic in their thinking and performance. Role play aligns with social support moved

by communication skills that further enhances problem solving skills of students

(Blatchford et al., 2003).

7.2. A Discussion on Episode Analysis

I discuss episode analysis in two sections. In section "A" I will discuss the

comparison of three episodes selected from case 1: questioning classroom. Similarly,

in the section "B" I compare three episodes taken from case 2: role play class room.

- 202 -

These episodes will explain how student's thinking developed from fair to strong

level. Moreover, I will focus on those aspects and factors that support the students for

developing their critical thinking.

7.3. Section A: Questioning Classroom

Now I discuss the focal points noted about the results of intervention,

contrasting with Episode 2, Episode 28 and Episode 30 in which change of the level

of critical thinking among students with respect to weak, moderate and strong critical

thinking respectively was observed. These episodes were taken from questioning

classrooms. Moreover, I will focus on those aspects and factors that support the

students to move from one type of critical thinking to the other type.

7.3.1. A discussion on episode 2.

The second episode of the intervention was video recorded on first week of the

intervention and similarly episode 28 and episode 30 in the end of the intervention. I

selected these episodes not only to show the effectiveness of intervention on the level

of critical thinking but to highlight those points that made the difference in the level

of critical thinking.

Task: In episode 2, grammar rules were practiced and students appeared poor in all

intellectual standards.

7.3.1.1. Poor background of English.

As critical thinking plays vital role in developing the skills of intellectual

curiosity and knowledge application in real world situations among students (Kong,

2010). In the Episode 2 (see Appendix 2), language barrier was observed critical

factor in lowering the critical thinking of students. Students demonstrated lack of

interest in participation in class room activities. There was no clarity and logic in their

ideas. It seemed, they did not understand the voices of each other. It showed only their

- 203 -

participation in response to the turn. The reason of their minimal participation in the

classroom activity was the poor English skill. .However, in later episode, interplay

was observed between improvement in CT and the language skill (see Appendix A

turns 2.2-2.38).

The country like Pakistan, there is mainly three tier education system, public,

private and madrasas. Private schools are further divided in to two tiers, in first –tier

there is well established system of English language which is very expensive and out

of reach of middle and lower middle class students. Whilst, in the second –tier of

private school system, there is a strange mix of languages while pretending to be

English medium (see section 1.1). Teachers used their mother tongue in explaining

English text while students are required to plagiarize and rote memorize the text. The

public schools used their indigenous languages as medium of instruction. Due to the

disinterest of government, public schools perform dismally. Resultantly, the country

seemed in a state of linguistic confusion. The ambiguity of language of instruction

policy allows schools to make their own choices which results in current crises of

education. The research into classroom interaction reveals that students can apply

critical thinking skills in the learning environment in which they are provided with

such tasks which require analysis, synthesis and evaluation of ideas which in turns

improves their language skills (Benesch, 1999). Additionally, critical thinking skills

help students to improve language skills by drawing conclusions from unfamiliar

language items and reflecting upon links between languages (Dfee, 1999) states that

critical thinking skills develop language autonomy among students to empower them

to share their ideas openly and freely in the class room. However, learners should be

provided opportunities of linguistic markers such as agreement or disagreement and

opinion expression markers to extend their ideas and to evaluate other's opinions

- 204 -

(Nemeth & Kormos, 2001). Such opportunities can develop stronger attitude among

students to remove their language ambiguities and to become more confident in

expression of thought.

7.3.1.2. Scaffolding.

Analysis of the Epi-2 shows that although students appeared confused and

ambiguous in answering different questions in episode, therefore, teacher scaffolds

students through persuasion and encouragement when they appeared confused and

reluctant in answering the questions (see turns 2.30-2.37). As, Punstibekar and

Hubsher (2005) suggested that scaffolding serves as a tool and as a process in helping

students in completion of a complex task that otherwise seems beyond their

capabilities. Teacher moves around the cycle of scaffolding, monitors the learner's

performance, analyses the level of current performance with the goal level, helps

student towards goal level, monitors the present level of achievement of a student and

so on ( Hayes & Devitt, 2008 ). For example, when teacher observed unclarity of

students in explaining grammar term "as white as" and she felt that students are going

off task, she intervened to help the students. She provided clue by asking question in

different angle (see Appendix 2, turns 2.2-2.38).

In the context of "responsiveness" of a teacher in helping individual student

here, builds an ideal approach to support learning. The basic problem is here,

scaffolding is defined to encourage individual learning so how could it deal with

whole class room problems. At first glance, it seems impossible for a teacher to

scaffold the whole class students individually as everyone in a class posses her unique

Zone of proximal development. There is an alternative perspective of dealing with

such type of problems which suggest that although every student has her personal

ZPD, however, there is some commonality of thinking among students. It is not

- 205 -

essential for everyone in a class to have entirely different set of ideas from each other.

For example, in the Epi-2, students showed the common problem of comprehension in

grammar rules. They showed reluctance, disinterest and feelings of boredom during

the classroom activities (see turns 2.2-2.29).

From the Vygotskian (1978) perspective, the heterogeneity nature of thinking of

a large group is not surprising, as people's thinking reflects their different social

histories which are widely acceptable. From the above ideas, it seems possible to

imagine the ZPD which represents the thinking of whole class students. It can be said

that ZPD is not only addressing students individually but it represents thinking of

socially distributed group (Dorn & Soffos, 2001). However, the success of teacher's

scaffolds depends on the level of heterogeneity of ideas of socially distributed group;

if the level of heterogeneity of thinking of people is high then it may possible for a

teacher to scaffolds the whole class rather than individual scaffolding. On contrary, if

the level of homogeneity of thinking is poor among a group of individuals then it may

become hard for a teacher to deal with fragmented thinking of individuals. The

concept of "socially distributed ZPD" which is suggested here moves teacher's

scaffolding from individualistic approach to group scaffolding (Bradley & Bradely,

2004).

7.3.1.3. Take more time in comprehension of ideas.

In the episode 2, students showed poor clarity, accuracy, logic and relevance

skills. Sequence (see Appendix 2) shows that students took more time in

understanding and answering the questions. They could not link their class room

school knowledge with out of school life settings. Consequently, they showed weak

critical thinking. There can be many reasons for their poor performance in the class

but some were found in the analysis of episode 2 (see section 5.2.1.1) these are:

- 206 -

(i) Social Status. As the subject of English was selected to teach students. In the

episode, grammar rules were practiced. Students showed poor command in the

English language. As mostly students belong to lower social class where fluently

spoken languages are Urdu and Punjabi and very less use of English language in these

families. It showed that language barrier hindered the development of critical thinking

among students (see section 5.2.1.1).

(ii) Responsiveness of teacher and students. Students seemed demotivate when they

could not provide accurate and relevant answer to the question. Although they get

clue from teacher but due to their unclarity of question and no exchange of knowledge

from other students or they took more time to reach the conclusion (see turns 2.1-2.7).

(iii) Irrational disagreement. Student's disagreement with each other did not base on

rational grounds; it was just a contradiction of ideas. Although, contradiction of ideas

promote learning, if it is based on logic and relevance, therefore, if contradiction

happens only to oppose others to present own superiority of knowledge then it

demotivate students and did not promote any kind of learning (Ceces-Kemanovic &

Webb, 2000). Although they were listening to one another to reply but not

understanding the exchange of dialogues effectively that foster understanding in

critical thought (see turns 2.38-2.48).

(iv) Little participation of students. Student's participation was minimal in class room

activity, they looked bored and frustrated when they were asked to relate question

with real life context. They were unable to generalize a question outside the

classroom. They showed lack of interest in classroom activity because they were

weak in understanding of grammar rules. In episode 2, student's responses are

observed without deep/ rational thinking. Their answers were not clear in accordance

to the context. They do not express as much as they can do. Teacher questioning and

- 207 -

feedback works as effective strategy to motivate students to participate in the class

room activity and to remove their ambiguities towards the topic. Although, students

showed little clarity and accuracy of ideas, therefore, teacher probed students when

they appeared confused until they get clarity of ideas (see turns 2.2-2.48).


Role play scenario: Three students were selected to play the role. Two students

played role as beggars and one performed her role as king. King has tested both

beggars' religious beliefs through giving them money in different forms.

7.3.2.1. Improves autonomy and self-worth.

Role play provides students opportunities to improve self-worth by giving them

choice to choose activities by themselves to learn. For example, in the beginning of

the episode, teacher gave choice to students to select the topic of their own interest to

play a role from the list of given topics. Teacher created a learning environment in

which students get opportunities to present their point of views that boost their

confidence. For example when teacher encouraged students to share their personal

experiences in elaboration of self-respect. Teacher's encouragement enhanced

student's confidence and they appeared clearer in presenting their point of views

(Sanprasert, 2010).

Generally, Pakistani public school culture is mostly teacher centred and class

room activities are directed by the teacher. Students have fewer opportunities to select

activities of their own choice rather they are required to follow the instructions of

teacher. On the other side, role play provides them autonomy of selection of activities

in which they can express their feelings and thoughts freely. As a result, such kind of

autonomy develops an insight among students to build up the skill and knowledge that

allows them to examine their own learning. Mostly students do not have such type of

- 208 -

autonomy skills due to unfavourable structured classroom environment in which they

have less chance to participate actively (Lamb & Reinders, 2008). In other words,

strong sense of autonomy creates ability in students to value their own learning

outcomes and take pride of their knowledge and skills.

7.3.2.2. Application of knowledge in real context.

Analysis showed that in the role play activity students were encouraged to

challenge the point of views of others and they also provided rationale for these

challenges (see Appendix 18). It was challenging task for students to use their

previous knowledge and vocabulary for existing situation of the role play. Role play

provided them opportunities that stimulate language used in real life situations (Huff,

2012) and students developed the ability to use the communicative strategies for

coping with face to face oral communication problems (Somsai & Intaraprasert,

2011).

Findings presented that when students were confronted with a challenging task,

they immediately tried to apply content in a relevant, real world context. These are the

results of continual social interaction that played role in modifying behaviour of

students and they appeared more respectful in valuing the opinions of others. Students

understood the benefits of respect for rules more accurately through real life

examples. Students showed strong critical thinking skills as they developed a

consensus on self-respect and appeared more confident in comparing right and wrong

facts (see Appendix 18).

7.3.2.3. Improves decision making power.

Moreover, such type of social interaction improved student's decision making

abilities that might let them diverge from the confines of their normal self-imposed

limitations or boundaries. It may assume that through role play students can transcend

- 209 -

and think beyond the confines of the classroom setting. Similarly, students are

encouraged to see the relevance of the content for handling real world situations

(Ayaz & Shah, 2011).

7.3.2.4. Develop positive attitudes.

Analysis of the episode shows that with the help of role play, students put aside

their identity and tried to cope with all difficulties such as anxiety, communication

problem and social interaction occurred during the activity. Role play enables students

to move from egocentric perspective to socio centric perspective. They improve their

confidence by sharing and presenting ideas with each other which promotes their self-

efficacy and self-esteem. They are not afraid of committing mistakes as they develop

understanding that mistakes are the pillars of learning. Such feelings reduce their

sense of embarrassment while making mistakes and boost their motivation and

involvement towards the task (Fang, 2010). Role play might be said as most

advantageous technique for those class room where teacher face problems of student's

less eagerness and motivation towards class room activities (Dooli,2008). In a

nutshell, role play foster positive attitudes among students towards class room tasks.

7.3.2.5. Debriefing.

Analysis showed that through role play those students who participated and

those who were observers both benefited. Students those who did not participate in

role play them observe the characters played by other students. Observation of roles

also helped in understanding the beliefs of God. Although, they are not participating

in the role but indirectly they are getting the fruits of the actual activity that helped

them to improve their knowledge, skills and attitudes. Teacher gets her feedback

through questioning.

- 210 -

7.3.2.6. Role of teacher.

The role of teacher in classroom activity was important. She worked as

facilitator and guide in the role play activity. She did not impose her own beliefs on

students rather guide them 1how to play a role by incorporating already fixed rules for

the activity. NGA (2011) argues that in role play activity the role of a teacher is less

dominating in comparison with traditional class room. Instead, he / she works as

guide or facilitator of communication process, organizer of role play activity, error

corrector and consultant. Although motivation and engagement is intrinsic in nature,

hence, teacher persistence, elevated level of confidence and pedagogical efficacy

impact student's motivation and engagement (Marton, Runesson & Tsui, 2004).

Analysis showed that teacher played following role in facilitating students.

7.3.2.7. Supporting student meaning making.

Teacher used two types of interventions to support students meaning making of

the concepts presented in the class with following headings:

(i) Promoting shared meaning. Teacher employed the intervention to communicate

the importance of rules in daily life to every student of the class. Teacher followed all

logistics used in the class while working with students to promote shared meanings.

These logistics might involve in presenting the ideas in the whole class, rehearse

student's ideas and reflect on student responses. Teacher practiced the intervention to

foster shared meaning by initiating the idea or task in the class and then ask questions

for the clarification of the idea and motivate students to continue it until the idea

should be explored and gives the comprehensive meaning.

(ii) Checking student understanding. Teacher made the intervention to check student

understanding by arranging a debriefing session in which feedback of students get

through thought provoking questions. In debriefing session, teacher asked questions

- 211 -

about the role acted in the class by the students to know their understanding of

particular ideas that how rules and discipline make our life convenient. The findings

showed that through this teaching intervention we come to know how meanings are

developed in the class through social interaction and collaborative tasks. It also

strengthens the fact, that how talks in the class room gives rise to the understanding of

the students.


This episode is selected to show the difference of critical thinking level. The level of

critical thinking was moderate. Here i will discuss focal points of the episode that

impact the level of critical thinking of students.

Task: Grammar rules were practiced

7.3.3.1. Probing questioning.

In the episode 28, questioning technique was used to develop critical thinking.

As Elder and Paul (1998) strongly advocated that "thinking is driven by questions, not

answers"," questions define tasks, express problems and delineate issues", on the

other hand the answer is considered useful if it generates other questions otherwise it

poses a full stop on thought (Paul & Elder, 2007). Students appeared weak critical

thinkers in the early episodes of the intervention when their CT skills were not

developed. Gradually, by consistent interaction with probing questions they showed

more clarity, accuracy, logic, relevance and fairness to the question at issue. Tienken,

Goldberg and Dirocco (2009) shared that probing questions always motivate students

to investigate, analyse, connect and generalize and it moves students from factual

recall to critical thinking (see turns 28.21-28.34).

Teacher probing facilitates students to communicate and share openly their ideas

with teacher and with their class fellows .It helps them to improve their CT. By using

- 212 -

probing questions teacher encourages divergent thinking of students and discourage

only one answer of the question. As most questions with only one answer bored and

frustrate students because students do not find any curiosity in question and their

imagination and motivation to learn both die (McComas & Abraham, 2012). For

instance, in the episode 28, when teacher asked question to students to make adjective

of cycle. In the beginning, although, students showed unclarity but after the teacher

probing they answered the question by providing relevant example (see Appendix 13,

turns 28.2-28.10). One of the students of the class has given the unfair example in

response of the question about the use of fox skin but the other student challenged her

answer by pointing out her mistake. It showed that all students are fully involved in

the class room activities and they were participating by arguing, answering and

challenging each other's point of view. It also showed their critical thinking skills as

they are not merely accepting each other's opinions but needs logic and evidence of

the statement (see Appendix 13, turns 28.28-28.31).

Learning is enhanced when students showed accountability to one another

within the context of the ongoing activity. The occurrence of such opportunities, of

course requires a reasonable well established basis for communication (Gose, 2009)

and of course my teaching strategy successfully affirms and encourage such base.

Students asked questions to teacher and one another during the class room activities

and developed ideas by collaboration, In the episode students tried to justify whatever

was discussed (see turns 28.21-28.31).

As Halverson and Gibson (2005) stated that there is a positive effect of

explanation on student's learning. Consequently, students helped their class fellows in

sharing knowledge, presenting different ideas and accepting their logical opinions

respectfully (Mercer, 2008). Students not only agree with the ideas of the other

- 213 -

fellows but they disagree with them on logical grounds respectfully. This

disagreement did not encourage any dispute among them instead it create a positive

learning environment in which everyone has equal right to accept or reject ideas on

accuracy, relevance and logical base. Additionally, students felt a sense of happiness

that motivates them to continue their task with more effort. Subsequently they looked

more involved in their tasks (see Appendix 13, turns 28.21-28.34).

7.3.3.2. Improves sequence of time through long interaction of questioning.

In the earlier episode 2, when the grammar rules were practiced, students

showed poor critical thinking skills. Afterwards, when the same topic was taught in

the episode 28, students shared relevant and logical and fair-minded examples in a

short time. The better performance of students may be assumed due to their long

interaction with questioning technique which improves their relevance and logical

skills. Ultimately, students show moderate critical thinking in the episode 28. Such

kind of change in student's thinking may be said an evidence of success of the

intervention. A critical thinker can present logical and relevant explanation of

complex ideas most effectively. Common thinking exercise may enable students to

present their personal judgment without any sound rationale, yet the role of teacher is

to move students beyond personal and biased judgment. Teacher's guidance and

persuasion may lead students to challenge existing body of knowledge and theories

and present rational explanation of ideas (Carmichael & Farrell, 2012).

In the episode 28, students showed sympathy for animals. It showed their

fairness skill towards animals as they understand that animals are innocent and

humans should not hurt them. They expressed positive feelings for all animals and in,

one of the students quoted example of his Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) that

showed his fair attitude for all animals (see Appendix 13, turns 28.28-28.34).

- 214 -

According to the framework of the study fairness is important indicator of critical

thinking, however, the improvement in fairness among students is an evidence of a

shift from weak critical thinking to moderate critical thinking. As true critical thinker

can understand the needs and rights of others. They accept their mistakes openly and

change their views when sound evidence is presented to them. They always avoid

selfish thinking and willing to work fair-mindedly for others (Alwehaibi, 2012).


In the last episode, critical thinking level of students was strong. In the last episode,

students improved their responses, communication skills and language barrier by

fluently sharing of ideas with each other. They become critical thinker by accepting,

rejecting and contradicting opinions of other fellows on evidence based logical

ground. Students participated eagerly in all class room discussion. They improved

their cognitive and affective skills by thinking rationally and responding actively.

Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2001) assert that cognitive presence enable students

to construct their own meaning through continuous reflection and discourse.

Classroom context was supportive for promoting critical thinking as students

remained busy in the whole class in identifying the problem, gathering information,

brainstorming possible alternatives, selecting best alternative and implementing it. As

critical thinking cannot develop in one day it requires process and adequate time. In

such context where students remain busy in identifying and exploring alternatives,

analysing logic and applying knowledge in relevant context promote critical thinking

(Walton, Reed & Macagno, 2008).

7.3.4.1. Wait time/Pausing.

Analysis revealed that during class activities teacher provided students wait time for

elaboration of their answers. Through wait time, students get better chance in

- 215 -

connecting ideas and presenting clear and accurate answers. Walsh (2015) states that

wait time brings changes in student's behaviour , responses increased in length and

quality, participation of students increased, self-confidence promoted and sharing and

contradiction of ideas among students enhanced .For example (see turns 30.9 -30.11)

when teacher asked students about different types of pollution, she waited for few

seconds , in the meanwhile students kept busy in discussion with each other and after

discussion they shared accurate and logical examples. Wait time promoted content

connected talk as students used it as support for clarity of ideas. (Cullen, 1998) argues

that those teachers who provide 3-5 seconds wait time to students permit them to

engage in more complex cognitive discourse. Moreover, teachers can create critical

thinking class rooms where regular intervals during discussion and questioning are

maintained.

7.3.4.2. Supportive environment.

Analysis lend support to the claim that teacher provided less structured classroom

environment to students to openly share and argue on conflicting accounts of

information. For example (lines 30.29-30.34) students argued on different sources of

water pollution. They presented different reasons of pollution. Some think fish pollute

water while others blame crocodile and other sea animals for making water polluted.

They presented logical explanations for their answers. As, Grant (2012), Steele

(2012), Barnes (2009) and Gill (1993) explains that good thinking depends on

student's skills of identification of a problem and citation of rational reasons for

solution. Teacher's questioning caused debate for students to involve in resolving

inconsistency of their reasoning. Thomson and Bebbington (2005) echoes that it is

necessary for active involvement of students in class room activities to provide them

- 216 -

consequential and supportive environment where student's opinions are respected and

they have ample opportunities to collaborate with each other.

7.3.4.3. Premeditated and long process of critical thinking to establish.

In previous episodes, students presented weak and moderate critical thinking. It

may leads to the fact that critical thinking requires time and context to process. With

long interaction of critical thinking activities students may become able to show

strong critical thinking in the end. They were taught content in previous classes that

may focus on content rather emphasise thinking. In new context, they may get better

chances to explore new horizons by sharing their input in the discussion. Critical

thinking needs enough time to transform skilled learners in to skilled thinkers.

Students appeared as strong critical thinkers by overcoming their erroneous thinking

and by enhancing their clarity, accuracy, logic and fair-minded (see Appendix 1 and

14).Moreover, when one participant of the class challenged another participant within

the class room it shows that the challenger is providing an opportunity to the other

participant to think on the particular task. Consequently, she presented her idea, and

the other class fellows became evaluators, evaluating answer. In such a way, a

discussion started based on reasoning and logic among the whole class fellows which

guided them to develop a strategy to resolve their problems in the class room. For

example, when a student put an example of source of water pollution in response to

the question of sources of pollution, the other student contradicted with her answer

and asked her logical justification of the answer (see Appendix 14, turns 30.21-30.35).

Therefore, the way in which they make the sense of the ideas indicated their

involvement in the activity that leads to develop a "system of competence" (Gresalfi

et al., 2009).

- 217 -

7.3.5. A discussion on comparison of epi-2, epi-28 & epi-30.

The comparison of Epi-2 (see table 5.1) to Epi-28 and Epi-30 (see table 5.2)

shows different level of critical thinking which is an evidence of improvement in

critical thinking of students. In the episode 2, students showed weak critical thinking

in earlier episodes for numerous reasons that gradually improved in last episodes.

They showed passiveness and disinterest in classroom tasks due to unclarity and

unfamiliarity with content and teaching strategy questioning that is relatively a new

strategy for them. They posited great confusion in understanding English grammar

that improves in later episodes. In E-28 and E-30 their time sequence is improved as

they took more time in the beginning in understanding concepts but took less time in

comprehension of ideas in the last episodes (see Appendix 2&13). In E-28 and E-30

they improved their confidence by posing, sharing and arguing questions with each

other. In Epi-28, the level of critical thinking was moderate. Students appeared more

confident in the episode while presenting their ideas. They took less time in

understanding the question and responded accordingly (see Appendix 13, turns 28.1-

28.6). They improved learning by showing improvement in their critical thinking

level. One of the reasons of their better performance might be long interaction with

questioning strategy that enhances their performance. In Epi-2 students could not

establish link between classroom knowledge and real context. In comparison, in Epi-

28 they presented real context examples in respond to every question. Similarly, in

Epi-30, they showed more interest and engagement towards class room tasks. They

demonstrated strong critical thinking by improving their all intellectual standards such

as clarity, accuracy, relevance, logic and fairness. They overcome their

communication gaps by openly and freely discussion in the class room. In Epi-28

students showed disagreement with their fellows' opinions but they did not involve in

- 218 -

argumentative talk (see Appendix, turns 28.28-28.34). On the other side, in Epi-30,

they attempted to draw conclusion through involving in talk in which they shared,

discussed and contradicted with each other. Further, their logical and rational skills

improved as they argue with each other when any illogical or irrelevant information

was presented by their class fellows. They learned how to respect and respond to each

other's argument (see Appendix 14, turns 30.29-30.34). Their intellectual skills

improved with long interaction of thought provoking questions posed by teacher and

peers. They shifted from their actual zone of proximal development to potentially

required zone with scaffolding of teacher. Questioning brainstorms their natural

inquisitiveness to search for alternatives and multiple perspectives in defining a single

realty. They learnt that one single correct answer is not a solution of the problem but

there are multiple perspectives in defending facts (see Appendix 14, turns 30.37-

30.41).

They become trained in applying real context examples in justifying their

claims. Students shifted from conventional set back to critical thinking context where

everyone is invited to participate and contribute, no one is ignored. They improved

their critical thinking level over time, having complex nature, critical thinking

requires time to take place it cannot be developed over night.

A change of critical thinking level from weak critical thinking to strong critical

thinking affirms the effectiveness of questioning strategy used for the study. Probing

and thought provoking questions promote critical thinking among students. The

questioning strategy used as a tool and preceptors to evaluate student's knowledge,

promote comprehension and build critical thinking. As Paul (2008) argued that

probing questions help students to uncover personal knowledge gaps about subject

matter. This realization can be a difficult situation for students who are making effort

- 219 -

for their success in the classroom. However, this situation is not considered a negative

step for student's success indeed it can be regarded an important step for learning

process. When students identify their learning deficits it may spur them to strive more

for better understanding and clarity of ideas.

7.4. Section B: Role Play Classroom

In this section, i have taken three episodes Epi-1, Epi-7 and Epi-29 from role play

classroom. I will discuss the main points which show the change of critical thinking

discourse of fair, moderate and strong critical thinking.


Role play scenario: Two students were selected voluntarily. They were briefed about

their characters. They were instructed to portray a scenario in which they highlighted

the importance of respect for feeling.

Discussion: In the start, students were reluctant in playing the role. They presented

difficulty in communicating dialogues with each other. They seemed anxious and

fearful in acting the roles. There can be assumed numerous factors in creating such

problems in their behaviour. First, it was their first interaction with the researcher and

novel experience of participating in role play. Whereas, in the past they were learning

thorough some other traditional teaching strategies such as book reading and drill

methods. Second, they may get nervousness due to the perceived sense of failure.

Students may encounter four types of fears in demonstration such as physiological

fear with trembling hands and sweating, cognitive fear by not concentrating on ideas

and replaying previous negative experiences and emotionally being excessive

nervous and frustrated. Bledsoe and Baskin (2014) suggests that teachers can help

students in overcoming their fear and anxiety by motivating and appreciating their

ideas. Students may remove their shyness with passage of time by engaging in

- 220 -

meaningful tasks. Teacher can facilitate them by exchanging dialogue with them and

appreciating their minimal participation to promote further maximum participation.

Although students did not present strong critical thinking in the episode, yet they

interact with each other and learn mutually from each other's experience. Role play

promotes experiential learning as students observe roles and reflect on experiences

they learn. Pavey and Donoghue (2003) state that role play encourages students to

apply their knowledge in a given situation, to reflect on issues and problems of others

and to increase independence of decision making. In experiential learning students

manage their own learning instead by following teacher's instructions. In experiential

learning, class room context is different from traditional classroom setting .In

traditional class room teacher dominates whereas in experiential learning context

teacher put most responsibility on student's shoulders. Students learn from their

experiences either by doing or observing a role rather through book reading. They

explore their relevant knowledge, acquire it by themselves and further reflect on their

learning (Moon, 2004). All students are beneficiary of experiential learning especially

those who need encouragement to experience the value of subject personally, those

who experience difficulty in learning in traditional class room and require a new

method to succeed and those who use their experience in strengthening learning

(Qualters, 2010).

Analysis reveals the fact that during role play activity, students improve their

cognitive and affective skills to some extent. For example, in cognitive part they

improve their attention and self-regulation skills by engaging in pretended scenarios.

Findings are consistent with Lillard et al (2011) who argues that learners get self-

control by following certain rules of role play. Students enhance their affective skills

by acting through gestures and facial expressions according to the demand of the role

- 221 -

(Lancy, 2007). Students shared many inaccurate and illogical examples during

questioning session after role play activity. They failed to relate respect for feeling in

real context. They also showed poor fairness skills.


Role play scenario: In this episode, two students i.e. Rabia and Maryam acted out as

guide of the museum to show the importance of rules in our life. In this scenario

students were instructed not to touch anything in the museum otherwise they will bear

the consequences. But Rabia broke the rule by touching the horse. As the

consequences she had to spent whole day in guide's office and missed the tea party

with her friends.

Discussion: The shift of discourse among students observed in the episode was

moderate critical thinking. Students showed clarity of ideas moderately in playing a

role; however, they showed some ambiguity of ideas while answering teacher's

questions. They knew the reasons of rules in daily life but could not answer the

importance of rules in our life. Their discussion was not based on logical reasoning.

Similarly, they could not logically justify the question (see table 5.11) "Do you

respect rules". The reason may behind be the shyness of students. When teacher asked

them to participate in the role play activity, both were little bit hesitant in playing the

role, but after teacher's encouragement they showed their willingness in participating

the role.

7.4.2.1. Collaboration of students.

Analysis shows that students worked collaborate in groups and were involved in class

room discussion .They were contradicting with each other respectfully and presenting

their own point of views. Nobody was sitting passively, instead they were trying to

answer the questions posed by the teacher and their class fellows (see Appendix 18,

- 222 -

turns 7.31-7.35). Indeed, it shows that the discourse encourages thinking (Mercer&

Littleton, 2007). The profuse skills of cooperative learning among students such as

problem solving, diversity of viewpoints, social interaction and criticism transferred

knowledge which provides sound ground for critical thinking.

The analysis (Wagner, 2012) shows that in role play activity teacher works as

moderator and facilitator, he assigns tasks to students to work in different groups. In

the episode, students were free to express their ideas openly and freely to expose the

significance of rules in daily life. Every student in a group participates equally in a

task and has access to wide source of information. Every student in a group was

responsible for her own work. Through role play activity, students became happier

and less stressed. They developed a sense of belongingness and reduced their

loneliness .Hopkins, Crittendon, Grant, and Wilson. (2005) states that role play,

students actively share, discuss, and negotiate ideas in their group which promotes

their interest in learning. Moreover, collaborative learning promotes critical thinking

by involving students in information processing, problem solving and decision

making jointly. Students learn to solve their problems mutually in a group work. For

example, in the start ,students showed unclarity about the importance of rules, but in

the meanwhile, negotiation with their fellows and teacher make them clear about the

significance of rules (see Appendix 18, turns 7.1-7.6). Collaborative learning

involves students in drawing logical conclusions by mutual efforts and enables them

to refrain from their personal biases and prejudices (Dooly, 2008).

The role of a teacher in role play activity was as a consultant to run learning

process smoothly. She is responsible to manage the meaningful learning content and

encourage students to use their classroom experiences in resolving real life problems.

- 223 -

7.4.2.2. Learning through mistakes.

Role play helped students learn from their mistakes while enabling them to learn

from others. It developed an insight in students, how to shift the prism at least

slightly, so they look at mistakes not as something to be dreaded and avoided, but as

an inevitable and often very helpful part of learning. The students learnt to examine

their perceptions and mistakes and treat representatives of other characters with

empathy. As Maier (2002) asserts that role play provides opportunities to students to

commit mistakes in non-threatening environment. Students can test many solutions to

resolve realistic problems and can apply immediately.

Students get more clarity about the importance of rules in daily life by

modelling and observing the characters. Additionally, role play encourages students to

take risks by themselves in facing challenging situations and by taking independent

decisions. Students usually are scared in making mistakes in classroom activities

because of negative feedback from teacher and their peers. It is the teacher who can

create an optimal learning environment in which errors are welcomed for further

learning (Ladousse, 2004). In such encouraging environment, students become more

committed in accepting challenges which improves their confidence and boost their

self-esteem in resolving real life issues. This confidence comes from student's

previous success in classroom tasks, teacher's feedback and through involvement in

appropriate tasks (Huang & Irene, 2008). The error correction process should be

ended with student's end. For example when one student argues that rules should not

made for children. The other students corrected her concepts through sharing multiple

opinions about the importance of rules (see Appendix 14, turns 7.6-7.13) Students

should be given chance to correct their mistakes by analysing deeply the mistakes for

correction instead of providing them correct response (Bean, 2001).

- 224 -

7.4.2.3. Enhance empathy skills.

Brooks and Zizak (2002, 759-781) shares the importance of empathy skills for a

teacher by saying:

Empathy is an ability to understand the emotions and perceptions of others and

to convey to others by showing acceptance. It is widely said that those children are

found less aggressive and having reduced antisocial behaviour who have empathy for

others. A significant correlation was found between academic performance and

empathy skills of children, children who showed high scores in empathy scores have

high scores on empathy skills. It promotes student's critical thinking skills by

correctly imagining and feelings the pains of others as it is as others have (Del, Aluja

& Garcia, 2004).

Role play promotes both cognitive and effective empathy of students by

involving them in to the situations where they are required to assume the roles of

humans or even the roles of animals, plant and inanimate objects (Cotton, 1994).

Analysis showed that students felt empathy for Rabia at first glance, when she broke

the rule and was asked to spend the whole day in guide's office as a punishment but in

the same time they developed the consensus that Rabia did wrong action by breaking

the rule so she must face the consequences (see Appendix 18). In such a way, in a

very short time, students differentiated disciplined and indiscipline activities and

came to know that how rules governed our lives to make us civilized.

Literature suggests that critical thinking and empathy go side by side as critical

thinking is considered cognitive part and empathy is on the other hand related to the

"Empathetic teachers are better able to put themselves into the shoes of

students in order to understand the world through student's eyes.

Empathetic teachers connect themselves more effectively with students

and promote learning more efficiently".

- 225 -

affective sphere and students are required to maintain the balance between the two to

show better performance (Keen, 2006).

Students also learned how to rebuild their thinking by imagining the role of

others and then acting out on it. By acting out a role of others, students can practice

empathy and perspective taking. Role play provides opportunities to students to

enhance self-reflection and awareness as when they put learned skills in theory in to

practice it establish a deeper cognitive link to material to comprehend easily (Maier,

2002).

7.4.2.4. Enhance motivation.

Analysis showed that students looked motivated and fully engaged while role

playing. Role play helped them in improving their motivation, self-confidence when

they overcome their shyness and communication skills during dialoguing. It is also

noticed that when students were given an opportunity to work autonomously, enjoy

learning relationship with peers, developing their sense of competence, resulted in

increased student motivation. This motivation may further foster self-determination

that leads to engagement. Moreover, active, collaborative learning and social skills

can be considered key components to engagement and motivation. According to

(Thijs & Verkuyten, 2009) engagement involves students cognitively and affectively

in class room activities.

Engaged students put more effort and concentration and show more positive

emotions towards class room tasks in comparison with less engaged students (Fan&

William, 2004). Students show more motivation and involvement in the task in which

they have personal interest, need or want (Grenfell & Warren, 2010). Role play

provides favorable context to students to improve their intrinsic motivation and self-

- 226 -

efficacy. Students demonstrate more motivation in autonomy supportive context

rather than the controlling context.

Guthrie et al (1999) points out four key components for student's motivation

such as autonomy support, competence support, effective instruction and relatedness

with real world issues. Through role play students enjoy autonomy by playing freely

roles to demonstrate a real world picture as natural as possible and they get

opportunity to share their knowledge and skills with peers for personal cognitive

growth after getting their feedback.

7.4.2.5. Improves social learning experience.

The analysis of transcript showed that role play was interesting and really a

worthwhile activity for both students and teachers. In this activity students not only

improved their social learning experiences by lively interact and act but they also

improved their communicative skills by sharing dialogs with their peers. Role play

promotes their critical thinking skills as well when they comprehend the meaning of

the context and try to convince others logically.

Students in experiential learning learn through cooperation with one another

when involve in direct experience closely tied with real life issues in which teacher

guides students rather than direct them towards the experience. Findings of the

episodes showed that in role play activity students were involved to ask question,

experimenting, solving issues, demonstrating responsibility and in making meaning of

the task. In experiential learning students are cognitively and affectively involved as

they experience the situation of real world task physically, cognitively, emotionally

and socially that shows the authenticity of the task Adriyati (2009). Through role

play, students get the opportunity to learn from natural consequences, mistakes and

- 227 -

success. These opportunities are provided to both teachers and students to nurture

their skills to value their own choices.

7.4.2.6. Debriefings.

After the role play activity, a whole class discussion was conducted to get

feedback of students towards the question at issue. Students showed moderate clarity

and accuracy towards the topic by apprehending the importance of rules in life.

Debriefings especially when led by instructors, helped students assimilate the

meaning of the learning experience and support the development of critical thinking

by providing insights on students’ interventions, as well as their mistakes. Debriefings

are typically facilitated by instructors or, less commonly, the students themselves

(Switky & Aviles, 2007). Moreover, debriefings can promote reflective learning and

encourage learners to discuss how to intervene in complicated situations (Jeffries

2005). Debriefing is also considered critical to developing students’ abilities to

transfer new knowledge to real-life settings (Childs & Sepples 2006; Dreifuerst 2009;

Jeffries 2005).

7.4.3. A discussion on the comparison of epi-1, epi-7 and epi-29.

Three episodes Epi-1, Epi-7and Epi-29 from the data were chosen for the

comparison of critical thinking skills among students. The reason of selection of these

three episodes was the change found in the critical thinking level among students. As

in the episode 1, students showed fair critical thinking. The other two episodes in

comparison with episode 7 in which students showed moderate and in episode 29 in

which they presented strong critical thinking skills. Students showed unclarity in E-1

while delivering dialogues and answering the questions. They improved their

comprehension in E-7 and in E-29 by perfectly performing their roles. The trend of

manipulation of thought was seen higher in E-7 in comparison with E-30.They learnt

- 228 -

that they are not merely delivering the dialogues but actually they are learning how to

transfer their previous knowledge to derive new meaning of the phenomena.

They also remove their ambiguities of question at issue by exchanging dialogue

with each other. It may also strengthen their social bonding among each other and

brings them close to each other. They put accurate and relevant examples. They

defend their roles logically. They showed empathy towards the negative characters

when they feel ashamed on their mistakes. The role play stimulates the imagination of

the students and enhances the cooperativeness and empathetic sense of students.

Students showed strong CT in many role play episodes and weak, fair and

moderate performance in most of questioning episodes. They presented strong critical

thinking in only one episode in questioning. It proved that no doubt, role play proved

more effective teaching strategy in comparison of questioning but the importance of

questioning cannot be ignored because role play may be considered more effective

and viable teaching strategy because it includes both questioning and action.

7.5. A Discussion on Quantitative Analysis

Paul (2008) states that critical thinking is not limited to any subject, content or

area rather it serves as a means of improvement in thinking by avoiding irrational and

illogical thoughts. Critical thinking is prompted by those questions which define the

tasks, convey actual problems and describe issues and ultimately support to reach on

any conclusion (Khan & Inamullah, 2011). On the other hand, the question which is

sloppy, ill structured, content recall and with definite answer mars thinking of

students and put an end to thinking (Paul, 2007). Nevertheless, probing questions are

directly linked in developing critical thinking as they probe thinking beneath the

surface to explore reality and the results of this study convinced me that probing and

- 229 -

challenging questions serves as a meaningful tool in developing critical thinking of

students.

The quantitative analysis was divided into two sub sections: (a) Questionnaire

analysis of questioning classroom and (b) Questionnaire analysis of role play

classroom. For questionnaire data analysis two statistical techniques mean and

Wilcoxon test were used in order to know the difference between pre and post critical

thinking questionnaires. Paul’s standards were used to measure the change separately

for each strategy through pre- and post- critical thinking questionnaire filled by

students. Gradually, by consistent interaction with probing questions and role play

context they showed improved clarity, accuracy, logic, relevance and fairness in

response to different tasks used in the classroom (see section 4.1.1.)

Descriptive analysis of questioning strategy revealed that the level of critical

thinking at the end of the intervention was significantly high in post critical thinking

test than in the pre-test of critical thinking before the intervention when CT skills of

students were not developed. A Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test was chosen because it

assesses whether the mean (average) of pre and post scores of students are statistically

different from each other. The overall mean score changed from weak to strong

critical thinking. It showed the ability of students who confronted with challenging

questions and tried to look reality in a new way by using their own thinking. Over all

the progress of students in all intellectual standards looked an improvement in their

thinking, however, students showed highest mean score in relevance standards that

revealed the ability of students to put real contextual knowledge into practice in usual

classroom setting (see sec 4.1.1, fig, 4.1) as critical thinking can’t just be switched on

but it can be developed and nurtured through constant interaction of students with

meaningful thinking exercises in accordance with questioning (Paul, 2006).To that

- 230 -

extent, the results of the study showed the influence of intervention on the cognitive

development of the students, therefore questioning strategy used for intervention is

viable and can be productive in promoting critical thinking. The results of the study

are consistent with the conclusion of (Brown & Freeman, 2000) that is in a view that

there is possibility of cognitive magic happening when students and teachers are

aligned with critical thinking process. Their reasoning, logic and rational tendencies

enhance without inculcation of the automatic blind following that can demolish the

context for the promotion of critical thinking. Each part of critical thinking such as

clarity, accuracy, fair-mindedness improves with persistently involves in critical

thinking process.

Paul and Elder (2007).argue that students work through different phases of

inquiry, collaboration and presentation of learning. These phases provide them

opportunities to inquire for new information, analyse and synthesize knowledge, learn

through experiential learning and share their knowledge with their fellow in

collaborative context.

In role play, students learn in collaborative flexible groups. When students

collaborate together they learn how to communicate with others effectively, work as a

team, practice self-discipline, and improve social and interpersonal skills. Through

collaboration, students are able to have a better understanding of what they are

learning and improve critical thinking skills (Kodotchigova, 2002). Analysis showed

significant mean difference in pre and post critical thinking scores among students in

both questioning and role play strategies. However, Fig 4.2 shows more visible

change in all intellectual standards in pre and post test scores of students. Students

improved clarity, accuracy, logic, relevance and fair-mindedness with more

percentage than in questioning. One of the reasons role-play can work better than

- 231 -

other teaching strategies is because of the power of student in placing oneself in

another’s shoes. This provides opportunities for learning in both the effective domain,

where emotions and values are involved, as well as in the cognitive domain where

experiences are analysed. Most of all, it really develops the communicative skills of

the students (Ayaz & Shah, 2011). It was observed in the intervention that students

willingly participated in role play activities. Both participants and observers enjoyed

the activity and showed in most of episodes moderate and strong critical thinking

skills rather weak critical thinking. They exhibited fair critical thinking in only one of

the episode-1 that might be considered as their first interaction with teacher and role

play strategy (see section 5.2.2.1).

The analysis reveals that the intervention provides the platform to the students to

participate, to share, to reflect on their ideas and to evaluate the quality of their

thinking by using intellectual standards. Questioning and role play both strategies

provides them opportunities to explore new ideas, to contradict with illogical and

irrational concepts presented by their fellows with reasoning and fair mindedness

skills .They learn how to accept and reject the opinions of others with patience and

respect. (See section 5.2.1.3). Findings show that students show more interest in

participation of role play instead of questioning; the common reason might be that of

the nature and context of the activity as they feel more comfortable in acting and

collaboration with their fellows. The other reason may be assumed that role play

provides them a novel context which is entirely different from their conventional

teaching strategies that promote rote learning instead of thinking and innovation.

Smyth (2000) argues that in critical thinking classroom, a teacher creates open and

flexible environment to motivate students to question and challenge the irrational

- 232 -

beliefs, encourage them to see the picture from big canvas by involving them in

critical thinking process that is beyond the classroom setting.

7.6. A Discussion on Students’ Attitude

Watson and Glaser argue that critical thinking involves ones frame of mind and

attitude. Such concept acknowledges that critical thinking is more than merely a

collection of skills one uses in certain situations; instead it is a perspective through

which one views all situations (Paul& Elder, 2008).

There is common trend among teachers and students to rely upon only one

learning approach; cognitive approach. Although, cognition is significant mental

process in learning as it deals with intellectual abilities and skills but it ignores the

affective part of learning which includes feelings and emotions, values, motivations

and attitudes (Clark, 2010). For critical thinking development it is pertinent to explore

both cognitive and affective parts. Nevertheless, a significant change in student's

attitude mean scores convinced me that the intervention can have effect on student's

critical thinking attitudes.

In the study, critical thinking attitude questionnaire was used to analyse the

change in the attitudes of students if any because of intervention. Paul’s (1994) traits

model was used to measure the change separately for each strategy through pre- and

post- critical thinking questionnaire filled by students. The descriptive statistics in

section 6.2.1 confirms the evidence that the critical thinking attitude of students was

changed at the end of the intervention in favour of questioning strategy. The overall

mean score was changed from weak critical thinking attitude to strong critical

thinking attitude. This increasing trend in each trait was observed for every statement

in this category (see section 6.3.1, Fig 6.2). The trend confirms the effectiveness of

questioning strategy in effecting the critical thinking attitude. To that extent, the

- 233 -

results of the study showed the influence of the intervention on the affective

development of students. The results of the study are in line with Paul (2007) who

argues that critical thinking is more than a set of skills; it also involves intellectual

traits such as humility, courage, empathy, integrity, perseverance; faith in reason; and

fair-mindedness that can be promoted by using questioning, simulation, reflection and

role play strategies. He argues that teacher can encourage critical thinking attitude

towards learning by adopting a non-traditional approaches such as questioning and

role play in their classes.

On the other hand, descriptive statistics of role play classroom show a

significant change in mean score in pre and post critical thinking attitude scores. In

comparison with questioning strategy, overall trend of each trait was significantly

higher which provides an evidence of effectiveness of the intervention. Analysis

showed that among all intellectual traits the mean score of empathy was higher that

shows feelings of students for other people. These findings are in line with Cooper

(2002) who says that empathy is an attitude of care which develops overtime with

collaboration of peers. He believes that care means to put oneself in another shoes to

feel pains, needs and miseries of others and role play provides such context to

students to practice. In Pakistani schools, where teachers practice reading, drill

method and grammar translation method for teaching of English in public schools

which do not challenge students to explore their talents through thinking (see

Appendix 1 section 1.4).

The analysis showed that intervention improves critical thinking attitudes of

students by involving them into such challenging learning context which provides

them opportunities to explore their hidden talents to share with their fellows by freely

interacting and cooperating. Students learnt their content with interest and motivation

- 234 -

as role play provides them fun and trill. They develop autonomy and courage by

making decisions on spot while performing role play to present their characters more

realistically. They show patience in accepting the decisions and opinions of others

that enhance their perseverance skills. They enjoyed the class room context that

reduce promote friendly environment in which they enjoy empowerment of

communication and decisions taken by themselves. Bernero (2000) states that

collaborative learning provides opportunity to students to improve their confidence,

communication, self-esteem and social skills.

7.7. A Discussion on the Factors Influencing Critical Thinking

In this section I discuss factors that influenced on critical thinking. They are

teacher's role and social context. Analysis shows that teacher's role affected the

potential productivity of critical thinking of students. In this section I discuss the role

of teacher played by her during this intervention. First, I discuss the probing

questioning used by the teacher to scaffold students. I discuss the role of a teacher as

manager to manage the class room situation. Then I discuss how teacher helps her

students in content. After that, I discuss the other factor social context how it affected

the level of critical thinking of the students. Further I discuss the behaviour of

students in social context that impact upon the level of their critical thinking.

7.7.1. Teacher's role.

Analysis shows that teacher's role affected the potential productivity of critical

thinking of students. In this section, I discuss the role of teacher played by her during

this intervention. First I will discuss the role of teacher to scaffold students through

probing. Then I discuss the role of a teacher as helper to correct the responses of

students. Further, I discuss the effect of communication skills and subject knowledge

on critical thinking of students.

- 235 -

7.7.1.1. Scaffolding through probing.

The analysis shows that one way of teacher's intervening in the intervention was

his probing questioning techniques (Alwehaibi, 2012) states that probing questions

used by the instructor can strengthen critical thinking skills of students by asking

further clarifications, justifications and explanations from students. In this section, I

discuss different types of questions used by the teacher during intervention.

In the sequence (see Appendix 3, turns 6.2-6.6) the teacher intervened when she

found students unclear about the meaning of "many" and "more". Mahira appeared

confused and reluctant in answering the question so the teacher scaffold by

encouraging her to elicit the answer of the question. As a result of this

encouragement, she was able in answering one part of the question. Additionally, this

encouragement motivates other students to think about the appropriate answer of the

question. When students appeared unclear about the meaning of "many" and "more",

teacher used probing by giving them a matching item list to match items with many

and more. Such type of encouragement helped students in finding the solution of the

problem.

ii. The following extract was taken from the episode 8 shows how teacher scaffolds

students through probing questions to bring them on right track when they were

unclear about the rationale of shopping.

Table 7.1


Turn Speaker Talk

8.6 T

Ok can you tell me, Why do we shopping?

(Students remained busy in murmuring)

- 236 -

8.7 S8 We do not do shopping but our parents do shopping

(after some wait time one student replied)

8.8 T Why do your parents do shopping?

8.9 S3 Our parents do shopping because they have money" One student replied

with smiling face

8.10 T So if you will be given some money, how will you spend money in

shopping?

8.11 S6 Yes teacher I will spend the whole money in buying my favourite cake and

biscuits.

(saying happily)

8.12 T You will spend whole money for yourself and will not spend on your

family?

(Silence, discussion with smile with each other)

8.13 S6 (Hunnn)I don’t know, I'm not interested in doing shopping for my younger

sister

8.14 T But if spent whole money now, then how could you do shopping for some

other items later?

8.15 S5 teacher I will think about to how I could get more money for shopping

8.16 S8 (Hunnn), I don’t know, I'm not interested in doing shopping for my

younger sister


8.17 T Why?


8.18 S9 I think I will buy the most important items with that money and will not

waste my money on useless things……………



- 237 -





8.25 S8 (Hunnn ) I think….


8.26 T Yes anyone wants to share any idea of saving money in shopping…..



Sequence in two episodes (6 & 8) shows that teacher asked probing questions

from student which provided the opportunities for cognitive and Meta cognitive

processes such as monitoring, regulating and evaluating one's own thinking and

learning. For example, in episode 6 , when student showed unclarity of meaning of

many and more and Mahira could only answered the half of the answer , teacher

probed them by indirectly asking the concept of many and more by providing them a

list of items to match items with many and more by using reasoning skills in

understanding the both concepts. In such a way, probing questions created building

blocks for further questions and supported students for their comprehensive

explanations(see Appendix 3 , turns 6.9-6.29) . Probing questions enables students to

remove their ambiguities about questions and also help them to clearly answer the

question (Grenfell & Warren, 2010). In other words, teacher's questions can be a form

of evaluation which helped students to think, to share and infer the conclusion.

Teacher's questions assisted students to think, share and find the answer of the

question. The purpose behind multiple series of questioning was to uncover the

understanding of students strategies used to comprehend the issue (Franke et al,

- 238 -

2001). Through student's feedback, teacher learned about the level of comprehension

of students about the topic shared in the class. These findings are consistent with

findings of Webb et al (2009) who propagate strongly probing questioning with

student's explanation. In the study, the researcher used probing strategy to observe the

understanding of students about their course. Probing help students to link their

previous knowledge with the present information, for example teacher asked students

about the purpose and reasons of shopping to get updates of their knowledge about

real life context (see Appendix 4, turns 8.6-8.8.13). It does not mean that teacher is

directly taking the action to fix all these unclear problems by her but she only takes

account of them to move on challenge. The purpose behind was to assess the critical

thinking level of students by evaluating their clarity, accuracy, relevance and logic

towards the topic. Even wrong explanations of students or silence as reported a gap in

comprehension in which teacher can take initiative according to the situation as seen

in the analysis of transcripts. Therefore, the purpose of teacher does not critically

evaluation of right or wrong responses of students rather it focuses on the continuity

of learning process through open dialogues delivery.

7.7.1.2. Teacher as a manager.

In the sequence (see Appendix 3, turns 6.18-6.25) the role of a teacher was to

manage the unpleasant situation arose in the class through exchanging of

argumentative dialogues between students. Teacher intervened in the discussion to

resolve the issue and make them clear about the right answer. Although it was direct

help of the teacher that may hinder the ability of students in making efforts to reach

the conclusion but it showed that sometimes, in such situations teacher has to make

decisions for classroom management. Teacher helped students in managing the

decorum of the classroom by taking action at right time.

- 239 -

Table 7.2

Transcript from Episode 6

Turn Speaker Talk




oh no you are giving wrong example how could we count yogurt

and how can use much for chair,( ha ha ha, laughing the whole

class)



than me?


oh don’t fight with each other , yes S2 is right we can use many

only for those things that can be numbered and much for those

things that are in quantity like milk, yogurt ,and water


water



7.7.1.3. Teacher helps in content.

The analysis of transcript shows two types of help, direct and indirect help.

When the teacher provided direct content help to students it impedes their thinking

process as they rely only on teacher's response rather finding solution by them.

- 240 -

Teacher's content related direct help does not encourage thinking and learning process

in classroom and also fails to keep students on task. On contrary, teacher's indirect

content help promotes thinking among students. Such type of help is connected with

series of challenging and probing questions which engage students more with task and

other class room activities. Teacher help in understanding the concept of "as white

as", in response teacher did not responded directly but put more other challenging

questions to probe the understanding of students.

However, it is positive attitude of teacher to encourage students by inquiring

about the similarity between white shirt and water colour (see Appendix 2, turn 2.17-

2.28) this act encourage students for doing well classroom tasks and enable them for

active participation in the class room discussion. As a result, they will become able in

doing their tasks by their own.

Analysis showed that students learn more by correcting each other's mistakes

instead of directly mentioned by the teacher. Teachers should take errors of students

positively instead of using them only for diagnose and remediation of student's

knowledge weaknesses. As a result students become more confident in taking more

risks, finding new ways of problem solution, cheat less and solving mysteries that

previously eluded them (Hayes & Devitt, 2008).

Additionally, such kind of process improves students understanding towards the

topic as well as clarifies their misunderstandings as, corrects ideas and enhances their

knowledge competency. On the other side, probing or reciprocal questioning may

limit student's thinking because it depends upon teacher's questioning and then reply.

As Mercer (2008) argues that it is conventional dialogue that facilitate student's

problem solving skills and motivates them to engage with task. These skills are

usually used in promoting students problem solving skills.

- 241 -

The purpose behind such kind of indirect help was to stimulate student's

thinking and to encourage them to be on task. I think teacher is considered the best

person who can decide what type of help a student requires. Teacher can decide better

about the type of help after assessing the situation. For promoting better learning

environment, teacher's evaluation is most important factor. Her encouraging feedback

enhances critical thinking of students, as more they become motivated, more they

show critical thinking skills.

7.7.1.4. Summary.

This subsection shows that how a teacher played different roles during the

intervention to promote a healthy learning environment. He helped her students in

resolving task difficulties by asking appropriate questions and after diagnosing other

off task issues. The analysis showed that appropriate probing questioning and proper

help of a teacher after diagnosing the needs of students proved effective for students

to promote their critical thinking skills.


This section explains the impact of the context of the classroom on the level of

student's critical thinking. Analysis showed that students exhibited weak critical

thinking in teacher led context and strong critical thinking in such context where

students were autonomous and open in sharing their ideas (see Appendix 1&14).

Critical thinking pedagogy involves students in challenging, reasoning and

reflective learning environment for innovation and knowledge construction. On the

other side, social constructivists believe that students construct or deconstruct

knowledge by actively engage in context through collaboration with others (Gage &

Berliner, 2002). Advocates of such approach including Dewey, Brunner, Piaget and

Freire argue that individuals use their cognitive filters such as schemas and beliefs in

- 242 -

perceiving and meaning making of the phenomena through active involvement in

social context. They propagate that the role of a teacher in such context is as a

facilitator who offers cognitive challenges to students and scaffolds them by

encouraging whenever they confronted with complex situation (see Appendix 2,turns

2.8-2.13).

In such context, the role of a student is not a passive information receiver rather

an actor who is willingly and actively engages in whole process of learning.

Moreover, teacher provides autonomy and freedom to students to perceive, think and

construct their own meaning of the phenomena without any fear of rejection by the

teacher and their fellows (Gage & Berliner, 2002).

Analysis showed that students showed weak critical thinking in the earlier

episodes of questioning classroom, they approached moderate thinking level in the

middle and strong critical thinking in the last episode only (see Fig 5.1). Students

looked uncomfortable and reluctant while displaying their information on request in

front of teacher and their fellows (see turns 1.1-1.5). Pakistani schools are stigmatized

for not encouraging students to ask questions or rewarded positively by the teacher

(Jilani, 2004). They are usually bound to blindly follow the instructions of teachers

either they are authentic or unauthentic. In earlier episodes, students feel shy in

presenting their information due to the fear of rejection or negative feedback from the

teacher. Further, they might not get appropriate time to think or consult any

information source such as course book to answer the question on the spot. Probing

questioning used by the teacher need quick response or feedback from the students to

probe more questions to draw conclusion that may frustrate them and stop them to

answer (see Appendix 1,& 2). In middle and last episodes, students performed better

in questioning sessions. They looked more confident and enthusiastic in sharing their

- 243 -

ideas in the classroom. It can be assumed that may students overcome their

apprehension and become accustomed with questioning strategy; in a result it

enhances their critical thinking level.

On the other side, in role play classroom, students showed fair critical thinking

in the first episode but improved quickly their critical thinking level from fair to

moderate in the middle episodes and strong critical thinking level in last episodes.

They feel more comfortable and motivated in role play classroom. They were eager to

play and observe the role. To them , role play classroom culture is less formal and less

disciplined different from their routine classroom culture where they are expected to

appear more formal, obedient and passive while engaged with formal academic

activities. Role play provides opportunities to passive students to maximize their

participation in classroom activities, create dynamism to the classroom and increases

chances of material retention (Ladousse, 2004).

Analysis revealed that in role play episodes students showed more clarity,

accuracy, relevance and logic in both while playing a role and answering questions in

debriefing sessions (see Appendix 21&23). Students were given role-play scenario

and instructions by the teacher to play. Although, students have roles and instructions,

however, they were autonomous in imagination, exchanging dialogues and handling

the complexities of the situation. Teacher did not intervene in the situation and has

given freedom to students to apprehend the situations by themselves. Such

autonomous and open context stimulates student's empathy skills to put themselves in

others' shoes to imagine well the feelings of the characters before act. Role play

privileges those students who are alienated from usual classroom context to engage

them in such environment where they voice their opinions freely.

- 244 -

Chapter VIII

Conclusions and Implications

In this final chapter, I reported synthesizes of my findings and relate them to my

research question considering the implications of the study. In the end of the chapter, I

also recommended a few suggestions for future research.

In relation to first two research questions: Are questioning and role play viable and

productive teaching strategies in developing critical thinking at upper primary level in

Pakistan?

In the study, two teaching strategies questioning and role play were used to

develop critical thinking of elementary students. The analysis of the study showed

that at the start of the intervention, in questioning classroom the level of critical

thinking of the students was weak. On the other side, students exhibited fair critical

thinking in the beginning episode of role play. Findings showed number of reasons

for the weak and fair performance of the students. First, students demonstrated poor

language skills in both questioning and role play classrooms. They showed reluctance

and hesitation while answering questions and playing a role. They showed poor

clarity and accuracy while answering questions. They were unable to connect class

room knowledge with real life context. They could not provide logical explanations of

their answers. They showed weak fair-mindedness in defending their point of views.

Students proposed illogical justifications of their ideas which were not welcomed by

others. Moreover, they took more time in understanding classroom task. The

classroom context was teacher led as most of the time teacher spent in taking and

- 245 -

negotiating with students. Students’ participation was minimal and most of them

seemed uninterested in classroom activities.

In the later episodes, in questioning classroom, after getting the exposure of

thought provoking questioning, the situation was transformed substantially towards

strong critical thinking. Students appeared more clear and accurate in presenting their

ideas. They were able to put relevant examples from real context to justify their

explanations. They were involved and posed relevant and argumentative questions

during the intervention. They contradicted with each other with reason and evidence.

They improved their time sequence and took less time in comprehending ideas. They

looked engaged and motivated in classroom participation. The classroom context was

student led .Students were free to ask and respond questions. They learnt the way to

explore answers by thinking and sharing rather consulting only books.

On the other side, in role play class room students showed better performance in

comparison of questioning classroom performance of students. In the earlier episodes,

they showed moderate critical thinking skills rather showing weak critical thinking in

questioning classrooms. In the later episodes, after getting the experience of role play

techniques, they showed strong critical thinking skills. They appeared more confident,

engaged and enthuasitic in playing their roles. They improved their communication

skills, which played an important role in establishing a productive collaboration

among participants’ classroom activities. They learnt how to respect each other's

opinion and give equal right to present her/his ideas.

The analysis revealed that students improved their self-confidence and academic

achievement by working jointly in groups. Students were excited in participating in

role play activities as it was a novel experience for them other than traditional.

- 246 -

The findings of the study indicate that questioning and role play both are

productive and viable teaching strategies in developing critical thinking skills among

elementary students. The results of the study are encouraging and convinced me that it

is possible to bring reform in learning of elementary students by developing critical

thinking in Pakistan. The results show that questioning and role play both strategies

can transform the Pakistani elementary classrooms from traditional teaching styles, in

which teacher dominates and students are not encouraged to question or participate in

learning process into student centred where student will enjoy academic freedom.

Findings of the study reveal that questioning and role play both strategies can be

used as productive instructional tools in order to improve critical thinking and

ultimately learning among elementary students of Pakistan (See figure 5.2).

Moreover, students took part in role play activities more enthusiastically. Role play

strategy develops their critical thinking through fun and provides the opportunity to

learn through experiential learning. My findings encouraged me, to say confidently,

that by implementing questioning and role play strategies; it is possible to change

traditional culture of elementary schools of Pakistan positively. The student's

interaction during the intervention not only influenced learning process but it also

developed their argumentative skills.

In relation to research question 2: Does intervention change the attitudes of the

students to become stronger in the level of critical thinking at upper primary level in

Pakistan? The quantitative explanation of the results showed a significant change in

attitude of students towards critical thinking. In order to know the effect of critical

thinking on student's attitudes, pre and post questionnaires were used separately in

both questioning and role play classrooms. The results indicated change in their

attitudes in the form of change in the scores of their intellectual traits of critical

- 247 -

thinking. By getting the experience of the intervention of the study, students improved

their all intellectual traits mean scores in post-test (See table 6.2). Students showed

highest improvement in intellectual empathy. The purpose of the study did not intend

to explore change in attitude statistically but to explore the effectiveness of the

intervention in improving attitude of elementary students.

The results of the study motivated me to say with no hesitation, that questioning

and role play both strategies are productive in developing critical thinking among

elementary students. Additionally, critical thinking improved intellectual traits that

form critical thinking attitude of elementary students. In relation to these findings, it

can be said that intervention affects the attitude of elementary students positively.

In relation to research question 4, what factors influence the productive potential of

intervention at upper primary level in Pakistan?

Two factors were emerged during the intervention that may be helpful for teachers in

developing critical thinking among students.

Role of teacher. Findings of the study showed how interaction between student and

teacher becomes more productive in enhancing critical thinking of students. Analysis

showed that how different roles of teacher influence classroom discourse and the

potential productivity of critical thinking. For example, teacher scaffold students

through probing questions whenever they confronted with challenging situation. The

purpose of thought provoking questions was to stimulate student's thinking in order to

elicit rational answer. Teacher facilitates students through encouragement. Probing

questioning of teacher indirectly help students in finding answers by developing a

web of ideas. Teacher helped students in content indirectly by providing clues and

hints. She also provided opportunities to students to use their intellect in drawing

conclusion through a series of challenging questions. Teacher did not provide direct

- 248 -

help to students in content as it blocks thinking of students and they trusted only on

teacher's answer without arguing either it is right or wrong.

Findings showed that in some critical situations arose in classroom forced

teacher to intervene in the situation and to resolve the conflicts of the students. For

example, in teacher played her role as a manager in managing the hot talk between

two students of the class. Although it seemed direct help from teacher that may put

negative effects on students but in some unpleasant context it is imperative for teacher

to provide direct input in handling the situation.

In short, different roles played by the teacher during intervention affected the

behaviour of the students in enhancing critical thinking. The findings about multiple

roles of teacher that were evident in promoting critical thinking of students have

implications for classroom education and for professional development of teachers.

Findings support teacher's indirect help in promoting critical thinking as it provides a

way of thinking to students to get solutions of their academic problems through using

multiple lenses. The results of the study discouraged direct content help of a teacher

which stops thinking and curiosity of students in identifying more alternatives for the

problem solution. Teacher might provide direct help to students in case of their

unclarity of ideas which cannot be fixed through indirect help. Teacher can judge

better the appropriate type of help at the appropriate time.

For example, teacher can help students through probing of questions that encourage

students to participate in the discussion more frequently in presenting and defending

their claims through reasoning. The findings can be used as guidelines for teachers in

using probing questioning and kind of help in their classrooms.

Social Context. The findings of the study support the role of context in improving

critical thinking of students. There were two context provided in the study. In

- 249 -

questioning classroom, students were given the opportunities to share, to negotiate

with each other with reasoning. Teacher played her role as facilitator in the classroom.

She created democratic environment in the class to facilitate every student on equal

basis. Students were autonomous in asking questions from teacher and with each

other. In the earlier episodes, they were not confident in presenting their views in

front of teacher and their fellows. It might be due to their previous classroom

experience where questioning and student's participation was not encouraged.

Students improved their confidence and critical thinking skills in later episodes. They

were able to argue with their fellows on logical grounds. On the other side, in role

play classroom students were more autonomous in taking their decisions. They

improved their communication skills in later episodes by frequently communicating

with each other. The context of the classroom was student led and it provided more

freedom to students in developing their critical thinking skills and critical thinking

attitude. Students were free of academic anxiety that might they face in traditional

classroom where they were expected to provide the right content from their books on

spot. While playing a role, they enjoyed more freedom of expression and autonomy.

Classroom environment was supportive and friendly. Students improved their

interpersonal relationship by sharing knowledge and constructing meaning mutually.

So in the light of these results, i suggest that teachers should facilitate their students

by promoting their maximum participation in the classroom. Through such context

students can enjoy more freedom and autonomy which resultantly leads to enhance

their critical thinking skills.

Theoretical Framework.

The findings of the study support my constructive framework in developing and

promoting critical thinking. Constructivists and critical thinkers go side by side. Both

- 250 -

are in favour of flexible and democratic context to facilitate thinking and learning. In

both contexts, teacher works as facilitator rather authoritative figure. Students learnt

through cooperation with each other through social interaction. So my findings are

consistent with such framework as teacher facilitated learning and critical thinking of

students through probing and scaffold. She provided open and liberal classroom

environment where students were autonomous in participation and construction of

their own knowledge by collaborating with each other. Such context helped them in

improving their confidence and self-esteem. They felt pride in them as each one's

opinion is valued in the classroom.

Concluding remarks.

The findings of the study support the success of the intervention in promoting critical

thinking among students. The difference of the level of critical thinking of students

from weak to strong throughout the intervention proved an evidence of the success of

the intervention. Both teaching strategies questioning and role play proved productive

in fostering critical thinking of students, however, role play proved more significant in

accelerating critical thinking of students because of its flexible nature. As students

took role play as less stiff and traditional strategy in comparison with questioning that

is more structured in nature. The strong attitude also provided evidence that

strengthened my belief about the successful implementation of the intervention in

Pakistani elementary schools. Literature and my findings support the belief that in our

public schools critical thinking strategies are neglected and traditional teaching

strategies are more promoted that further leads to education system failure. I suggest,

teachers can facilitate their students through using the intervention in their classrooms

in promoting more promising change in the level of critical thinking and their

attitudes.

- 251 -

Limitations.

The study was conducted in only one school in one city due to time and resources

constraints for a PhD study. Although the findings of the study cannot be

generalized , however, the study provided important implications for elementary

schools

The Participant number in both classrooms was relatively low as compared to

Pakistani public school classrooms where the number of participant was relatively

high.

The episodes were translated from Urdu to English for analysis of the study. This

is a limitation because translation cannot portray the same meaning as the original

words therefore some verbal and nonverbal behaviors could not be translated.

Questionnaire data do not provide a comprehensive account of critical thinking

and critical thinking attitude. In order to provide sufficient detail of the data a

discourse analysis was done to examine the change in the level of critical thinking.

In comparison, for attitude change examination, only quantitative analysis was

done which is considered a limitation of the study. It provides only quantitative

measures to understand the change critical thinking attitude which is not sufficient

to portray the whole picture of the study.

The study was conducted in only one school in one city due to time and resources

constraints for a PhD study. Although the findings of the study cannot be

generalized , however, the study provided important implications for elementary

schools

The Participant number in both classrooms was relatively low as compared to

Pakistani public school classrooms where the number of participant was relatively

high.

- 252 -

The episodes were translated from Urdu to English for analysis of the study. This

is a limitation because translation cannot portray the same meaning as the original

words therefore some verbal and nonverbal behaviors could not be translated.

Questionnaire data do not provide a comprehensive account of critical

thinking and critical thinking attitude. In order to provide sufficient detail of the data a

discourse analysis was done to examine the change in the level of critical thinking. In

comparison, for attitude change examination, only quantitative analysis was done

which is considered a limitation of the study. It provides only quantitative measures to

understand the change critical thinking attitude which is not sufficient to portray the

whole picture of the study.

- 253 -

References

Akram, M., & Mahmood, A. (2011). The need of communicative approach (in ELT)

in teacher training programmes in Pakistan. Language in India, 11(5), 172-178.

Alwehaibi, H. (2012). Novel program to promote critical thinking among higher

education students: Empirical study from Saudi Arabia. Asian Social

Science, 8(11), 193-204.

Anderson, G. (1998). Fundamentals of education research (2nded.). London: Falmer

Press.

Arend, B. (2009). Encouraging critical thinking in online threaded discussions. The

journal of educators online, 6(1). Doi:10. 1.1.412.1694.

Ayaz, M., & Shah, M. A. (2011). Perspectives of Students Regarding Role of

University Teachers in Prompting the Students to Enhance Their Classroom

Attendance. World Applied Sciences Journal, 12(9), 1523-1527.

Bailin, S. (1991). Rationality and intuition. Philosophical Inquiry in Education, 4(2),

17-26.

Bailin, S. (1999). The problem with Percy: Epistemology, understanding and critical

thinking. Informal Logic, 19(2-3), 161-170.

Bailin, S. (2002). Critical thinking and science education. Science & Education,

11(4), 361-375. doi: 10.1023/A: 1016042608621

Barab, S. A., Dodge, T., Thomas, M. K., Jackson, C., & Tuzun, H. (2007). Our

designs and the social agendas they carry. Journal of the Learning Sciences,

16(2), 263-305.

Barnes, D. (1975). Language, the learner, and the school. Aylsebury: Hazell Watson

and Viney.

Barnes, J. (2009). Examining the effects of an intervention program concerning sport

competitive theory and moral reasoning on the moral cognitive growth of

freshman. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.

- 254 -

Bean, J. C. (2001). Engaging ideas: The professor's guide to integrating writing,

critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-

Bass

Bell, P., Hoadley, C. M., & Linn, M. C. (2004). Design-based research in education.

In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science

education (pp. 73-84). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Benesch, S. (1999). ‘Thinking criticallly, thinking dialogically’, TESOL Quarterly,

33(3), 573- 580.

Bensley, D. A. (1998).Critical thinking in psychology: A unified skills approach.

Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Bensley, D. A. (2010). A brief guide for teaching and assessing critical thinking in

psychology. Observer, 23(10), 49-53.

Bernard, H. R. (1988). Research methods in cultural anthropology. Newbury Park,

CA: Sage Publications.

Berliner, D. C. & Kupermintz, H. (Eds.) (2008). Fostering change in institutions,

environments, and people. New York: Routledge.

Bernard, H. R. (1994). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and

quantitative approaches (2nded.). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

Bernero, J. (2000). Motivating students in math using cooperative learning. Saint

Xavier University, Chicago. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 446

999) Blatchford, P., Kutnick, P., Baines, E., & Galton, M (2003). Toward a social

pedagogy of classroom group work. International Journal of Educational

Research, 39, 153-72.

Bledsoe. T.S., & Baskin, J.J. (2014). Recognizing student fear: The elephant in the

classroom. College Teaching, 62(1). 32-41.

Bloom, B. S., Engelhar, M. D., First, E. J., Walker, H. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956).

Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals.

New York: David McKay Co.

- 255 -

Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice.

London: Continuum.

Boulton, M. (1994). The methodological imagination. In M.Boulton (ed.), Challenge

and innovation: Methodological Advances in social research on HIV Aids (pp. 1-

21). London: Taylor and Francis.

Bowling, A. (1997). Research methods in health: Investigating health and health

services. (4thed.). England: Open University Press

Bransford, J. (1987). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school.

Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Bradley, K. S., & Bradley, J. A. (2004). Scaffolding academic learning for second

language learners. The Internet TESL Journal, 10(5).

Brooks, P., & Zizak, O. (2002). Does pre-emption help children learn verb

transitivity? Journal of Child Language, 29, 759–781.

Brookfield, S. D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore

alternative ways of thinking and acting. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Brookfield, S. D. (2006). Authenticity and power. New Directions for Adult and

Continuing Education, 111, 5-16. doi: 10.1002/ace.223

Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges

in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the

Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language

pedagogy (2nded.).USA: Pearson Education.

Brown, A., & Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Guided, co-operative learning and individual

knowledge acquisition. In L. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction.

New York: Lawrence Erlbaum

Brown, M. N., & Freeman, K. (2000). Distinguishing the features of critical thinking

classrooms. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(3), 301-309.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713699143.

Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5thed.).UK: Oxford University Press.

Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational

analysis: Elements of the sociology of corporate life. USA: Pearson Education.

- 256 -

Carroll, W. K. (Ed.). (2004). Critical strategies for social research. Toronto:

Canadian Scholars’ Press.

Carmichael, E., & Farrell, H. (2012). Evaluation of the effectiveness of online

resources in developing student critical thinking: Review of literature and case

study of a critical thinking online site. Journal of University Teaching and

Learning Practice, 9(1), 1-17. Retrieved from http://www.jutlp.uow.edu.au/.

Case, R. (2005). Moving critical thinking to the main stage. Education Canada, 45(2),

45–49.

D .Cecez-Kecmanovic, C Webb (2000).Towards a communicative model of

collaborative web-mediated learning. Australasian Journal of Educational

Technology, 16(1)

Challan (1995).The Reliability and Validity of a Performance Task for Evaluating

Science Process Skills. Gifted child quarterly, 39(1): 14-20.

Childs, J. C., & Sepples, S. (2006). Clinical teaching by simulation: Lessons learned

from a complex patient care scenario. Nursing Education Perspectives, 27(3),

154-158.

Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that

stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6),

815-843.

Christian. W. C. and V. Dibia (2013) Exploring The Effectiveness of Online Role-

Play Gaming in the Acquisition Of Complex And Tacit Knowledge, Issues in

Information Systems, 14, 2, 367-374.

Christopher, J. B. (2002). Teaching English as a foreign language. Philadelphia: John

Benjamin Publishing Company.

Christopher H. Tienken, Stephanie Goldberg & Dominic Dirocco (2012). Questioning

the Questions . Kappa Delta Pi Record. 46(1) 39-43.

Clark, R.; Gieve, S. On the discursive construction of ‘the Chinese learner’. Lang.

Cult. Curric. 2006, 19, 54–73.

Cobb, P., Confrey, J., DiSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design

experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13.

- 257 -

Cochran-Smith, M. (1995). Uncertain allies: Understanding the boundaries of race

and teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 65(4), 541-571.

Cohen, L., & Manian, L. (2000). Research methods in education (5thed.). London :

Routledge.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education.

London: Routledge/ Falmer.

Cooper, B. (2004). Empathy, interaction and caring: Teachers' roles in a constrained

environment . Pastoral Care in Education, 4, 12-21.

Corden, R. (2004). Group work: Learning through talk. In T. Grainger (Ed.),

Theroutledge falmer reader in language and literacy (pp. 81-108). New York:

Taylor & Francis Group.

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cullen, R. (1998). Teacher talk and the classroom context. ELT journal, 52(3), 179-

187.

Cotton K., 2001, Developing, Empathy In Children and Youth, School Improvement

Research Series, online: www.Iyrics.com.

Davies, L., & Iqbal, Z. (1997). Tensions in teacher training for school effectiveness:

The case of Pakistan. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8(2), 254-

266. doi:10.1080/0924345970080205

Design-Based Research Collective (DBRC) (2003). Design-based research: An

emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational researcher 32(1), pp5-8.

Dean, B.L. (2005). Citizenship education in Pakistani schools: Problems and

possibilities. Journal of Citizenship and Teacher Education, 1(2), 35-55.

Dean, B.L. (2007). Educating for democratic citizenship in Pakistani schools. South

Asian Journal, 17,66-94.

Del barrio v., Aluja .A., Garcia L.F., (2004) Bryant's Empathy Index for children and

Adolescents : psychometric properties in the Spanish Language. Psychology Rep.

95 (1): 257- 62.

Delius, C., Gatzemeier, M., Sertaan, D., &Wünscher, K. (2005).The story of

philosophy. China: h.f.ullmann Publishing.

- 258 -

Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of

qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbook

of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dewey, J. (1900). The school and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston: Health Publishers.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Macmillan.

DfEE (1999). National curriculum for modern foreign languages: key stages 3-4.

London: DfEE and QCA.

Dooly, M. (2008).Constructing knowledge together. Retrived from:

http://pagines.uab.cat/melindadooly/sites/pa

gines.uab.cat.melindadooly/files/Chpt1.pdf

Dorn, L. J., & Soffos, C. (2001). Scaffolding young writers: A writers’ workshop

approach. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative

and mixed methodologies. UK: Oxford University Press.

Dreifuerst, K. T. (2009). The essentials of debriefing in simulation learning: A

concept analysis. Nursing Education Perspectives, 30(2), 109-114.

Dreyer, J. (2003). The educator as assessor. South Africa:Van Schaik Publishers.

Duron, R., Limbach, B., & Waugh, W. (2006). Critical thinking framework for any

discipline. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education,

17(2), 160-166.

Durkin, K. (2008). The adaptation of East Asian masters students to western norms of

critical thinking and argumentation in the UK. Intercultural Education, 19(1),

15-27. doi: org/1 0.1080/14675980701852228

Durkin, K. (2010). Videogames and young people with developmental disorders.

Review of General Psychology, 14(2), 122-140.doi: org/10.1037/a0019438

Elder, L., Paul, R. (1994). Critical Thinking: Why we must transform our teaching.

Journal of Developmental Education 18(1) 34-35.

- 259 -

Elder, L. (1996). Critical thinking and emotional intelligence. Inquiry: Critical

Thinking across the Disciplines, 16(2), 35-49.

Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2001). Critical thinking: Thinking to some purpose. Journal of

Developmental Education, 25(1), 40-41.

Elder. L. (2004). Think About Fran and Sam, Foundation for Critical Thinking, Dillon

Beach, CA,

Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2007). Critical thinking: The nature of critical and creative

thought, Part II. Journal of Developmental Education, 30(3), 36-37.

Ellis, R. (2012). Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Hoboken:

Wiley Blackwell.

Ennis, R. (1985). Goals for a critical thinking/reasoning curriculum. Illinois Critical

Thinking Project, Champaign, IL.

Ennis, R. (2011). Critical thinking: Reflection and perspective Part II. Inquiry:

Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 26(2), 5-19.

Ennis, R. H. (1981). Rational thinking and educational perspective. In J. F. Soltis

(Ed.), Philosophy of education. Chicago: The National Society for the Study of

Education.

Ennis, R. H. (1987). Taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In J. B.

Baron & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice

(pp. 9-26).New York: Freeman Times Book.

Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed

research. Educational Researcher, 18(3), 4-10.

Ennis, R. H. (1992). Critical thinking: What is it? Proceedings of the forty-eighth

annual meeting of the philosophy of education society. Denver, Colorado.

Ennis, R. H., & Paulus, D. (1965).Critical thinking readiness in grades 1-12: Phase I

deductive reasoning in adolescence. New York: Cornell University Publication.

- 260 -

Ennis, R. H., & Weir, E. (1989).The Ennis-Weir critical thinking essay test: Test,

manual, criteria, scoring sheet: An instrument for teaching and testing. USA:

Hawker Brownlow Publishers.

Evans, R. (1973). Jean Piaget: The man and his ideas. New York: Dutton.

Facione, P.A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes

of educational assessment and instruction.American Philosophical Association

(ERIC Document Reproduction Services no.ED 315 423).

Facione, P. A. (2000). The disposition toward critical thinking: Its character,

measurement, and relation to critical thinking skill. Informal Logic, 20(1), 61–84.

Fan, W. & Williams, C. M. (2010). The effects of parental involvement on students’

academic self-efficacy, engagement and intrinsic motivation. Education

Psychology, 30(1) 53-74. Doi: 10.1080/01443410903353302.

Fang, F. (2010). A discussion on developing students’ communicative competence in

college english teaching in china. English Language Center, Shantou,

Guangdong, P.R. China. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 1,

No. 2. Academy Publisher Manufactured in Finland.

Farmer, L. S. J. (2007). What is questioning? Paper presented at conference in world

library and Information Congress, Seoul, Korea.

Faste, T., & Faste, H. (2012). Demystifying 'design-based research': Design is not

research, research is design. IDSA Education Symposium. Retrieved from

http://www.idsa.org/sites/default/files/Faste.pd

Feagin, J., Orum, A., & Sjoberg, G. (1991). A case for case study. Chapel Hill, NC:

University of North Carolina Press.

Feng Liu & Yun Ding, ,(2009). Role-play in English Language Teaching, Asian

Social Science, Vol. 5,

Fisher, R. (1998). Teaching thinking: Philosophical enquiry in the classroom. UK:

Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd.

Fisher, R. (2001). Philosophy in primary schools: Fostering thinking skills and

literacy. Literacy, 35(2), 67-73.

- 261 -

Fischer, S. C., Spiker, V. A., & Riedel, S. L. (2009). Critical thinking training for

army officers, volume 2: A model of critical thinking. (Technical Report).

Arlington, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social

Sciences.

Fisher,A. Michael Scriven (1997) Critical Thinking: Its Definition and

Assessment Hardcover.

Flick (2006). An introduction to qualitative research, Journal of qualitative research

in Psychology. 4(3) , 259-260, Sage publications.

Foote. C., Vermette, P. & Battaglia, C. (2001). Constructivist strategies: Meeting

standards and engaging adolescent minds. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (1994).Interviewing: The art of science. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications.

Forsyth, D. (1987).Social psychology. Pacific Grove, Ca: Brooks/Cole.

Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T. P., Levi, L., & Fennema, E. (2001). Capturing teachers’

generative growth: A follow-up study of professional development in

mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 653-689.

Friedel, C. R., Irani, T. A., Rhoades, E. R., Fuhrman, N. E., & Gallo, M. (2008). It's in

the genes: Exploring relationships between critical thinking and problem solving

in undergraduate agri science students' solutions to problems in Mendelian

genetics. Journal of Agricultural Education, 49(4), 25-37. DOI:

10.5032/jae.2008.04025.

Gage, N. L., & Berliner, D. C. (1998) Educational psychology (6th ed.). Boston, MA:

Houghton Mifflin. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical

inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The

Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 1-19.

Gelder, T. V. (2005).Teaching critical thinking: Some lessons from cognitive science.

College Teaching, 53(1), 41-48.doi: org/10.3200/CTCH.53.1.41-48

Gill, J. (1993). Learning to learn: Toward a philosophy of education. Atlantic Heights,

NJ: Humanities Press.

- 262 -

Gillani, B. B. (2000). Using the web to create student-centered curriculum. In R. A.

Cole (Ed.), Issues in web-based pedagogy: A critical primer (pp. 161-183). USA:

Greenwood Press.

Gillani, I. G. (2004).A comparative study of scholastic achievement of higher

secondary school students in urban and rural areas in the subject of

English(Unpublished master’s thesis). Department of Education,

BahauddinZakaria UniversityMultan, Pakistan.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. C. (1967).The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies

for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.

Gordon, T. J. and Glenn, J. C.(1993). Issues in Creating the Millennium Project:

Initial Report from the Millennium Project Feasibility Study, United Nations

University.

Gose ,M. (2009). When Socratic dialogue is flagging: questions and strategies for

engaging students. J Coll Teach Learn.57(1):45–49.

Grant, T. (2012). Comparing the SBH Maieutic Principle-Based Method to traditional

case study methods of teaching media ethics. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).

The University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.

Gresalfi, M. S. (2009). Taking up opportunities to learn: Constructing dispositions in

mathematics classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(3): 327-369.

Grenfell, J. & Warren, I. (2010). Virtual worlds to enhance student engagement. The

International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society 6(1), 25-39.

Retrieved from http://www.Technology-Journal.com.

Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American

Educational Research Journal, 31, 104-137

Gul, R. B, Cassum, S., Ahmed, A., Khan, S, Saeed, T., & Parpio, Y. (2010).

Enhancement of critical thinking in curriculum design and delivery: A

randomized controlled trial for educators. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2,

3219-3225. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.491.

- 263 -

Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Metsala, J. L., & Cox, K. E. (1999). Motivational and

cognitive predictors of text comprehension and reading amount. Scientific

Studies of Reading, 3, 231-256.

Huang, Irene Y. 2008. “Role play for ESL/EFL Children in the English Classroom”,

The Internet TESL Journal.

Halpern, D. F. (1998).Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains:

Disposition, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring.American

Psychologist, 53(4), 449-455.

Halpern, D. F. (2002).Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking.

USA: Routledge.

Halpern, D. F. (2007).The nature and nurture of critical thinking. In R. J. Sternberg,

H. L. Roediger III, & D. F. Halpern (Eds.), Critical thinking in psychology (pp.

1-15). NewYork: Cambridge University Press.

Halverson, B. & Gibson, D. (2005). The SimSchool Project: Using Classroom

Management Simulations to help Future Teachers Teach and Improve Student

Learning, Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher

Education International Conference 2005 (pp. 2624-2628).

Halx,..M,. E., Reybold, L, E, (2005). A pedagogy of force: faculty perspective of

critical thinking capacity in undergraduate students. The Journal of general

education, 54(4). 293-315.doi:10.1353/ jge.2006.000g.

Hamiloğlu, K., & Temiz, G. (2012). The Impact of Teacher Questions on Student

Learning in EFL. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in the World,

2, 1-8.

Harbour, E., & Connick, J. (2005). Role playing games and activities rules and tips.

http://www.businessballs.com/roleplayinggames.htm

Hasil, R. (2012). Enquiry - based teaching: Heart of critical thinking (Unpublished

master's dissertation). Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.

- 264 -

Hayes & Devitt,( 2008 ). Classroom Discussions with Student‐Led Feedback: a

Useful Activity to Enhance Development of Critical Thinking Skills. Journal of Food

Science Education 7(4):65 - 68 ·DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-4329.2008.00054.x

Healy, P. (1990). The Garnaut report: Implications for Asian studies. Asian Studies

Association of Australia: Review, 13(3), 68-75. doi:

org/10.1080/03147539008712639

Henderson-Hurley & Hurley, 2013). Enhancing critical thinking skills among

authoritarian students. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher

Education, 25 (2), 248-261.doi: 10.1080/10511250300085841.

Heyman, G. D., & Legare, C. H. (2005).Children's evaluation of sources of

information about traits. Developmental Psychology, 41(4), 636-647. doi:

org/10.1037/0012-1649.41 .4.636

Holloway, I. (1997). Basic concepts for qualitative research. London: Blackwell

Science.

Hoadley, C. M., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Teaching science through on-line, peer

discussions: SpeakEasy in the Knowledge Integration Environment. International

Journal of Science

Hopko, D.R., Crittendon, J.A., Grant, E., & Wilson, S.A. (2005). The impact of

anxiety on performance IQ. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 18 (1), 17-35.

Howell, J. (1991). Using role-play as a teaching method. Teaching Public

Administration, 12. (1), 69–75Education, 22(8), 839-858.

Huff, C. (2012). Action research on using role play activity in an adult ESL level-one

class. Hamline University. Saint Paul, Minnesota.

Jarvis, L., Odell, K., &Troiano, M. (2000). "Role-playing as a teaching strategy."

Jeffries, P. R. (2005). A framework for designing, implementing, and evaluating

simulations used as teaching strategies in nursing. Nursing Education

Perspectives, 26(2), 96-103.

- 265 -

Jenkins, S. B. (2009). Measuring teacher beliefs about curriculum orientations using

the modified-curriculum orientations inventory.The Curriculum Journal, 20(2),

103-120. doi: org/10.1080/09585170902948798

Jilani, R. (2009). Problematizing high school certificate exam in Pakistan: A

washback perspective. Reading, 9(2), 175-183.

Jilani, W. (2004). Conditions under which English is taught in Pakistan: An applied

linguistic perspective.SARID Journal, 1(1), 1-9.

Jones, M. (1995).Clinical reasoning and pain.Manual therapy, 1(1), 17-24.

Jones, S. (2007). Adding value to online role plays: Virtual situated learning

environment. Retrieved from

http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/jones-s.pdf

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R., Stanne, M.B., & Garibaldi, A. (1990) Impact of group

processing on achievement in cooperative groups, Journal of Social

Psychology, 130(4), 507 - 516.

Kaplan, B.,& Maxwell, J. A.(2005).Qualitative research methods for evaluating

computer information systems. In J. G. Anderson & C. E. Aydin (Eds.),

Evaluating the organizational impact of healthcare information systems (pp. 30-

55).New York: Springer Publications. doi: 10.1007/0-387-30329-4_2

Kayes, A.B., Kayes, D. C. & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Experiential learning in teams.

Simulation & Gaming, 36. 330–354.

Keen, S., (2006). Empathy and the Novel. Member Publications. Oxford

Kennedy, M., Fisher, M. B., & Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical thinking: Literature

review and needed research. In L. Idol & B. F. Jones (Eds.), Educational values

and cognitive instruction: Implications for reform (pp. 11-40). Hillsdale, New

Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.

Kim, K. J., & Bonk, C. J. (2006). The future of online teaching and learning in higher

education. Education Quarterly, 29(4), 22-30.

- 266 -

Khan, W. B., & Inamullah, H. M. (2011). A study of lower-order and higher-order

questions at secondary level. Asian Social Science, 7(9), 149-157.

http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v7n9p149

Khatib, M., Marefat, F., & Ahmadi, M. (2012). Enhancing critical thinking abilities in

EFL classrooms: Through written and audiotaped dialogue journals. Humanity &

Social Sciences Journal, 7(1), 33-45.

Koenig, M. A., & Harris, P. L. (2005). Preschoolers mistrust ignorant and inaccurate

speakers. Child Development, 76(6), 1261-1277. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-

8624.2005.00849.

Kong, S. L. (2010). Critical thinking for effective teaching and learning. Republic of

Singapore: Research Publishing Services.

Kuhn, D., & Pearsall, S. (1998). Relations between metastrategic knowledge and

strategic performance. Cognitive Development, 13, 227–247.

Kurfiss, Joanne Gainen (1988), Critical Thinking: Theory, Research, Practice, and

Possibilities. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report. Association for the Study of

Higher Education.; ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, Washington,

Kumar, K., & Gupta, G. (2009). Perceived organizational justice, job satisfaction, and

turnover intentions: A co-relational study. Gujarat Journal of Psychology,

25.Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1408665

Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). TESOL methods: Changing tracks, challenging

trends. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 59-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/40264511.

Kvale, S. (1996).Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.

Thousand Oaks:Sage Publications.

Lamb, T.E. and Reinders, H. (2008) Learner and teacher autonomy: concepts,

realities and responses. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.

Landousee, G. P. (2005). Role play , G. P. Oxford (p. 147). Oxford University Press.

Lan, C. H., Tseng, C. C., & Lai, K. R. (2008, July). Developing a negotiation-based

intelligent tutoringsystem to support problem solving: A case study in role-play

http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v7n9p149

- 267 -

learning.Paper presented at the Eighth IEEE International Conference on

Advanced Learning Technologies. Cantabria, France.

Lancy, D. F. (2007). Accounting for variability in mother– child play. American

Anthropologist, 109, 273–284. doi:10.1525/aa.2007.109.2.273.

Lee, W.S. (2006) Software Evaluation Research: Case Study Methodology Designed

Research. University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Department of Software and

Information Systems. Last viewed June 16, 2006 at

ww.sis.uncc.edu/~seoklee/Projects/CSM.htm.

Lee, Y., Kinzie, M. B., & Whittaker, J. V. (2012). Impact of Online Support for

Teachers’ Open-Ended Questioning in Pre-k Science Activities. Teaching &

Teacher Education, 28, 568-577. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.01.002

Lesh, R., Hoover, M., Hole, B., Kelly, A., & Post, T. (2000). Principles for

developing thought-revealing activities for students and teachers.In A. Kelly &R.

Lesh (Eds.), Research design in Mathematics and Science education(pp. 591-

646).New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lillard, A. S., Pinkham, A., & Smith, E. D. (2011). Pretend play and cognitive

development. In U. Goswami (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive development (2nd ed.,

pp. 285–311). London, England: Blackwell.

Lincoln, YS. & Guba, EG. (1985).Naturalistic inquiry, Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Publications.

Littlewood, William, (1981). Communicative language teaching: an introduction,

Cambridge, Cambridge press.

Lipman, M. (1988). Critical thinking, What can it be? Educational Leadership, 46(1),

38–43.

Maier, H.W. (2002). Role playing: structures and educational objectives. CYC-online,

36. Retrieved from www.cyc-net.org/cyc-online/cycol-0102-roleplay.html

Malik, A. H. (2005). Instant teaching of English as a foreign language. Multan:

Honey Books.

- 268 -

Malik, B., &Aguado, T. (2005). Cultural diversity and guidance: Myth or reality? In

B. A. Irving & B. Malik (Eds.), Critical reflections on career education and

guidance: Promoting social justice within a global economy (pp. 56-70).

NewYork: Routledge.

Marlowe, B. & Page, M. (2005). Creating and sustaining the constructivist

classroom, 2 nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press Inc.

Marton, F., Runesson, U. and Tsui, A. B. M. (2004). The space of learning. In:

Marton, F. & Tsui, A. B. M. (Eds), Classroom discourse and space of learning,

1-72). N.J..Lawrence Erlbaum.

Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework

for effective instruction. USA: Association for supervision and curriculum

development.

Mercer, N. (2008) Classroom dialogue and the teacher's role, Education Review,

21, 1, 60-65.

Mercer, N. & Hodgkinson, S. (2008) Exploring Talk in School: inspired by the work

of Douglas Barnes. London: Sage.

Mercer, Neil and Littleton, Karen(2007). Dialogue and the development of children's

thinking: a socio cultural approach .London, UK: Routledge.

Mehan, Hugh (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

McComas W, Abraham L. Asking more effective questions. Rossier School of

Education.http://cet.usc.edu/resources/teaching_learning/materialdocs/Asking_B

etterQuestions.pdf. Accessed December 4, 2012.

McKay, S.L. (2002). Teaching English as an international language. England:

Oxford University Press.

McKenzie, J. (1997). Creating research programs for an age of information. The

Question Is the Answer,7(2). Retrieved from

http://www.fno.org/oct97/question.html

- 269 -

McPeck, J. E. (1990). Critical thinking and subject specificity: A reply to Ennis.

Educational Researcher, 19(4), 10-12.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, S. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded

sourcebook (2nded.). London: Sage Publications.

Moon, J. A. 2004. A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning: Theory and

Practice. Routledge-Falmer: London.

Myers, M. (2000).Qualitative research and the generalizability question: Standing

firm with Proteus. The Qualitative Report, 4(3/4), 122-126.

Nayak, R. K., & Senapaty, H. K. (2011).Effect constructivist approach in fostering

creativity of primary school children.Journal of Indian Education, 38(3), 85-93.

Nemeth, N. and Kormos, J. (2001). ‘Pragmatic aspects of task-performance: the case

of argumentation’, Language Teaching Research, 5(3), pp. pp. 213–240.

Nosich, G. M. (2012).Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking

across the curriculum.USA: Centres for teaching & Technology Book Library.

Nosich, G. M. (2005). Problems with two standard models for teaching critical

thinking.New Directions for Community Colleges, 130, 59-67. doi:

10.1002/cc.196

Nunan, D. (1989). The teacher as researcher.Retrieved from

http://www.teachingenglish. org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/Y299%20ELT-15-

screen_Research-in-the-Language-Classroom.pdf#page=26

Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning.USA: Heinle&Heinle

Publishers.

Nussbaum, M. C. (2010). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities.

Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.

Patil, Z. N. (2008). Rethinking the objectives of teaching English in Asia.Asian EFL

Journal, 10(4), 227-240.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rded.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4-3/myers.html

http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4-3/myers.html

- 270 -

Paul, R. (1992). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly

changing world. Tomales, CA: Foundation for critical thinking.

Paul, R. (1992). Critical thinking: What, why, and how. New Directions for

Community Colleges, 1992(77), 3-24.

Paul, R. (1993). Critical thinking: How to prepare students for a rapidly changing

world.CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.

Paul, R. (2005). The state of critical thinking today.New Directions for Community

Colleges, 130, 27-38.

Paul, R. (2009). The aspiring thinker's guide to critical thinking. USA: Foundation

Critical Thinking.

Paul, R. (2011). Reflections on the nature of critical thinking, its history, politics, and

barriers on its status across the college/university curriculum: Part I. Inquiry,

26(3), 5-24.

Paul, R. W. (1992). Critical thinking: Santa Rosa, California: Foundation for Critical

Thinking.

Paul, R. W.(1986). The goal of critical thinking: From educational ideal to

educational reality.Washington: Sage Publications.

Paul, R. W. (1995). Critical thinking: How to prepare students for a rapidly changing

world. Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Paul, R. W., &Heaslip, P. (1995).Critical thinking and intuitive nursing

practice.Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22(1), 40-47.

Paul, R. W., &Nosich, G. M. (1991).A proposal for the national assessment of higher

order thinking at the community college, college, and university levels.

Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2001). Critical thinking: Inert information, activated ignorance,

and activated knowledge. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(2), 36-37.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2001).Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your

learning and life. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

- 271 -

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2002). Critical thinking: Teaching students how to study and

learn (part I). Journal of Developmental Education, 26(1), 36-37.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2002).Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your

professional and personal life (2nded.).USA: Sage Publications

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2003).The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and

tools. (4thed.). Tomales, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2005). Critical thinking and the art of substantive writing, part I.

Journal of Developmental Education, 29(1), 40-41.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006).The thinker’s guide to the art of Socratic questioning.

USA: Sage Publications.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2007). Critical thinking: The art of Socratic questioning.

Journal of Developmental Education, 31(1), 36-37.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2007).The thinker’s guide to the art of Socratic questioning:

Based on critical thinking concepts & tools. CA:Foundation for Critical Thinking

Press.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2008). Critical thinking: The art of Socratic questioning, part

III. Journal of Developmental Education, 31(3), 34-35.

Paul, R., Binker, A.J.A., Jensen, K.,& Kreklau, H. (2010).Critical thinking handbook:

4th-6th Grades. USA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Pavey, J., & Donoghue, D. (2003). The use of role play and VLEs in teaching

environmental management. Planet, 10, 7–10.

Philley, J. (2005). Critical thinking concepts. Professional Safety, 50(3), 26-32.

Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International

University Press.

Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Distributed scaffolding: Helping students

learn science by design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42

- 272 -

Qaisar, S. (2011). The effect of collaborative group work lessons in mathematics as an

alternative method for concept development of the students at upper primary level in

Pakistan, University of Leeds (Unpublished Thesis)

Qualters, Donna M., (2010). Experiential Education: Making the Most of Learning

outside the Classroom. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Number 124,

Catherine M. Wehlburg, Editor-in-Chief. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. ISBN:

978-0-470-94505-6.

Ragin, C. C. (1994).Constructing social research: The unity and diversity of method.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

Raths L. E.,Wasseeman, S., Jones, A. and Rothstel, A. (1966). Teaching for Critical

Thinking: Theory and Application. Columbus, Ohio: Charles-Merrill.

Ragin, C. C., &Amoroso, L. M. (1994).Constructing social research: The unity and

diversity of method. (2nded.).London: Sage Publications.

Richards, J.C. and Rodgers, T.S. (2001) Approaches and Methods in Language

Teaching (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rhodes, D. (1995). A new typology of questions. Retrieved from

http://www.phy.ilstu.edu/pt e/publications/engaging_students.pdf

Robson, C. (2003). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and

practitioners-researchers (2nded.). UK: Blackwell publishing

Rossman, G. B., & Marshall, C. (1995).Designing qualitative research.Newbury

Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Roth, M. W. (1996). Teacher Questioning in an Open-Inquiry Learning Environment:

Interactions of Context, Content, and Student Responses. Journal of Research in

Science Teaching, 33, 710-735.

Rudd, R., Baker, M., & Hoover, T. (2000). Undergraduate agriculture student learning

styles and critical thinking abilities: Is there a relationship? Journal of Agricultural

Education, 41 (3), 2-12. doi. 10.5032/jae.2000.03002.

Sadker, M. P., & Sadker, D. M. (2003). Teachers, schools, and society (6th ed.). New

York:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_C._Ragin

- 273 -

Somsai, S. & Intaraprasant, C. I. (2011). Strategies for coping with face-to- Online-

ISSN 2411-2933, Print-ISSN 2411-3123 January 2016 International Educative

Research Foundation and Publisher face oral communication problems employed by

thai university students majoring in english. GEMA .Online Journal of Language

Studies 11 (3) 24-28.

Smyth, J. (2000). "Reclaiming Social Capital through Critical Teaching". The

Elementary School Journal, vol. 100 no. 5, pp. 491–511.

Sanprasert, N. (2010). The application of a course management system to enhance

learner autonomy in learning English as a foreign language. System, 38: 109-

123.McGraw-Hill.

Santrock, J. (2006). Life span development. Jakarta: PT Erlangga.

Santrock, J., & Halonen, J. (2006).Connections to college success. USA: Cengage

Learning.

Schmuck, R. (1997).Practical action research for change. Arlington Heights, IL:

IRI/Skylight Training and Publishing.

Seiferth, M. S. (1997). Socratic teaching. Retrieved from

http://lonestar.texas.net/~mseifert/c rit3.html

Silva, E. (2008).Measuring skills for the 21st century. Washington, DC:

KCDLoneline Publishers.

Shenton, A. K. (2004 ). Strategies for Ensuring Trustworthiness in Qualitative

Research Projects. Education for Information, 22(2 ) 63-75 2004.

Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we

know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 43-69.

doi: 10.1006/ceps/1996.004

Slavin, R. E. (2009).Educational psychology: Theory and practices. (9thed.). New

Jersey: Pearson.

- 274 -

Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Chambers, B., Cheung, A., & Davis, S. (2009). Effective

reading programs for the elementary grades: A best-evidence synthesis. Review

of Educational Research, 79(4), 1391-1466.

Smith, G. F. (2003). Beyond critical thinking and decision making: Teaching business

students how to think. Journal of Management Education, 27(1), 24-51.

Somekh, Bridget & Cathy Lewin (2005). Research Methods in The Social Sciences,

New Delhi: Sage.

Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and

Winston Publications.

Stake, R. (1995). The art of case research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Teaching critical thinking: Eight easy ways to fail before you

begin. The Phi Delta Kappan, 68(6), 456-459.

Steele, S. (2012). Community engaged service-learning: The effect on university

students and community partners. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The

University of Idaho, Moscow, ID

Stiggins, R. J. (1997). Student involved assessment for learning (3rded.). USA:

Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.

Stuart, L. F. (2003). Assessment in practice: A view from school: Creating a school

culture of learning and assessment. Washington: Teachers 21 Publishers.

Suter, L. E., &Frechtling, J. (2000).Guiding principles for Mathematics and Science

education research methods: Report of a workshop. Virginia: National Science

Foundation.

Switky, B., & Aviles, W. (2007).Simulating the free trade area of the Americas.PS:

Political Science and Politics, 40(2), 399-405.

Tinsley, H. E. A. & Weiss, D. J. (2000). Interrater reliability and agreement. In H. E.

A. Tinsley & S. D. Brown, Eds., Handbook of Applied Multivariate Statistics and

Mathematical Modelling, 95-124. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

- 275 -

Thijs, J. & Verkuyten, M. (2009). Students' anticipated situational engagement: The

roles of teacher behaviour, personal engagement, and gender. Journal of Genetic

Psychology, 170(3), 268-286. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.

Thomson, I. & Bebbington, J. (2005) 'Social and environmental reporting in the UK: a

pedagogic evaluation', Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 16(5), pp. 507-33.

Towers, J. (1992). Outcome based teacher education. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(8), 624-

627.

Tripathi, V. (2011).The relevance of Tagore's concept of education in contemporary

times.International Referred Research Journal, 1(17), 107-108.

Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: Evidence

from four institutional case studies.The Journal of Higher Education, 73(6), 740-

763.

Tudor, I. (2003). Learner-centeredness as language education. New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Vacek, J. E. (2009). Using a conceptual approach with concept mapping to promote

critical thinking.Journal of Nursing Education, 48(1), 45-48.

Van der Zwet J. de la Croix A, de Jonge LP, Stalmeijer RE, Scherpbier AJ, Teunissen

PW.

(2014). The power of questions: a discourse analysis about doctor-student interaction.

Pub Med .48(8):806-19. doi: 10.1111/medu.12493

Van den Berg, H., Manstead, A. S., van der Pligt, J., &Wigboldus, D. H.

(2006).The impact of affective and cognitive focus on attitude formation.

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(3), 373-379.

Van Lier, L. (2001) “Constraints and Resources in Classroom Talk: Issues of Equality

and Symmetry.” In Candlin, C. and Mercer, N. (ed.) English Language Teaching

in its Social Context: A Reader. London and New York: Routledge. pp. 90-107

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological

processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

- 276 -

Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring Classroom Discourse: Language in action. Oxon:

Routledge

Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting information systems in organizations.USA: Wiley

Publications.

Walton, D. (2012). Using argumentation schemes for argument extraction: A bottom-

up method. International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural

Intelligence, 6, 33–61. doi:10.4018/jcini.20120 70103.

Wang, F.,&Hannafin, M. (2005).Design-based research and technology-enhanced

learning environments.Educational Technology Research and Development,

53(4), 5-23.

Warsi, J. (2004). Conditions under which English is taught in Pakistan: An applied

linguistic perspective. Sarid Journal, 1(1), 1-9.

Willett, J. B., & Singer, J. D. (1991). From whether to when: New methods for

studying student dropout and teacher attrition. Review of Educational Research,

61(4), 407-450.

Willingham, D. T. (2007).Critical thinking.American Educator, 31(3), 8-19.

Yin, R. K. (1989).Case study research (2nded.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Yin, Robert K. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, Thousand

Oaks, CA, , 3rd edition.

Yin, Robert K. (2004). The Case Study Anthology, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Younger, J. (1985). Practical approaches to clinical research: The case study.

Paediatric Nursing, 11, 177-179.

Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher Order Thinking Skills and Low Achieving

Students: Are They Mutually Exclusive? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12,

145-181.

- 277 -

Appendices Questioning Classroom Episodes

Appendix 1, Episode 1 (Discipline)

Table 1.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 T (Teacher introduced today's topic by welcoming students)

Today we are discussing lesson 1 "discipline"

1.2 T Dear students what do you know about discipline?

"Silence" no answer (students were bowing their head down and not

answered)

1.3 T Repeated the question

But students were smiling and seemed reluctant in answering

1.4 T Encouraging students by saying that you can share any idea what

you want

1.5 S2 Hun (thinking) ) and looking at her class fellows ,

I think teacher ,discipline is good thing

1.6 T How can you say it is good thing can you elaborate it?

1.7 S2 Huun I think it is …………(thinking but not answered)

Silence from the whole class

1.8 T Ok let me share an example with you if you come late in the school

what will happen?

(Murmuring and sharing with each other)

1.9 T Don’t you face any penalty of being late?

(Repeat question with different words)

1.10 S4 Hunnnn, I think we will be punished….

(after a pause she replied)

1.11 T Why do you come late in the school?

Silence ……

1.12 T Yes share any reason of being late in school? You can share any idea

without hesitation

(Motivated them)

No answer,

1.13 T Ok just imagine, what happens if your parents are not at home.

(Probed them with another question)

1.14 S2 teacher we will enjoy a lot"

(laughed the whole class)

1.15 T No I'm asking you what happens in your kitchen, in your drawing

room, will you keep everything maintained in the absence of your

- 278 -

parents

1.16 S3 No teacher we will destroy everything in kitchen, in our bed room

and in our drawing room.

(replied with embarrassment)

1.17 T So this is an example of indiscipline….you see how things become

messy without discipline

(she related the example with the concept of discipline)

1.18 T Do you have another example from your real life?

(Repeat the question to get students clarity)

(Whispering with each other, no answer)

1.19 T Ok tell me how many Gods are there in the universe?

(probed with another question after observing unclarity of students)

1.20 S8 We worship one God as we are Muslims and believe in one God

1.21 T Imagine if there is more than one God in the universe, what will

happen?

1.22 S2 No teacher there is only one God and it is impossible to have two

Gods

(replied with her religious thoughts)

1.23 T No I'm asking if there is more than one God, what happens.

(She insisted her question)

(Students looked busy in discussion with each other)

1.24 S1 teacher one God will send us in a heaven and the other will send us

in hell

(after some pause)

1.25 T Good , can you explain it in detail?

(No answer , students remained busy in talking with each other)

1.26 T Ok tell me what happens if there is no God in the universe?

(Teacher probed them with different angle)

1.27 S9 Teacher we will all the time sleep

1.28 T Could you elaborate your answer?

1.29 S9 Hum ,,,(thinking) I think…..

( could not elaborate or justify)

1.30 S1 Teacher if there is no God then we will do our work by ourselves

and will not take his help

1.31 T Do you think that we can do our work accurately without God?

1.32 S1 No teacher because God is always good

1.33 T Any other from you who can explain this question

(Silence ,no answer from students)

1.34 T Ok if there is no teacher in the class, what happens?

- 279 -

(Asked question with different angle)

1.35 S 9 (Excitedly) there will be a mess, everybody will make a noise

( laughing the whole class)

1.36 S3 If there is no teacher, one of us can be a teacher…

(laughed whole class)

1.37 S2 Yes in the last week when teacher was absent we did not study

anything but only enjoyed talk with each other

1.38 S6 Yes and in the next day , teacher punished us for not doing any study

in her absence

1.39 S7 Hunnn, I think teacher should not be on leave.

1.40 T Ok and what happens with the discipline of the class?

1.41 S7 Teacher then we will make a noise and there will be fighting among

students as if we do all this in teacher presence then we will be

punished

1.42 T Alright so now you can understand that if teacher is absent from

class then everybody is disturbed so now you can understand about

the presence of God that he will be absent from the universe then

what happens?

1.43 S2 Oh--------yes now i understand yes teacher if there is no God then

everybody will punish each other and snatch things from poor

people because rich people are very powerful

1.44 T No i asked what happens if both Gods say to worship them? Give

me any logic?

1.45 S1 Teacher i think we should worship one God only because we are

Muslims and we should not worship other God

1.46 S2 Yes teacher it is not fair to worship two Gods at a time but only we

should worship one God

1.47 T Ok if one God say will shower rain and the other stopped the rain in

hot summer what do you feel?

1.48 S2 Teacher i think there must be one God because two Gods will create

a big problem for all of us one will give us food and the other will

stop it so there will be one God

1.49 T So in the same way you understand the that if there are many Gods

then the discipline of the universe will be disturbed

1.50 S1 Yes teacher you are right if there will be one God then we will

follow the instructions and in one time there will be one event either

rain or sun and there will be no confusion

- 280 -

Appendix 2, Episode 2 (Shopping)

Table 2.1

No. Speaker Talk

2.1 Teacher (Teacher opened the course book and said, today we will discuss

grammar rules

She asked the question "Do you know the meaning of as white as."

silence (Students were murmuring with each other)

2.2 T After no reply from students teacher probe them with another

question

Ok did you see white colour?

Students nodded their heads yes…

2.3 T Ok then give examples of white colour items

2.4 S Um…My shirt is white

2.5 S My scarf is white

2.6 T You know that clothes have many other colours, Can you give

examples of those items that are always white and have no other

colour

(silence)

2.7 T Repeated question,

Students… you don’t have any relevant example of as white as-----

--------

(Again No answer ) (Students looked very passive and not showing

interest because of unclarity of the concept of discussion. mostly

were sitting with bowing heads and not even listening the teacher

question.)

2.8 S2 After some time silence (one of the students raised her hand,

teacher allowed her to answer)

Teacher I think I can give example of , as white as bread

2.9 S6 yes I enjoyed white bread daily(One student showed agreement

with S2 without understanding the question)

2.10 T Can you please give more examples from your daily life?

2.11 S3 Teacher I think….(students murmuring among each other ),not

answered

2.12 S4 Hunn…I don’t know about it because I have no other example

(said with embarrassment)

2.13 T Ok no problem, you can share any idea relating white colour , I

will appreciate your ideas, even if it is wrong ,(motivating

students)

- 281 -

2.14 S4 …. mmm … as white as " my shoes----

2.15 T OK, do you have only white colour shoes?

2.16 S4 No, I have many other colorful shoes red and black

2.17 T So , it means shoes cannot be always in white colour

2.18 S4 Yes teacher , you are right, but I don’t have another example,(

looking helpless)

2.19 T It's ok , asking other students, do you have any other example

from your daily life of as white as---

(Students were busy in discussion with each other) not answered

2.20 T (By observing student's confusion, initiated other question),

Look around your home, and share anything which is always

white?

2.21 S7 Um----I think water is white-----

2.22 T Do you think water has any colour?

Silence, students were smiling with embarrassment but not

answering

2.23 S1 Teacher , I have an example that water looks white

2.24 T How could you say that it is white?

2.25 S1 Because it looks white—

2.26 T Do you think that your white shirt and water has the same colour?

(Pointing at her shirt)

2.27 S1 (Looked at her shirt and smiled),

no teacher it is not the same,

2.28 T It means it is not the correct example?

2.29 S1 Yes teacher, (answered with bowing head)

2.30 T Ok , you can give examples from your kitchen, whatever you like

to eat or drink that can be always white,

(giving clue)

2.31 S2 Ummm , yes I drink milk daily and it always white---

2.32 S5 yes I saw in TV advertisement , the child was drinking chocolate

milk

2.33 T , milk is the right example of as white as----and chocolate is used

to flavor the milk ,

(make her clarity towards the term)

2.34 S6 (After teachers , appreciation, )

oh,,,,yes yogurt is always white,,,

2.35 S3 Yougart, milk and snow are always white

- 282 -

2.36 S3 Yes teacher I understand that these three are always white and

never change their colour

2.37 T Good example

2.38 T Now come out of your kitchen and give other examples from your

surroundings

Murmuring with each other, no answer

2.39 S3 Oh, I think lion is white,

(say excitedly)

2.40 T Did you never see lion in other colour?

2.41 S3 Yes I saw also brown lions but I like only white lions

2.42 T But it is not the example of as white as…..

2.43 T Ok why do you like lion? Why not other animals?

2.44 S3 Because it is the king of the jungle and he can kill anybody , he is

very power full

2.45 T So you think if he kills anybody, he is good animal?

2.46 S3 Yes , I don’t care if he kills anybody, he is the king of the jungle

so he has right to kill anybody

2.47 T So you think that if somebody is powerful, he should be allowed to

kill anybody?

Thinking but not answered

2.48 S2 (Nodded her head ) she is not rightly answering , nobody has right

to kill anybody without reason

- 283 -


Table 3.1

No Speaker Talk

6.1 T We are discussing today the remaining grammar concepts about the

topic "shopping"

(Introduced the topic)

6.2 T Do you know the meaning of many and much

S9 (Students discussing with each other ) Mahira looked around the

class, raised her hand but abruptly downed her hand, as she looked

confused in answering the question.

6.3 T Mahira do you want to say something?

6.4 S9 (Hunnn) (reluctant in answering)

teacher actually I , m not sure about the answer so I'm not interested

in answering and she again looked towards her class fellows for

some assistance

6.5 T (Encouraging her)

oh don’t be hesitant , we all will appreciate your answer , so share it

with us and don’t bother if it is wrong

6.6 S9 Smiled and said, teacher I think many means, a lot of things and what

much means, I don’t know?

6.7 T Ok fine, (motivating her)

You have given the perfect answer of many and we will explore the

answer of much from other students.

6.8 T Ok, I ,m providing you the list of items and you are supposed to

match them with many and much concept it will help you

understanding the concept of much and many

6.9 T Can you differentiate the items with many and much idea, if there are

some bananas and milk what would you use for the both?

6.10 S1 How many milk and how much bananas….

6.11 S3 (No teacher, she is wrong)

It is like how many oranges and how much milk as I bought milk and

oranges yesterday from the shop

6.12 S2 (At once Norin added her remark )

But teacher is asking about bananas not about oranges? So why are

you giving this wrong example?

(She looked at Mahira arrogantly)

6.13 S6 Yes bananas and oranges are two different fruits so how can we

count in a same way

(asked logical question)

- 284 -

6.14 S3 I think bananas and oranges both can be counted in numbers so we

can say how many oranges and how many bananas".

6.15 S2 yes (seemed satisfied)

we can also count any other fruits and vegetables as well

6.16 S7 It's like ,how much cherry and how many juice

6.17 T No we can use many for all measurable things that can be counted in

numbers and use much for quantity of things in number like how

much,

(intervened after observing their unclarity),




oh no you are giving wrong example how could we count yogurt and

how can use much for chair,( ha ha ha, laughing the whole class)



than me?


oh don’t fight with each other , yes S2 is right we can use many only

for those things that can be numbered and much for those things that

are in quantity like milk, yogurt ,and water


water



6.24 S8 "oh teacher"(excitedly)

I have another example that is how many lemons and how much its

juice „

6.25 S1 Oh, I love lemon juice, whenever my mom make it at home I drank it

whole and never shared with my younger sister

6.26 S9 But I always share my favourite items with my younger brother

because I love him

6.27 S1 No if I will share my toys with my sister , she should play with her

own toys

6.28 T No we should share our belongings with our siblings as they are so

young

(advised them)

6.29 T very good (encouraging her)

your examples are showing that you are clear about the difference of

many and much, now we will use can and cannot with different

examples, for example "Why birds fly and cannot swim?"

- 285 -

6.30 S3 (Because birds live in the air)

6.31 S5 No birds live on trees instead of living in the air….

(She contradicted with her)

6.32 T But question is that why do they not swim?

Silence, students discussing with each other

6.33 S4 I think , birds do not know swimming,,,

(laughed the whole class)

6.34 S7 I think because birds are not fish

6.35 T So do you think that fish can fly? Teacher counter questioned her

6.36 S1 No teacher fish cannot fly because it has no wings to fly,

(another student answered logically)

6.37 T Yes, true, it means birds have wings to fly so they don’t have

features like fish to swim in the water;

(teacher clarified the difference between fish and birds)

6.38 S4 Teacher if we have many money we can buy many birds

6.39 S5 No if we have many birds they will fly because they have wings

6.40 S1 Oh yes, and I see that crows can fly fast than sparrows

Excellent, teacher admired her

- 286 -


Table 4.1

No Speaker Talk

8.1 T We will discuss the importance of shopping today

(announced the topic)

8.2 T Did you go for shopping ever?

A half of class said" yes" in a chorus

8.3 T Oh, that’s good, teacher showed excitement and further asked,

What do you shop usually?

8.4 S2 We get our favourite food items such as juice, biscuit and chips

8.5 S3 Yes I love to get my favourite chips from the market

8.6 T

Ok can you tell me, Why do we shopping?

Students remained busy in murmuring,

8.7 S8 We do not do shopping but our parents do shopping

(after some wait time one student replied)

8.8 T Why do your parents do shopping?

8.9 S3 Our parents do shopping because they have money" One student

replied with smiling face

8.10 T So if you will be given some money, how will you spend money in

shopping?

8.11 S6 Yes teacher I will spend the whole money in buying my favourite

cake and biscuits.

(saying happily)

8.12 T You will spend whole money for yourself and will not spend on

your family?

Silence, discussion with smile with each other

8.13 S6 (Hunnn)I don’t know, I'm not interested in doing shopping for my

younger sister

8.14 T But if spent whole money now, then how could you do shopping for

some other items later?

8.15 S5 teacher I will think about to how I could get more money for

shopping

8.16 S8 (Hunnn), I'm not interested in doing shopping for my younger

sister


8.17 T Why don’t you want shopping for your family?

- 287 -


8.18 S9 I think I will buy the most important items with that money and will

not waste my money on useless things……………







8.25 S8 (Hunnn )I think….


8.26 T Yes anyone wants to share any idea of saving money in

shopping…..



8.27 T Where do you go usually for shopping and why?

(Probed with another question)

8.28 S9 We frequently go to Hyper star, a big store for shopping ,it has big

variety of all types of household like food, grocery , baking and

toys variety

8.29 T Don’t you think that all this variety is available at small stores

8.30 S9 No teacher good things only available at big stores

8.31 S2 No teacher (contradicts) we always shop from small stores all items

are available at cheap prices

8.32 T Then why do people shop from big stores

8.33 S1 Teacher, because things are beautiful there

8.34 S2 No teacher because people do not go for picnic any where

8.35 S6 No it depends on the item some items are good to buy from big

stores and some from small stores

8.36 T Ok let you assume if you have 300 rupees and you have to select

some toys, some grocery items and some bakery items, how could

you manage your money?

8.37 S1 I will buy rice for 200 rupees and juice for 150 rupees and will give

50 rupees to beggar

8.38 S2 I will buy juice for 50 rupees, chocolate 50 rupees,

And 100 rupees for video game

8.39 S3 And I will buy bread and butter for whole money and not interested

in getting more things for anyone.

- 288 -

8.40 T What will you do for 100 rupees that is left

8.41 S2 Hunnn(thinking) teacher I don’t know

8.42 S3 I will spend 100 rupees on noodles, 100 rupees for ice-cream and

100 rupees will take as my pocket money, (laughed the whole class)

8.43 S9 And I will spend 100 rupees for books, and 200 rupees for younger

brother toy

8.44 S1 I will get gift for 300 rupees for my grand pa

8.45 S9 I will buy my favorite doll house for the whole money, my mom

will buy gifts for my younger brother

8.46 T Did you ever do shopping from sale?

8.47 S2 My mom shop toys for us

8.48 T Do you think that sale items are durable?

8.49 S5 Teacher, we don’t need durability but we need cheap rate items

only.

8.50 S2 No teacher sale items are not durable, my mom bought one kurta

for me and it was torn after two days so sale items are not good…

(contradicted)

8.51 S1 No but we can get sale items on cheap rate so we should buy from

the sale market and should not care about quality (contradicted)

- 289 -

Appendix 5, Episode 10 (Cleanliness)

Table 5.1

No Speaker Talk

10.1 T She introduced the topic "cleanliness"

Do you know what cleanliness means?

10.2 S6 (Hunnn), when we clean our self ,it is cleanliness

10.3 T Do you think that only cleaning ourselves means cleanliness?

(Murmuring with each other)

10.4 S2 I think we should clean our school bags as well , it is also

cleanliness

10.5 T Yes , you are right, we should clean our all belongings

10.6 S4 Yes teacher we should not play in school ground as it make school

dirty…

10.7 S9 No we should play in the ground because these are made to play

but we should not spread trash there

10.8 T But grounds are built for play in school so how could you avoid

grounds

(Asked justification)

Students kept busy in discussion and not answered

10.9 T Imagine you are playing a football match in the ground and there

are wrappers and used bottles everywhere so how will you play?

No answer, students remained busy in discussion

10.10 S3 (Hunnn ), teacher, we will call a sweeper to clean the ground

10.11 T Is it not better to clean ground by your selves instead of a sweeper?

(Further probed)

10.12 S4 But teacher what will sweeper do if we clean grounds…..

10.13 T It is our responsibility to clean our school by ourselves instead

relying on sweepers

(She advised them)

10.14 S3 Yes teacher my mother told me that our prophet peace be upon him

like cleanliness very much….

10.15 T Ok let me know how could we clean our classroom, give some

examples?

10.16 S2 Teacher we should get out those children who make class rooms

dirty

10.17 S3 Yes teacher these children do not use dustbin

10.18 S5 We should throw toffee wrapper, used papers or any used item in to

- 290 -

dustbin instead of throwing on floor

10.19 S7 Yes and we should not chew gums to be clean….

10.20 S3 But chewing gum is not a dirty thing…

(Asked surprisingly)

10.21 S8 Oh yes, but we should not throw gums on floors it make rooms

dirty

(explained wisely)

(Yes you are right, whole class agreed)

10.22 T Ok and how could we clean our homes as well"

10.22 S9 We can clean our houses to throw trash in dustbin ..c

10.23 S6 And we should help our mother in kitchen…

10.24 T But how helping mothers related with cleanliness?

10.25 S6 because she will work properly

10.26 S4 No teacher we should help our mother in cleansing home….

10.27 S3 we should take care of our mother in cleansing washrooms as well

as she becomes tired of doing every task

10.28 S1 But she is our mother so she can do all work for us….

10.29 S8 No we should help our mother in every task as we love our mother

10.30 T Ok then let me know how could we clean our country clean?

No answer, busy in talk with each other

10.31 S1 Hunn, I think we should not make our streets dirty …

No sweepers clean our streets

10.32 S5 We should not spit on streets…

10.33 S8 We should throw our trash in dustbins and should not make our

streets dirty

10.34 S2 We should not throw dirty bottles and papers in our grounds and

play area but put in dustbins R

- 291 -

Appendix 6, Episode 12 (Grand, pa's garden)

Table 6.1

No Speaker Talk

12.1 T Why do we make gardens in our homes?

12.2 S5 Teacher we make gardens to grow plants and flowers because

flowers look beautiful

12.3 S3 Yes we also make gardens to get shadow of tress

12.4 T What are the benefits of gardens?

12.5 S1 Trees make garden

12.6 S4 No teacher(contradict) trees gives us greenery and shadow to

protect from sun

12.7 S2 Flowers also provide us fragrance and beauty

12.8 T What we get from greenery to protect our environment?

12.9 S2 Oh yes teacher greenery gives us oxygen that protect our

environment

12.10 S1 Oh teacher flowers are used as food of any bird

(raised hand excitedly)

12.11 T How can we use flowers for our food as well?

12.12 S8 We can use flowers in our vegetables

12.13 T Did you ever eat flowers in vegetables?

12.14 S8 no teacher I never eat it

(Looked embarrassed)

12.15 S6 Flowers cannot be used as human food but it is actually the food

of birds and animals

12.16 T What do you know about sun flower?

12.17 S1 It is a yellow flower

12.18 T Do you know why does it change its direction with sun?

12.19 S2 It changes its direction with sun to protect its petals from sun

12.20 S4 No teacher (contradicts) it changes its direction as the sun rises

and sun sets

12.21 T How sunflower is used in our food?

12.22 S2 We used sun flower oil that is made from sun flower

12.23 S4 Yes teacher I read from my book that we also used its seeds in our

medicines

12.24 T Ok let me know the uses of trees?

12.25 S7 Teacher long trees are good and small are not good

- 292 -

12.26 T Why long tree are good and small trees are not good?

12.27 S7 Because long trees gives big shadow and small trees don’t give big

shadow

12.28 S6 No teacher (contradicts) all trees give us oxygen and shadow

12.29 T Why should we not sit under trees at night?

12.30 S2 Because there are ghosts at night (laughing the whole class)

12.31 S1 No teacher it is not true there are no ghosts but actually trees

produce carbon dioxide gas at night that is dangerous for our

health

12.32 T Why trees are important in bringing rain?

12.33 S5 No rain does not come because of trees but it comes from sky

12.34 S3 Yes when rain comes we can stand under trees

12.35 S4 when there are a lot of trees then they will catch rain from sky

12.36 T Why rain comes in hilly areas more than our city?

12.37 S9 Teacher because hills catch rain quickly

12.38 S3 Because these hills have a lot of trees those brings rain in hilly

areas

12.39 T How did we take care of our gardens?

12.40 S2 Yes teacher my mother and grandpa take care of it by growing

new plants and flowers

12.41 T How can you help your parents and grandparents in taking care of

their garden?

12.42 S1 we can help them by giving water to plants and taking care of

flowers

12.43 S4 We can also help them by removing unwanted grass and weeds

12.44 T Why weeds are pulled out from trees?

12.45 S8 Because they develops snakes under earth

12.46 S3 No because weeds are harmful for our plants

Ok How can we make our garden more beautiful?

12.47 T teacher we can make our garden more beautiful by growing

different and new colours of flowers

12.48 T How can we earn money through flowers?

12.49 S2 no teacher flowers give us smell but do not give us money

12.50 S4 No teacher (contradict) we can get money by selling flowers and

trees

12.51 T Did you ever buy flowers from shop for presenting gift to your

friend

- 293 -

12.52 S2 Yes teacher I bought flowers from flower shop and presented to

my friend on her birthday

12.53 S1 Yes teacher my father once get flowers from the shop for a funeral

of his friend

12.54 S5 And I saw one ant was eating flowers..

12.55 S7 Hunnn, but aunts do not eat flowers, what are you saying?

(Very surprisingly)

12.56 S5 I saw her pulling flower to her tunnels...

12.57 S7 Oh flower may be some sweet taste so she was bringing it to her

home..

12.58 S5 Yes it may be like that

12.59 S2 We should kill aunts because they spoil our food

12.60 S4 No we should not kill any insect as God does not like it

12.61 S3 Yes we should take care of animals and insects as killing them is a

sinful act

- 294 -

Appendix 7, Episode 14 (Earth Day)

Table 7.1

No Speaker Talk

14.1 T Do you know the name of the planet on which we live?

14.2 S3 Teacher we live on ground planet

14.3 S4 No we live on earth

14.4 S2 Yes teacher we live on earth and earth is a planet

14.5 T How many other planets in our solar system?

14.6 S1 I think 5 more plants

14.7 T No there are 9 planets in our solar system

14.8 T Do you know the difference of earth with other planets?

No answer

14.9 S6 (hummm) earth is big than other planets….

14.10 S2 I read from my social studies book that earth has water and

oxygen and other planets have not………

14.11 T Good answer , yes only life is possible on earth because of water

and oxygen

14.12 T Ok tell me how we are destroying our earth?


14.13 S8 Hunnn, teacher we are throwing used dirty material on earth that

is spoiling our earth

14.14 S6 And pollution is also destroying our earth…..

14.15 S1 Yes I watched a documentary in which they told about poisonous

smoke produced by factory creating problem for earth….

14.16 S1 Oh yes teacher I read from newspaper that it is called pollution

14.17 T How pollution effect our environment?

14.18 S2 Pollution make our whole environment and earth dirty by

spreading different diseases among people…………….

14.19 S9 Yes my social studies teacher told us that pollution creates more

hot weather

14.20 S5 Yes because of pollution we have to face health problems

14.21 T How should we care about our environment?

14.22 S2 If we clean our environment then we can save our environment

14.23 S4 Yes teacher if we do not throw garbage everywhere then we can

save environment

- 295 -

14.24 T How can we save our school environment?

14.25 S1 Teacher we should not disturb our friends then we can save our

environment

14.26 S2 Yes teacher if we do not disturb our teachers that will save school

environment

14.27 T I mean how can we clean our school environment?

14.28 S5 Oh yes teacher if we clean our class rooms from garbage ,our

school will look clean

14.29 S9 Yes teacher if do not throw trash in school grounds it will make

school clean

14.30 S3 Oh yes teacher ( excitedly) by cleaning our classrooms and whole

school we can save our environment

14.31 T We clean our houses and throw our garbage in the streets; do you

think it is fair with others?

14.32 S1 No teacher we should not throw our garbage in the streets because

it will disturb all those who lives or pass through the street

14.33 S2 But if will throw trash in the streets then sweepers will clean it

why should we do the work

14.34 T No this is not correct, it is our duty to clean our environment it is

not only the duty of sweepers.

14.35 T We observed many people who throw trash from their cars on the

roads, does it seem fair?

14.36 S4 No teacher it is because it can cause accidents and may creates

problems for the passerby.

14.37 T Ok let me know how can we save our country environment?

14.38 S8 when we will stand our cars in a queue that will save our

environment

14.39 T How it will save environment?

14.40 S8 When people will not fight with each other for right parking it

will save our country environment

14.41 S3 when we do not pluck flowers from ground that will save our

environment

14.42 S4 By not littering everywhere will save our country environment

14.43 S1 We should place our trash in dustbin in our homes, school, shops,

parks and everywhere that will clean and save our country

environment

14.44 T Do you know what earth day is?

14.45 S2 A day on earth

14.46 S1 No teacher it is environment safety day

14.47 T How do you know that?

- 296 -

14.48 S1 I read it from my book that when we celebrate environment safety

day that is called earth day

14.49 T Ok how can we celebrate that safety day or earth day?

14.50 S6 By celebrating parties

14.51 S2 No teacher (contradicting) by cleaning our homes and schools

14.52 S5 Yes teacher we should go in the streets that day and cleans our

streets by removing trash from streets in such a way we celebrate

that earth day

14.53 S1 But teacher if we clean our streets than what sweepers will do?

They will take rest then

14.54 S4 Yes it means to clean our earth from trash and garbage

14.55 S3 We should clean our homes by ourselves on earth day in such

way we can celebrate that day

- 297 -

Appendix 8, Episode 16 (My Country)

Table 8.1

No Speaker Talk

16.1 T Do you know the meaning of Pakistan"?

16.2 S2 Yes it means pure land

(the whole class said at once)

16.3 T Ok and what was the purpose of making the country Pakistan

Silence , no answer from students

16.4 T Before patrician of our country in indo Pak which nation was in

majority ?


16.5 S6 oh yes teacher, Hindus were living with Muslims and Hindus are

enemies of Muslims

16.6 T How could you say that Hindus are our enemies,

16.7 S6 I have seen an Indian movie in which a Hindu Villon tortured

Muslims badly.

(student shared evidence from media source)

16.8 S2 Yes teacher, I also read from my social study book, that Hindus

tortured Muslims that’s why Pakistan came as separate home land

for Muslims

16.9 T Ok good, so you mean to say that Pakistan came into being

because of bad conduct of Hindus?

16.10 S6 Yes teacher they are not our friends I have seen in many Indian

movies

16.11 T Do you have the other reasons for making Pakistan a separate

home land?

(Students did not answer at the moment and teacher provided

them wait time)

(Nobody appeared with any answer but kept busy in discussion)

Teacher gave them 1 mint wait time to think, but they could not

justify the whole concept

16.12 T Do you know why did we get separate homeland?

(Probed another question)

16.13 S5 Hunnn, because Muslims were not allowed to eat eatables….

16.14 S2 No because Hindus were very cruel to them….

(No any other answer comes from students, teacher intervened)

16.15 T Ok listen, Muslims and Hindus were different in their religion

- 298 -

,customs and rituals so we think of separate home land where we

practice our religion

(teacher explained after observing their unclarity)

16.16 T Ok now tell me about our natural resources of our country?

16.17 S 1 Teacher we have 4 rivers from which we get water for our

crops…

16.18 S5 We have animals…ir

16.19 T Do you think animals are natural resources?

16.20 S5 Hunnnn, I think…

16.21 T Yes you are right, animals are our natural resources

16.22 S5 No teacher I read from my social science book that land, rivers

are our natural resources…..

(Contradicted )

16.23 S2 Teacher , food is our natural resources

16.24 T Yes land ,water, soil and animals are natural resources

16.25 T How could we protect our natural resources?

16.26 S2 We should not send animals outside grazing …

16.27 T No we are talking that how can we protect our land, soil and

animals.

16.28 S3 Teacher if we water properly to land and soil then we can save

our resources

16.29 S9 Yes teacher if we take care of our resources then our resources

will be increased.

16.30 S4 We should not destroy our resources as all human; animals need

these resources for their life….

16.31 S7 but animals are for our use so we should use animals fully…

16.32 T No we should not overloaded our animals but we should take care

of them properly

16.33 S2 Yes teacher my uncle has a pet dog , he takes care of his dog and

his dog protect his home

- 299 -

Episode 18, (My Country)

Table 8.2

No Speaker Talk

18.1 T We will continue the previous lesson 'my country"

18.2 T How many provinces are in our country?

18.3 S4 Four

18.3 S5 (No , disagreed ) , teacher now we have 5 provinces , we have a

new province "Gilgit Baltistan"

18.4 S8 Oh yes , you are right, a new province is added recently

18.5 T Do you know about people of Gilgit Baltistaan?

18.6 S8 Yes teacher , I heard from friend who visited gilgat that people of

ilgit that are white and red in complexion

18.7 S4 Oh yes they are beautiful I saw them in T.V documentry

(Excitedly saying)

18.8 T Why they have white complexion?

18.9 S9 Because they drink milk…….

18.10 S3 No teacher because they live in cool places

18.11 S4 Yes teacher because there is no hot weather and they enjoy cold

weather so they are white

18.12 T Yes you are right , weather is one reason for their complexion but

what other reasons make them different from other province

people?

18.13 S2 Teacher , my uncle lives in Gilgit, and he told me that those

people live in mountains are different from those who live in

other provinces

18.14 T How they are different from other people?

(probed them)

18.15 S9 They eat corn and nuts

18.16 S10 We also eat corn and nuts but we are not white as they are?

(she challenged S9)

18.17 S9 But they always eat nuts so they are different….

18.18 S1 They eat nuts because they want to protect themselves from cold

18.19 S2 Yes you are right, they eat nuts to protect themselves from cold

18.20 T Yes , they eat nuts to provide energy to their bodies to work well

(she encouraged them for their responses)

18.21 T Ok do you know the difference of professions in different

provinces and of our country?

- 300 -

18.22 S7 Hunnn, northern areas people do transport business and in Punjab

province people do land plough and other business

18.23 S5 In northern area , people are poor so they beg for them that is very

bad

18.24 S 2 No we should not give them money even if they are old or poor

18.25 S9 But we should help poor and needy people as they cannot earn

money for them

18.26 S8 Yes we should help them , in reward God will help us

18.27 S1 Yes , we should help needy people but not beggars….

18.28 S1 Yes because God does not like beggars

18.29 S8 Hunnnn , I agree with you

18.30 S7 Yes , we should punish beggars

18.31 T No we should discourage beggars but should not punish them

18.32 S7 Yes teacher you are right, we should be kind with them

- 301 -

Appendix 9, Episode 20 (Aeroplane)

Table 9.1

No Speaker Talk

20.1 T Today we are discussing the lesson "Aeroplane"

20.2 T Did you ever travel in plane?

No teacher, whole class said

20.3 T Ok do you know the name of our national airline?

20.4 S5 It is aero plane line…..

(The whole class busy in discussion with each other)

20.5 T Its name is Pakistan international airline

20.6 T Why do we travel through airplane instead of cars and buses?

20.7 S4 because aero planes are big than bus and cars….

20.8 S6 No because we get yummy food in the plane….

(The rest of the class busy in discussion)

20.9 S7 No teacher, aero planes are speedier than cars and we can reach at

our places quickly by travelling through aero planes

20.10 T do you agree with the answer shared by her"

(She asked from the whole class)

Yes teacher she is right

20.11 T Ok then tell me why aero plane can fly and cars and buses cannot

fly?

20.12 S1 Because aero plane are made to fly and cars are made to run on

roads.

20.13 S8 No teacher aero plane can fly because they have wings and cars

have not.

20.14 S3 Because the machinery of aero plane is different from the car's

machinery

20.15 T Ok do you know the difference of fares between aero plane and

cars?

20.16 S2 Teacher aero plane is big than cars so its fare is more than cars

20.17 S9 No teacher my father travelled through aeroplane for Germany,

he told me that air fare is much more than car fare because it

travels with high speed….

20.18 S8 Yes teacher, my uncle went to Saudi Arabia through plane and he

paid 2 lakhs…..

20.19 S1 But my father went to Karachi thorough train and he thinks it is

- 302 -

better than plan

20.20 T Ok fine you shared the difference of fares accurately; now tell me

if you know the difference of passenger and warship planes?

20.21 S2 Yes teacher war planes are used in wars and passenger plane are

used for common people…..

20.22 S5 Yes teacher and war planes are smaller in size than passenger

plane

20.23 S3 And teacher in war planes only 2 or 4 people can sit but in a

passenger plane 300 people can sit…

20.24 T Ok now tell me the difference of travel between plane and ship?

20.25 S9 Teacher, there is difference of amount of time between them,

planes can cover distance with fast speed than a car..

20.26 T Ok , if you get one ticket of plane and you find your friend sick

and needs to travel by plane and she could, not afford traveling

expenses, so what you will decide either will u go or give tickets

to your friend to travel?

20.27 S6 No teacher, I will not lose the opportunity to go through the

plane.

20.28 S1 No teacher I will give the amount to needy person as God will b

pleased..

20.29 S8 Yes we should always take care of needy people first…

20.30 T Yes we should not think only for ourselves but also think for poor

and needy people

20.31 S5 I always help poor people with my pocket money

- 303 -

Appendix 10, Episode 22 (Safety Rules)

Table 10.1

No Speaker Talk

22.1 T Do you know how to cross the road?

22.2 S3 Yes we should cross the road with elders

22.3 S2 Teacher we should cross the road very carefully and don’t see

here and there

22.4 S4 we must see around and if there is one way traffic then we should

wait for the red signal to cross the road

22.5 S5 we should not cross the road with old people

22.6 T Ok if do not cross the road carefully then what happens?

22.7 S5 we may get an accident

22.8 S3 We should cross the road quickly then we can save ourselves

from accidents

22.9 S2 No teacher (contradicts) we should not cross the road quickly

because it may cause accidents as cars are coming with high

speed

22.10 T Why signals are placed on roads?

22.11 S6 They are placed because they give light at night to help people

cross the road

22.12 S1 No teacher(contradicts) signals are in three different colours and

red signals are for cars, orange is for bus and green is for

motorcycles

22.13 S8 No teacher (contradicts) I go in a car with my father and he told

me that green signal is to go, red means to stop and orange means

to wait or start

22.14 S6 No my brother says that if we are in a emergency then we should

go through crossing the signal

22.15 T Why do people ignore signals?

22.16 S9 Teacher because they don’t like signals (laughing the whole

class)

22.17 S2 No teacher (contradicts) because they want to reach their home

hurriedly so they ignore signals

22.18 T Do you think we should reach our homes by breaking the traffic

rules?

22.19 S2 No teacher it is not fair to break the rules and made others in

trouble for our selves

22.20 T Why zebra crossings are made for?

- 304 -

22.21 S10 It is made for animals to cross the road

22.22 S2 No teacher (contradicts) it is also made for human to cross the

roads who are walking on the road

22.23 T Ok if we do not use zebra crossings then what happens?

22.24 S3 If we are in a car we don’t need to cross the zebra crossing

22.25 S4 No teacher (contradicts) if we don’t care of zebra crossing we

may get an accident

22.26 S2 Yes and traffic uncle will may punish us

22.27 S6 No they don’t punish children

22.28 T Do you think that traffic rules are only for elders and not for

children

22.29 S2 Teacher, I think traffic rules are only for elders because they drive

cars and children do not drive any vehicle

22.30 T And what rules children have to follow on roads?

22.31 S2 They should not run on the roads

22.32 S3 They should not cross the road alone

22.33 S6 Teacher, they should cross the road through the bridge over the

road

22.34 T What is the purpose of bridge?

22.35 S7 Bridge are made for motor cycles

22.36 S8 No teacher (contradict) bridge are made for old people only as

they cant cross the roads

22.37 S1 Bridges are made for animals protection as the will get an

accident if they go through roads

22.38 T No it is not true bridges are made only for humans safety , there

are side roads for animals crossing

22.39 T Ok what safety measures we should follow at homes?

22.40 S1 Teacher we should wear good clothes

22.41 S4 Hunn , how can good clothes safe us?

22.42 S1 Hunnn, we look good in good clothes that make us attractive and

safe

22.43 S4 No I don’t think so because clothes only can be used as safety if

there is dengue fever then we should wear proper clothes to safe

ourselves from dengue mosqueto

22.44 S9 Yes we can save ourselves by following our parents instructions

22.45 S7 What instructions we can follow at home?

22.46 S9 Hunnn, we should not play with knives and other dangerous

utensils

- 305 -

22.47 S10 Oh yes and we should not eat medicines without our parents

instruction as medicines can be poisonous

22.48 S1 Yes and we should not touch electricity equipments as their

current will kill us

22.49 S11 I always ask my brother to fix electricity problems as he will face

the currant I will not

(telling in funny mood)

22.50 T No we should not make anybody in trouble

22.51 S7 Water should be used to clean our floors..

22.52 S5 Yes teacher once my hand burnt when I touched hot cattle

suddenly and I did not follow my mother's instruction so I got

hurt so we should always follow what our parents say

22.53 S8 And teacher we should not touch bathroom cleaning items like

finale, surf and some other material because it can kill us

22.54 S2 Oh yes teacher (excitedly) we should not get close to mosquito

spray as well as it is very dangerous for our health

22.55 S9 Yes teacher once my cousin drinks mosquito spray and he fainted

and after a long time he recovered so we should always avoid

these things

22.56 S2 And we should not touch lizard and fly spray also

- 306 -

Appendix 11, Episode 24 (Sun Travels)

Table 11.1

No Speaker Talk

24.1 T Do you know where does the sun rise and where does sun set?

24.2 S3 Yes teacher sun rise on the sky

24.3 S1 No teacher is asking another question (addressing the s3)

yes teacher the sun rise in the east and sets in the west as I read it

from my history book

24.4 T ok tell me what will happen if there is no sun?

24.5 S9 Teacher then darkness will be there and we cannot see any thing

24.6 S2 Yes teacher and there will be cold everywhere and we will die with

cold if there is no sun

24.7 S5 And teacher we will not b able to go to the school because of

darkness we will enjoy long holidays (laughing the whole class)

24.8 T Do you think that sun rise in the same time for all countries

24.9 S1 Yes teacher God has created sun to go every country

24.10 S5 No (Contradict) sun appears with different timings in different

countries as my uncle lives in Germany and there sun comes after 4

hours later than us

24.11 T What is the reason of sun appearance with different timings in

different countries?

24.12 S6 Yes teacher as every country has different timings so sun comes in

every country with these different timings

24.13 T Ok tell me where does sun goes at night?

24.14 S1 It goes under the sky to take a rest and comes in the morning

24.15 S9 No teacher (contradict) sun has no need of rest but God ordered sun

to come in the morning and moon will come in the evening

24.16 T why do sun does not come at night and moon in the morning?

24.17 S4 Because their timings are different

24.18 S7 No teacher (contradict)sun gives us light and heat as we need it for

doing our daily work and moon gives cool light at night when we

are sleeping

24.19 S10 Yes teacher we don’t need heat at night so moon comes in the night

24.20 T How is sun beneficial for plants?

24.21 S2 Teacher it helps plants and crops to grow well

24.22 S8 Plants look more green because of sun light

24.23 T What are disadvantages of sun?

24.24 S2 Teacher we get bored if daily sun comes

- 307 -

24.25 S7 No teacher we do not get bored of sun but we should avoid sun in

hot summer as we can get heat stroke

24.26 S9 Oh yes teacher my younger brother in last summer becomes very

weak because of heat stroke

24.27 S7 Yes and sun can also spoil plants

24.28 S10 And teacher it can kill animals in summer because of its high heat

24.29 S5 with high heat of sun we cannot study

24.30 T ok in summer if your mother ask you to help her in the kitchen ,

will you do that?

24.31 S1 No teacher I can't do work in hot summer

24.32 S4 Yes teacher we cannot help our mother in summer because we can

get heat stroke

24.33 S4 yes teacher I will help my mother as she is preparing food for us

24.34 S8 Yes we help our mother in setting dining table as she works alone

so we should help her

24.35 T In many countries sun does not come for several months ,why?

24.36 S5 Because there is rain

24.37 S1 No teacher because sun travels to different countries and may be it

will be available in another country

24.38 S2 No teacher (contradict) because some countries are very cold and

there is snow everywhere so sun does not come there as my father

lives in America and he told me this fact

24.39 T Why our northern areas like Swat, Naran and kaghan are considered

cold areas?

24.40 S7 Because teacher there is many snow every where

24.41 S2 No teacher (contradict) because they are located on height and on

mountains as well so they are cold

24.42 T why are northern people look white and red in complexion?

24.43 S1 Because they eat apples and apricots

24.44 S12 No teacher because they eat fish

24.45 S6 No teacher because they walk very fast

24.46 S9 No teacher (contradict ) because they live on mountains and

there is snow on mountains so there is no hot weather so they

becomes red and white people

- 308 -


Table 12.1

No Speaker Talk

26.1 T Can you give the same sound words of snow

26.2 S9 Cow

26.3 S2 Go

26.4 S7 No its bow

26.5 S2 No its row

26.6 S3 Oh teacher (very excitedly) its crow (laughing the whole class

26.7 S8 Teacher its grow

26.8 T There are two similar words like well and it has two different

meaning can you give meanings of the both?

26.9 S12 Yes teacher well means fine

26.10 S2 Yes teacher the other well means well where from we get water

26.11 T There are matching words in two given list in your book so let me

answer of snow gives------------

26.12 S3 Gives us cold

26.13 T Sun gives-----------

26.14 S9 Sun gives us heat

26.15 S3 Sun is not good it makes us ill in summer with its high heat

26.15 T Milk has-----------

26.16 S5 Yogurt

26.17 S7 No teacher it has calcium

26.18 S8 Cow's milk is not good

26.19 T How could you say that her milk is not good

26.20 S13 I read from one story book that buffalo milk is good

26.21 T You should read from authentic book rather than from story book.

(she suggested her the way)

26.22 T Ok can you tell me the meaning of energy?

26.22 S13 It means when we have energy then we can do every thing

26.23 T Can you use it in your sentence?

26.24 S9 Yes teacher meat gives us energy to fight against diseases

26.25 T Tell me what the words have common like, bus, car, and train?

26.26 S3 Teacher all these three are used as transport

26.27 S4 Car runs fast than bus…

- 309 -

26.28 T And what difference they all have

26.29 S1 Teacher bus is big than car and train is big from car and bus

26.30 T Ok again let me what is common in dogs, cats and birds?

26.31 S2 Teacher dogs are dogs they are dangerous and cats and birds are

less dangerous

26.32 S8 All are animals

26.33 S7 No teacher (contradict) cats and dogs are animals abut birds are

not animals so they don’t have anything common among

26.34 S9 Teacher they all eat food

26.35 S8 No teacher (contradict) they all do not eat the same food dogs and

cats eat meat but birds do not eat meat

26.36 S3 Oh no teacher I observed that crow and eagles eat meat I think

they have one thing common that they all have four legs

26.37 S3 Crows should be killed because they always tease other small birds

26.38 S9 No we should not kill any animal because they are innocent

creature

Yes you are very true (agreed whole class)

26.39 T And what is common in pencil, pen and crayon?

26.40 S1 All are used for writing purpose

26.31 S8 No teacher crayon are used for colouring only but not for writing

26.42 S9 No teacher (contradict) sometimes we can write with crayon when

we do not have pen or pencils.

26.43 T And what is common in Dolphin, shark and whale?

26.44 S2 they all are good fish

26.45 S5 No teacher (contradict) they all are fish

26.46 S9 And they all eat small fish

- 310 -


Table 13.1

No Speaker Talk

28.1 T Can you make cycle as a compound word

28..2 S1 It is my brother's cycle

28.3 S3 Teacher it is my cycle

28.4 S7 It can be your cycle

28.5 S5 Oh I know the answer(very excitedly) its bicycle I read it from

English book

28.6 S8 Wonderful tell me when we destroy our plastic bottles and

28.7 S6 Then again make some other items from this material what we

28.8 S6 Call the process?

28.9 S2 New bottles

28.10 S9 But it is not a process teacher

(replied with confusion)

28.10 S3 No teacher it is called recycle I read it from my book

28.11 S8 Oh yes teacher it now can be used to complete the word cycle

28.12 T Ok the other sentence is lion is a --------------animal

28.13 S2 Lion is a dangerous animal

28.14 S5 Lion is a beautiful animal

28.15 S1 The other sentence is "sparrow" is a ----------bird

28.16 T Sparrow is a small bird

28.17 S11 Sparrow is a innocent bird

28.18 S3 Crow is----------bird

28.19 S7 Crow is a dirty bird because he always tease small birds

28.20 S6 Crow is a naughty bird as he snatched food from other birds

28.21 T Fox skin is used for------------

28.22 S1 Fox skin is used for eating

28.23 S8 No teacher it is wrong but its skin is used for shoe making I saw it

in T.V documentary

28.24 S2 Oh yes I have also seen such documentary , its skin is used for

bag making and shoe making both

(excitedly agreed with her)

28.25 S2 And its skin is used to make leather jackets as well

28.26 T How do you know that?

- 311 -

28.27 S6 (Turned her face to Nida)

I read it from my science book

28.28 T Do you know many people kill fox only to get her skin?

28.29 S2 "Oh"…. very bad , people are very cruel , we should take care of

innocent animals

(saying sadly)

28.30 S3 But animals are not good they can harm us so we should kill them

28.31 S8 no (nodded her head) I disagree with you,

we should not kill animals for our own purpose, it is really bad

28.32 S9 Oh…Teacher , my mom told me that people use other animals

skin such as camel, sheep and cow for making bags and shoes by

killing them, it is very bad

(sharing sadly)

28.33 S2 I think we use dead animals skin for different purpose but we

should not kill animals for getting their skin

28.34 S5 And teacher our holy prophet also loved animals and disliked

those people who hurt animals

(Quoted from religious thoughts)

28.35 S3 Teacher , dog is a faithful animal , I like dogs

28.36 S1 No dog is a bad animal , it can bite anybody,,,,,,,,,,,,,

28.37 T But we are not discussing the dog

( the whole class agreed)

28.38 T Now give me examples of as slow as

28.39 S2 Yes teacher it is as slow as Zarina

(Pointing out her class fellow, laughing the whole class ) because

she does her work very slowly

28.40 S3 Oh no teacher the right example is as slow as tortoise

28.41 S7 Yes another example is as slow as ant

28.42 S4 And what can be used as fast as--------

28.43 S10 As fast as I can run

28.44 S11 As fast as deer runs

28.45 T Yes these are accurate examples of as slow as and as fast as

- 312 -

Appendix 14, 30 (Pollution)

Table 14.1

No Speaker Talk

30.1 T Do you know what pollution is?

30.1 S1 Pollution is not good (un)

(said at once)

30.2 S2 Huuu, No pollution is in our homes

(contradicted with her) un

30.3 T No, I m asking you the meaning of pollution?

(intervened)

(students looked busy in discussion)

30.4 S5 Hunnn , I think garbage is called pollution,

(After a while she replied) c

30.5 S1 Hummm ,yes, If we throw garbage everywhere in our streets and

grounds it will create pollution

(agreed with her confidently) R

30.6 S3 Oh yes , and when we throw our home trash in the streets , it will

cause pollution

(Sara shared her answer very excitedly) R

30.7 S6 Hummm, and animals also pollute our environment with their

garbage (R)

( Said with mocking face)

30.8 T Yes, you are right; these are some factors that responsible for

increasing pollution in our environment. (She endorsed them and

asked relevant question)

30.9 T Do you know about different types of pollution?

(Students kept busy in discussion) teacher gave them a few

seconds wait time to think)

30.10 S6 Teacher there are many types of pollution such as environmental

pollution and air pollution , I read it from my social studies book

(She provided evidence very confidently) A

30.11 T Ok then what is earth or environmental pollution?

30.12 S7 Hummm, teacher as already Salma discussed about street

garbage , this is an example of earth pollution (A)

(She connected her example with the above answer)

30.13 S9 Oh yes , teacher I read from newspaper that it is called pollution

(Nodding her head) (A)

- 313 -

30.14 S1 I think when we throw garbage in our school it creates pollution

as I have read it from my social studies book (A)

30.15 S9 Yes and when we throw papers and chips wrappers everywhere

it creates pollution (A)

(Agreed with S1)

30.16 T Yes you are correct, and what about is air pollution?

(She encouraged and connected another question with previous

question)

30.17 S5 Hnnnn , I think birds create air pollution….un

30.18 S1 Hummm how could birds create air pollution?

(she cross questioned her surprisingly)

30.19 S1 (Raised hand excitedly)

No teacher, cars and buses produce poisonous smoke that pollute

air (c)

30.20 S5 Yes (agreed with s1) ,and this poisonous smoke pollute the

whole environment (L)

30.21 T Good example you shared (she applause her for her logical

explanation) do you know other reasons?

30.22 S6 Oh, there is another reason for making air and environment

polluted , many factories and mills produce poisonous smoke that

is very harmful for all living beings (L)

(said excitedly)

Yes teacher she is very much true

(All students showed agreement with her)

30.23 T Ok good, you all shared valuable information; now tell me about

some information of water pollution?

30.24 S5 When people throw their garbage in the water that makes it dirty

as I have seen many people throwing their garbage in canals. (A)

(Shared her personal experience)

30.25 S8 Oh you are right once I went for a picnic and I saw many people

were throwing their left over in the water (A)

(Shared her experience)

30.26 T Oh you are true,

(motivating her)

30.27 S4 Teacher we should not throw our garbage in the water because it

can be harmful for animals

(Fair-mindedly and worriedly saying) F

30.28` S3 Yes fish can die because of dirty water

(Giving logic with example) F

30.29 T Ok you are right, let me know what other sources can pollute

- 314 -

water?

Students remained busy in discussion with each other for a few

seconds

30.30 S6 Hummm, I think fish and other sea animals such as crocodile

also pollute water when they produce their dirty wastage.(IL)

After some wait time , Mahira said

Laughed the whole class and murmuring with displacement

feeling with mocking faces, (hunnnn)

30.31 S9 water is their home so how could they pollute it,

She further asked her"?

30.32 S6 So you tell me then where they go for their toilet purpose?

(She cross questioned her in return).

30.33 S9 (Hummm) I think crocodile comes out the water for toilet and

after getting free they go to water,

(After thinking and with some confusion she replied). (IA)

30.34 S6 (Ha ha, laughed) and what about fish, where they go, if they go

outside water, they will die

(she asked her logically but in sarcastic tone)

(The whole class was looking busy in thinking and enjoying the

talk of both students)

30.35 T Ok to some extent these animals do make water polluted but

there are some other factors that pollute water do you know

about it?

(Intervened when observed their unclarity of the idea)

Students again kept busy in discussion with each other)

30.36 S1 Oh yes I have seen in a TV documentary that ships and boats

polluted water by throwing their petrol and garbage in the water

(A)

(After discussion with her fellows she answered enthuasitically)

(All students clapped for her answer , showing their agreement )

30.37 T Ok now let me know the ways to protect our environment?

(whole class busy in discussion and murmuring with each other)

30.38 S8 (after some discussion many students raised their hands, teacher

allowed them one by one to answer)

we can prevent our environment by not throwing trash on roads,

streets or on public places (c)

30.39 S3 we should not burn wastage in open places to control air

pollution(c)

30.40 S8 We should not litter on roads (C)

- 315 -

30.41 S3 We should always place garbage in dustbins (C)

(students shared multiple responses)

30.42 T Do you think that your school environment can protect whole

environment?

30.43 S4 Yes teacher if do not throw trash in school grounds it will make

school clean and it will protect the environment (L)

30.44 S1 Oh yes teacher ( excitedly) by cleaning our classrooms and

whole school we can save our environment (L)

30.45 T We clean our houses and throw our garbage in the streets; do you

think it is fair with others?

30.46 S2 No teacher we should not throw our garbage in the streets

because it will disturb all those who lives or pass through the

street (f)

30.47 S1 We observed many people who throw trash from their cars on the

roads, it is not fair to make our country's environment dirty (f)

30.48 T Ok you see that school and home environment both can clean

and destroy our environment, now let me know how can we save

our country environment?

30.49 S2 Teacher if we will clean our houses and will not spread trash all

around it will protect our environment (L)

30.50 S5 No teacher, I think we can make our country clean by keeping

all dirty items in dustbin as I have seen in one documentary "how

to clean Environment" A

30.51 S5 Yes teacher if we all follow the rules then environment can be

saved (IR)

30.52 T How rules can safe our environment?

(Students busy in conversation with each other)

30.53 S1 Hunnnn, I don’t know (uc)

(looked embarrassed)

30.54 S4 Teacher I have seen near our house that smoke of factories

creating more pollution so we should place factories out of city

(A)

30.55 S2 (Oh another thing comes in my mind, excitedly shared her idea)

Teacher buffalos and cows farms in the cities also create mess on

the roads and throughout the city , so we should shift their farms

out of city to safe our environment (R)

30.56 T Wonderful idea , yes animals also make our environment

polluted, we should make proper arrangements for them

(she encouraged student happily)

- 316 -

Appendices Role play Classroom Episodes

Appendix 15, Episode 1 (Respect for Feelings)

Table 15.1

No Speaker Talk

1 Kalsoom Do you know amber I'm the best player of the school and no

one can compete me

(Hummm, take a pause ,she was hesitant to share her answer)

1.1 Kalsoom Did you hear what I said?

(when no answer comes from her side)

1.2 Amber Yes but Hooria is also a good player

(Hummm, talks in a low voice )

1.3 Kalsoom Oh no (sarcastically) she is a bulky bomb how can she be a

good player

Amber (Again thinking but not answering)

1.4 Kalsoom Helo, why did you take Hooria's name as a best player

(Asking her angrily, when she did not reply)

1.5 Amber It is very bad to say such bad words for her ,you know she will

be hurt if she knows your comment

(answered again with very low voice)

1.6 Kalsoom (Could you speak up nobody can hear you)

1.7 Kalsoom Oh (proudly saying) I dame care about it if someone minds it

1.8 Kalsoom I, m the best and beautiful girl of the class (very proudly

saying)

1.9 Amber Addressing the class , girls you are doing voting today for the

best player who will represent the school

1.10 Amber (counts the votes by class) she announced that students

selected Hooria as best player who will represent the school

1.11 All children congratulated Hooria

1.12 Kalsoom (Looks angry) oh! I can't believed they chose Hooria,

everybody knows that I'm the best player

1.13 Amber Being the best player and being the best representative from

this school are two different things.

1.14 Kalsoom What do you mean?

1.15 Amber Well Kalsoom, you never showed respect for others

- 317 -

1.16 Kalsoom Hun (thinking)

1.17 Amber What I mean is that you don’t talk with others in a nice way

1.18 Kalsoom But I was actually trying to help them in game

1.19 Amber But when you say "Hooria is a bulky bomb or "stupid" these

words hurt others feelings

1.20 Kalsoom Ok and if they are not playing right game what should I call

them

1.21 Amber You should ask them firstly if they need your help and then

guide them politely

1.22 Kalsoom Ok I get it

1.23 Amber And you always remember that respect always means to be

polite and considerate with others it never means to make fun

of others if they are doing wrong moves in a game or in other

life situations

1.24 Kalsoom Ok I ,m sorry for my act I will never repeat it and will always

respect others

1.25 Amber Good and remember if you respect others then you will be

respected as well

1.26 Kalsoom Ok thank you very much amber you are my real friend who

guides me in the right direction

Table 15.2, (Debriefing questions)

No Speaker Talk

1 T Do you understand what respect means?

1.1 S3 Hunnn, it means to make you happy….

1.2 T How could you relate happiness to respect?

1.3 S1 Teacher, I think if u r happy it means we respect you

1.4 T Do you agree with Salma's justification of respect?

(Asked from whole class)

Whole class was busy in discussion

1.5 S3 Teacher, we should not disrespect our teachers…

1.6 T Yes we should respect our teachers but I, m asking you the

meaning of respect that you learnt today from the role play?

(she insisted on the question)

1.7 S6 Teacher I think we should take care of others means respect

(After some discussion, Mahira replied)

1.8 T Good and what does respect for feelings mean?

1.9 S4 We should become good friends …

- 318 -

1.10 S9 Hummmm, yes if we are good friends we will respect each

other….

1.11 S7 No teacher it means to take care of feelings of others..c

1.12 S8 Yes I saw a T.V drama in which one friend presents a gift to

her friend on saying sorry

1.13 S1 Yes teacher as we observed in a role that we should not calling

others with bad names…

1.14 S4 But I think we can call our friends with any name I saw a

movie in which children used many names for their friends….

1.15 S8 Oh yes , respect also means to do work of our elders and do

not show reluctance to follow them

1.16 T Can you give me examples of respect you show at school and

at home?

1.17 S4 Teacher ,we should listen carefully our teachers talk and to

follow these instructions …

1.18 S6 Yes teacher I agree with Slama and we should also listen to

our parents as well while they provide instructions about any

task …

1.19 S1 Oh, I also want to share one thing that we should always ask

people before touching things that belong to them because if

these things are stolen or damaged we will be punished…

(excitedly sharing)

1.20 S8 But if we take things without permission and do not damage

them then I think it will not hurt others…..

1.21 S7 I need to share another thing that we should not hurt others

with harsh words ….

1.22 S9 Yes teacher ,I saw many girls making fun of others by saying,

"moti, cow, goose etc, we should not making fun of other's

physique…..

1.23 S4 But teacher I think if somebody call me with bad name , I will

also call her with bad name….

(Marium replied angrily)

1.24 S1 Yes teacher we should fight with her …

(agreed without thinking)

1.25 S7 You are right mahira, we should not forgive anybody who bad

manners to us…..

(Looked annoyed)

1.26 S2 Hum,(take a pause) no I think , we should call people by their

real names instead of bad names….

(contradicted with her)

1.27 T Ok good discussion you all did yes you are right we should not

- 319 -

hurt people by insulting them and tolerate their bad manners as

well (she advised them)

Ok can you give more examples from your class room of

respect or disrespect…

1.28 S3 Yes teacher it is very bad, when we are whispering with each

other instead of listening to teacher …

1.29 S2 I talked with my friend in a class when she asked me a

question…

1.30 S10 It is not respect when we take sharpeners and erasers of our

class fellows without permission …

1.31 T Any other example you have?

(When no more answer comes from students, she intervened)

1.32 T Would you like to share any other information about the topic

"respect for feelings"

1.33 S3 Yes teacher it means to respect others opinions

1.34 S9 Hummm, But we should not listen nonsense talk of others….

1.34 T No we should listen to others and if they are wrong correct

them politely

(advised her gently)

1.35 T And what will happen If do not care of others feelings

1.36 S9 Teacher I watched a cartoon in which one kid get gifts for

stealing things……

1.37 S3 No teacher if we steal anything then God will punish us…

1.38 T No stealing is always bad and we should not take anything

without other's permission

1.39 S5 Yes we will face bad results and people will not like us as we

see in today's role play activity that Kalsoom was rejected by

her class fellows for not respecting others ….

- 320 -

Appendix 16, Episode 3 (Respect for difference)

Table 16.1

No Speaker Talk

1 Amjad Who is that?

1.2 Ali Is he boy or girl, I can't figure out

1.3 Amjad He looked like a boy but he has very long hair

1.4 Ali Sarcastically smiled) oh!

look his hair are pinned up too like girls

1.5 Amjad And what he is holding in his hand

1.6 Ali Oh! It looks so ugly

1.7 Amjad Hey Ali look at him, hey I'm jatgar

1.8 Faheem Why are you making fun of jatgar?

1.9 Amjad Look at his weird long hair that make him funny and besides he

does not know about our talking

1.10 Faheem No he knows English

1.11 Amjad But he can't hear me what we are talking

1.12 Faheem No he is understanding by your facial expressions that you are

making fun of him

1.13 Ali Yes she is right because he looks very upset

1.14 Faheem And how would you feel if somebody makes fun of you

1.15 Amjad Yes it will be embarrassing for me

1.16 Faheem Hey Jatgar why did you get so long hair?

1.17 Jatgar In our religion boys don’t cut their hair that why I wore my

long hair

1.18 Amja Oh I'm really sorry I don’t know that fact

1.19 Ali Yes we sorry for our talk that made you upset

1.20 Faheem Yes it showed that we always welcome differences of others by

having exact knowledge about it and never made fun of others

1.21 T So you saw that making fun of others does not show respect to

others

(Whole class said yes teacher we understand the meaning of

respect for differences)

- 321 -

Table 16.2 (Debriefing Questions)

No Speaker Talk

3.1 T What did you learn from today's role play activity?

3.2 S2 Hunnn ,we learned that one should not look funny like Jatgar

3.1 T What will be your response towards a new comer in the

class?

3.2 S1 Teacher, if he looks funny we will make fun of her.

3.3 S2 You have also very weird hair ,,so should we laugh at you

(Talked sarcastically)

3.4 S1 No ,

(Looked embarrassed )

3.5 T And if she looks physically different (i.e. short heighted, very

tall or weird voice) from other girls then, how will you

respond to her?

3.6 S3 Yes teacher, most of us will laugh and make fun of her

3.7 T Do you think it is fair to deal with such person who looks

different from others?

3.8 S7 No teacher (disagree) it is not a good way to treat such a

person but we all don’t do this but a few of us make a fun of

these persons

3.9 T Suppose someone made fun of you. How would you feel?

3.10 S2 Teacher we feel really bad as once I made different hair style

and everybody laughs at me, I felt ashamed at the time….

3.11 T So if you feel bad then others will also feel bad

3.12 S3 Yes teacher we should not make fun of anybody

3.13 T A different person can be from any other city or country and

he may look different by dressing or talking so we should

accept her with these differences

3.14 S4 Yes teacher one of my friend is from another province

(Balochistan) she has very different accent , I always

appreciate her

3.15 T Yes of course if you will respect her differences then she will

respect you more

3.16 T What are some ways to show respect to people who are

different from you?

3.17 S8 We should accept their difference by accepting them as our

class fellows or as our relatives if they are

3.18 S7 Yes teacher we should not tease them for their differences as

well

3.19 S10 Yes , if will not respect people in return they will not respect

- 322 -

us

3.20 S7 But if we respect these funny people , they will not accept us

3.21 S13 Nobody is funny in the world , we should not mock each

other

3.22 T So what do you understand about respect for differences

3.23 It means we should accept difference of others respectfully

3.24 I think respect for differences means respect for any funny,

guilty or weird person because they look different in any case

3.25 T God dislikes those who make fun of others and will punish

them for their disrespectful behavior

(Advised them )

3.26 S10 Yes teacher my mother showed me once a boy always make

fun of people who cannot walk or talk properly, once he

became himself deaf in a road accident

3.27 S2 yes teacher I have very good friend from another Sikh

religion, we never criticize each other for belonging two

different religions

3.28 S11 Yes God gives punishment to those who make fun of others

(agreed with her)

3.29 S13 Yes and my brother killed one dog who bite people

3.30 T No we are talking about that we should accept others

opinions and other differences in their personalities

respectfully

(Yes teacher, the whole class said with a loud voice )

- 323 -

Appendix 17, Episode 5 (Self-respect)

Table 17.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 Salma Hi Zaini !look at this red piano, it looked very pretty

1.2 Zaini Oh yes, it is but it is expensive , do you have enough money

to buy it

1.3 Salma No I have not

1.4 Zaini Then how would you get it

1.5 Salma I will hide it

1.6 Zaini But it would be stealing

1.7 Salma Don’t you worry , this is a big store, if one piano is missing

then no will bother it (she picked piano and hide under her

clothes) and both went back to their house

1.8 Salma (Thinking) oh! What I did today is it right thing, should I steal

that piano, if my mother's knows that she will be very angry

1.9 Reema (Another friend) hi Salma , how are you ? You are looking

upset what happens to you?

1.10 Salma Hunn (looking confused)

I want to share one thing with you

1.11 Reema Yes sure

1.12 Salma I did one thing wrong yesterday that I stole one piano from

store and now I feel very bad because stealing is not a good

habit and I did not do before that

1.13 Reema Yes no doubt, stealing is a bad habit , but the good thing is

that you are feeling in a right way

1.14 Salma I think we should go to the store and return the piano

1.15 Reema Yes we must do that

1.16 Salma (Entered in the store)

sir I'm really sorry (talked with embarrassment)

I stole that piano yesterday but I feel ashamed and apologies

for my mistake that I committed

1.17 Store

manager

Oh! Lovely I appreciate your thinking that you feel bad ,ok I

forgive and warned you to be careful for the next time

1.18 Salma Yes sir surely

1.19 Reema Now you feel very proud in yourself that you did right thing

today

1.20 Salma Yes I feel proud that I protected myself respect

- 324 -


No Speaker Talk

5.1 T What did you learn from today's activity

(No answer, Kept busy in discussion)

5.2 S7 Hunnn, teacher I think we should not steal anything from any

where

5.3 S9 No we should feel ashamed on our doing and should not

repeat it in future

5.4 S8 No in the play , Salma felt ashamed of stealing

5.5 S1 Yes , once I went to a big store and I picked one Pac of biscuit

but forget payment, I felt so upset so i went there in the next

morning and paid money

5.6 S8 Yes my brother also ate chocolate from the store and forget

money

5.7 S5 If he ate chocolate what did he feel like?

5.8 S8 He said I brought only one chocolate from a big store so they

will not bother it

5.9 S5 But he should feel guilty about his act , as it is unfair to steal

anything either a small or big in size

5.10 S10 It is true if we will take care of others belongings , they will

respect us in return

5.11 S2 Yes because if we will take care of others belonging they will

take care of us in return

5.12 T So what self respect means?

5.13 S14 Teacher it means when we feel guilty on wrong doing we

should accept it as Salma felt guilty and she did right act to

return the piano

5.14 S6 I think when we feel embarrassed on our wrong doing that is

called self respect when we are caring ourselves

5.15 S1 Yes once I took eraser from my friend's bag and I returned it

back to her after using , she did not mind it

5.16 S11 But it is bad habit , as we always take anything with

permission and say sorry if we take anything without

permission

T Yes you are right , we should always ask people before taking

their belongings and if you take mistakenly then accept your

mistakes open heartedly, that is called self respect

Yes teacher (whole class said in a loud voice)

- 325 -

Appendix 18, Episode 7 (Respect for Rules)

Table 18.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 Rabia Feel how smooth this horse is. I can’t believe it’s over 100

years old.

1.2 Maryam you’re not supposed to touch

1.3 Rabia But nobody is watching me so I will touch and see how it

feels like

1.4 Maryam (hunnnn)

(forget her dialogue)

1.5 Rabia Should I touch it?

(Rabia asked Maryam in a low voice)

1.6 Maryam (Looked confused) (she forgets her dialogue)

1.7 Rabia Maryam , if I touch this horse ,would I bear any punishment?

1.8 Maryam Oh yes you will face the consequences

(she remembers her dialogue)

1.9 Rabia (see here and there) and touched the horse, suddenly horse

fell on the floor with a horrible voice

1.10 Rabia Oh no (looking upset) what to do now

1.11 Maryam You will face a punishment

1.12 Guide (comes in) oh what happened here , I heard a weird sound

1.13 Rabia I'm extremely sorry , the horse is broken mistakenly

1.14 Guide Mistakenly (looking angry) but why did you touch it

1.15 Rabia I'm sorry for that

1.16 Guide No (nodded his head) you will pay fine or will stay in my

office whole day alone

1.17 Rabia Oh no please forgive me I will not repeat it again

1.18 Guide But I already warned you and you violate the rules so you

must be punished

1.19 Rabia (looking very embarrassed and upset)sir I have not enough

money to pay fine

1.20 Guide Then you will spend whole day in my office

1.21 Rabia Ok sir (and she stayed whole day in his office without getting

any food)

- 326 -


No Speaker Talk

7.1 T What did you learn from the role play activity?

7.2 S2 I don’t understand why rules are important for us?

7.3 S3 Yes teacher we don’t need rules all the time as we want to

enjoy our life...

7.4 S8 But if we will not follow school rules we will be late from

school and will be punished..

7.5 T But you see in the play that if you will not follow the rules

you will suffer

(explained them politely)

7.6 S7 But rules should not be for children,

7.7 T Ok imagine if you play a game without rules what will

happen?

7.8 S6 Oh,,,yes teacher we will fight with each other….

7.9 S5 You are right and nobody will be disciplined…

(Agreed with her)

7.10 S2 Oh yes , rules makes us disciplined

7.11 S9 And we do all our tasks in time…..

7.12 S8 Yes once we played a table tennis match without following

rules and everybody became disturbed and confused

7.13 S3 Yes I also read from my social studies book that without

rules nobody can win any game

7.14 S9 But I saw a wrestling in which wrestler were not following

the rules but people were enjoying….

7.15 T What are the advantages of rules?

7.16 S2 Yes teacher rules are good ------

7.17 T What do you mean by good rules

7.18 S2 Teacher we come in time at school then we will not be

fined..

7.19 S1 Yes I agree with her ,as if we follow the school rules then

we will not be punished …

7.20 T Why it is important to follow rules

7.21 S7 Teacher because rules makes us punctual and regular.

7.22 S9 Yes , we can finish our task on time if we follow rules …

7.23 T Ok and what happens when we broke rules?

7.24 S2 Teacher we will be punished for example if the school rule

is not to pluck flowers then we should not do that….

- 327 -

7.25 S5 It is unfair to touch library book without librarian

permission….

7.26 S4 We should not throw wrappers in the garden and class

rooms, it will make our school dirty…

7.27 S2 Yes we should take care of our school as our home…..

7.28 S1 But if there are no dustbin we will throw wrappers on

flours…

7.29 T But it will make your school dirty; do you like a dirty

school?

(No answer, students were murmuring with each other….)

7.30 S1 Hummm, I think we should always throw dirty stuff in to

dustbins..

(after some wait time she replied reluctantly)

7.31 T How do you feel when you are asked to follow the rules by

your elders?

7.32 S6 But I like rules for others but not for my sake…

(Said with smile)

7.33 T Then it is selfishness not fairness, we should always respect

rules for ourselves and for others.

7.34 S1 Yes teacher we feel always good when we stand in a queue

and follow the school rules…

7.35 S3 Teacher sometimes we don’t like rules because we want to

play for the long time in the school but we get only 15

minutes break…

7.36 T But it is for your betterment if you waste your time in play

then your studies will be suffered

7.37 S10 Yes teacher if we will not follow the rules then everybody

will be disturbed.

- 328 -

Appendix 19, Episode 9 (Telling a lie)

Table 19.1

No Speaker Talk

(teacher was writing on the board)

1.1 Sara Oh teacher Mahak hit me on head with a pencil, ( Mehak was

sitting behind Sara).

(Crying )

1.2 T What happened ?

1.3 Sara Teacher Mehak hit my head with her pencil, when you were

writing on the board

(Complained against Mehak)

1.4 T Mehak, did you hit Salma?

1.5 Mehak No teacher, I did not do that but Lubna hit Salma

(she pointed out Salma, who was sitting with her)

1.6 Lubna No teacher , she is telling a lie, I saw her hitting Salma

(arrogantly said)

1.7 T Mehak what is reality?

1.8 Mehak Teacher Lubna is telling a lie, I was busy in writing , I did

not hit Salma

(denied Lubna's claim)

1.9 T I will complaint to your parents about your lie

(angrily said)

1.10 Mehak Oh ,no teacher please don’t tell to my parents , I ,m sorry

yes I hit Salma,

(admitted with embarrassment)

1.11 T Why did you hit Salma ?

(Asked Mehak)

1.12 Mehak Actually she hit me in break time so I hit her now

1.13 T It is very bad act you did today

1.14 Mehak I, m extremely sorry for that..I promise I will not repeat it in

future

1.15 T Liar is not accepted in any society , people hate liars so we

should always speak the truth

(Advised them)

1.16 Mehak Salma, im really sorry for my act

Salma Ok Mehak it is alright

(shake hands)

(Whole class clapped)

- 329 -

Appendix 20, Episode 9 (Telling a lie) (Role play 2 group 2)

Table 20.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 T Why did you wear such an expensive watch in a school,

don’t you know it is not allowed in school premises".

1.2 Sana My mum allowed me today to wear this watch.

1.3 T ok I heard your mother voice outside, she was talking with

school manager for your fees, I call her to explain about your

watch

1.4 Sana oh no teacher please don’t tell my mum about my watch, she

will kill me by knowing that I, m wearing the watch

1.5 T So you were telling lie with me

(angrily asked)

1.6 Sana Yes

(bowing head)

1.7 T Telling a lie is really a bad habit, people will never trust on

liars and never make them friends

1.8 Sana I, m extremely sorry for that , miss I will be careful in future

Table 20.2 (Debriefing questions)

No Speaker Talk

9.1 T What did you learn from today's two roles

9.2 S3 We should not hit anybody

9.3 S4 We should always follow rules of school as our teacher told

us about rules

9.4 S9 We should not behave like Salma and Sana because they are

not good girls

9.5 S10 No teacher we should not tell a lie to any person it is bad

habit that we learn from today's both role play activities

9.6 S11 We always be ashamed when someone prove us liars

9.7 S2 Yes I read from my Islamiyat book that our prophet (peace

be upon him ) really hate liars

9.8 S1 My brother always tells a lie and never caught by anyone

9.9 S3 I always speak the truth because my mother always gives me

gifts

9.10 S2 I tell a lie sometimes to get my younger sisters chocolate

- 330 -

9.11 S11 I do not tell a lie because fear of God as he will punish liars

9.12 S 13 I never cheat my friends in any game

9.13 S 14 I always speak the truth in front of my parents because they

feel hurt because of my lying

9.14 S7 I lied to my younger brother to get his food

9.15 T No in any case we should speak the truth and never try to tell

a lie to people

9.16 S8 Yes teacher you are right because once I lied to my mother's

illness and she got ill after some time really

9.17 T Yes you are right God punish those who always tell a lie

(Yes teacher you are right we will never tell a lie in future)

- 331 -

Appendix 21, Episode 11 (Telling a lies)

Table 21.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 T Students, I asked you all to complete your stories last night

and bring your copies with you, did you do it?

(Whole class said yes except Salma who was sitting quietly

with bowing head.)

1.2 T Salma , show me your copy, did you finish your work?.

1.3 Salma Yes teacher I completed my work but I forget my copy in

school bus".

(Looking embarrassed)

1.4 T But why did you behave carelessly, I told you all yesterday

to bring your work today, teacher angrily scolded her

1.5 Meena Teacher, she is telling a lie, she did not finish her work so

did not bring her copy,

(Meena , another student shared with teacher)

1.6 T How did you know that, teacher asked Meena in a

response?

1.7 Meena She told me yesterday on phone that she could not finish

her work, Meena replied to teacher.

1.8 Salma No teacher, Meena is not right, I forget my copy in the bus,

Ok I will call bus driver now to inquire about your copy,

(teacher spoke angrily)

1.9 Salma Oh no teacher please don’t call them, I will let you know

the truth, (Slama became nervous at once)

1.10 Salma Teacher , I ,m sorry I was watching T.V late night so I

could not complete my homework

(looked embarrassed)

1.11 T It is really bad, I will not trust on you in future

(scolded her)

1.12 Salma Please forgive me , I will not repeat it again

(Apologized )

1.13 T Ok , you know telling a lie always make you in trouble ,

people will not trust you ever

(advised all students)

- 332 -

Appendix 22, Episode 11 (Role play scenario 2)

Table 22.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 Sehar You know my father yesterday got a prize of bravery from

the president of our country"

(Sehar said very proudly)

1.2 Nida Oh wonderful, your father is very brave"

( Noor looked impressed by her story).

1.3 Noor Ok what act your father did for which he is awarded a

prize?

1.4 Noor He saved one little girl from stormy sea when we were on

holidays in summer, now he is hero,

(again showed pride for her father)

1.5 Noor Hunn , oh is it true that your father rescued that girl by

fighting with a dangerous shark"?

(She suspiciously asked her)

1.6 Sehar Yes, it is true , my father jumped on shark and killed it with

his sharp knife when it was ready to attack on girl,

(She boasted of her father bravery).

1.7 Kiran But we did not hear any new or see picture of your father

with this incident in media,

(Kiran asked with doubt)

1.8 Sehar My father does not like show off, he does not want to

advertise his bravery,

(Sehar said rudely)

1.9 Kiran What is your father profession

1.10 Sehar He is a rescue officer; he travels around the country and

saves life of needy people

(she explained confidently)

1.11 Kiran Once my mother told me about your father that he is

property agent as he sold us our house and charged too

much" (Kiran exposed Sehar's lie)

1.12 Sehar No he was in the past a property agent but now he is a

rescue officer and saves life of needy people,

(Sehar defended her claim)

1.13 Noor No you are telling a lie, he is not a rescue officer, could you

show us a picture of your father with president receiving his

award?

(Noor showed her doubt)

- 333 -

(Now Salma looked embarrassed as she has not any proof

of it)

1.14 Noor It's really bad Sehar, you should not tell a such big lie about

your father,

1.15 Sehar I'm really sorry , I promised to not tell a lie again


No Speaker Talk

11.1 T What did you learn from the activity?

11.2 S9 Teacher , telling a lie is not good habit

11.3 S2 I always speak the truth because trutful people will go to

heaven

11.4 S9 Once I broke the glass and I lied with my mother to escape

from her punishment so we should sometimes tell a lie

11.5 S8 No we should not tell a lie in any case because our Prophet

(peace be upon him) hate liars

11.6 S11 I don’t understand then what should we say if we get in

trouble

11.7 S1 One of my friend stole a doll from the shop and she did not

tell anybody about it , she now plays with that doll..

11.8 S12 My brother was suspended from his school for telling a lie

about sharing wrong information of his family

11.9 S3 Why does he not like truth?

11.10 S12 Because he always tell a lie while playing chess with his

friends and always he lost the game because of his bluff and

nobody likes his lies

11.11 T So you see people dislike liars and like truth

11.12 S5 Yes teacher, we should always speak the truth and never tell

a lie

(Whole class agreed with her)

11.13 S9 Yes teacher we should not cheat others for our benefit

11.14 S13 But if someone cheat us we should also cheat her , why

should we tolerate her

(saying with mocking face)

11.15 S4 no it is not fair to cheat anybody without any reason as it

hurts others badly

I read in my Islamiat book that liars will not be entered in

heaven

11.16 T No students we should advise everyone to speak the truth

because God punish those who tell a lie or cheat each other

(advised whole class)

- 334 -

Appendix 23, Episode 13 (Friendship)

Table 23.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 Mediator Who will take initiative to share about the incident?

(Asked both baby bear and Goldilocks)

1.2 Baby

bear

I will let you know the story

1.3 Baby

bear

Goldie locks and I had been good friends for last many years

and she frequently visited my house

(started story)

1.4 Baby

bear

A few days back she broke into my house, eaten all food and

broke my favourite chair that my grand pa gifted me

1.5 Goldie

locks

No I did not break into his house, I went there as usal visit.

Yes it is true that I ate porridge as it smells yummy but I'm his

friend so how could he blame me for all that

(Said surprisingly).

1.6 Baby

bear

But it does not mean to come in my house, when no one was

preset at home, he replied angrily

1.7 Mediator if Goldilocks is your friend and you allowed her to come at

your home freely then how could you blame her.

1.8 Baby

bear

yes it is true, she is allowed to come freely but she should not

break my favourite chair

1.9 Goldie

locks

Oh sorry I did not know the importance of your chair as I

assumed it a toy chair to play.

1.10 Mediator Baby bear , forgive Goldie as she has mistakenly broke your

chair

1.11 Baby

bear

Ok I forgave her

(after listening her sorry)

1.12 Mediator We should forgive our friend's mistakes because friends are

very precious

1.13 Baby

bear

Ok Goldie sorry for taking you wrong

1.14 Goldie Oh, no problem,

Both hand shake their hands

- 335 -


No Speaker Talk

13.1 T Ok what did you learn from today's activity?

13.2 S2 We learn that baby bear and Goldie Locks are good friends

13.3 S4 No teacher we learnt that we should take care of our friends

13.4 S9 We also learn that we should not say bad our friends because

they love us

13.5 S8 Yes once my friend did not come on my birthday because she

was ill so I did not mind it

13.6 S7 Yes teacher I always remember my friend's birthday and I take

care of that day because she take my care

13.7 S13 But if my friend will not come on my birthday I will not give

her gift on her birthday

13.8 S6 I read from Islamiyat book that our Prophet (P.B.H) likes

sharing of gifts among each other to strengthen love among

friends

13.9 S12 My friend says you are very good

13.10 S4 Once my friend needs money to pay her fees ,I helped her from

my pocket money

- 336 -

Appendix 24, Episode 15 (Friendship)

Table 24.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 T I m giving you one project to work on and after two

weeks you will submit me , I will reward a gift to best

one

ok miss , we will do in time

(whole class said)

1.2 T This is your new class fellow Shumaila, she migrated

in our school. she is high achiever and I hope she will

win the project reward

Zainab " hum, I don’t care what people will think about my act

but I , will win the prize at any cost"

Zainab On the day of project presentation ,she came up with a

wicked plan in the class

1.3 T Did you all bring your projects?

Yes teacher we brought our projects

(whole class said)

1.4 T Ok then show me your projects

(In the meanwhile Shumaila went out the class for

washroom)

(Zainab blotted her project with ink)

(Teacher was checking their projects)

1.5 T Shumaila , what u did , it is so dirty work,

(Angrily asked about her blotted pages)

1.6 Shumaila Oh no teacher , I did not blotted it

(became very upset)

1.7 T Ok if you did not do that then who has done it?

1.8 Shumaila I don’t know teacher

(with very low voice)

1.9 T oh , what a dirty work you presented, you will be

awarded with D grade

(asked her to leave the class)

1.20 T Zainab has done wonderful work and the prize will go

to her

Zainab (Looked very happy)

(Whole class murmuring)

(All is done by Zainab)

- 337 -

Zainab went to her home and got high fever,

nobody went to ask her only Shumaila went there

1.21 Zainab (felt ashamed)

Oh ,Shumaila, thank you for coming, I,m sorry I

blotted your project today so I got fever , it is God

punishment, please forgive me for my act

1.22 Shumaila Ok , no problem, you felt guilty so I forgive you

(both shake their hands)


No Speaker Talk

15.1 T What did you learn today from the play?

15.2 S3 Hunnn, I think Shumaila should blot Zainab work

15.3 S2 No , we should not spoil others work, it is sinful act

15.4 S8 We learn that we should not always think about ourselves but

should think about others will

15.5 S9 Yes once my friend broke my precious pen , I did not ask her

for a new pen or take any revenge

15.6 S10 Class fellows are not good they usually tease us as they are not

our friends

15.7 S6 No we are friends but we should not hurt each other because in

the way we will be hurt in future

15.8 S11 But if we hurt we should not make more relations with them

15.9 S4 One of my best friend take my English copy and when she

returned it was torn, I asked her about , she said she was in

hospital and my copy has been misplaced , I said sont you

worry I will ask you again about my copy

15.9 T No we should tolerate each other's acts and try to forgive

others

Ok teacher we will take care of our friends

(said whole class)

- 338 -

Appendix 25, Episode 17 (Peer pressure)

Table 25.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 Sara Look that girl, how funny she looks

(making fun of a paralyzed girl who was sitting on wheel

chair) three of them were making fun of them and the other two

were initially observant after some time they also involved in

the activity)

1.1 Sara Oh look bulky bomb is going

(Pointed out one bulky teacher)

1.2 Meena Oh look how ugly she looks

(Haha, laughed all friends)

1.3 Rabia She walks like this

(acted like her teacher, hahaha ,again all friends laughed)

Norin Hunnn, ha ha ha

(said nothing but laughed)

Entered in the class room, oh teacher is not there

(three of them marked their previous attendance when actually

they were absent, one did not mark his attendance but served as

observant

1.4 T Opened the register

Who made these changes in attendance,

( asked angrily)

(Silence, no one answered)

T I will give penalty of 500 rupees to the whole class

1.5 Raffia Mam Sara group did all this, I have seen them marking

attendance

1.6 T Stand up all of you, did you do all this

1.7 Sara Yes teacher ,

(Bowing head)

1.8 T Ok ay you all four are expelled from the school for your wrong

doing

1.9 Norin But teacher I did not mark attendance so please don’t expel me

(requesting her)

1.20 T Yes I know but you are their friends you did not stop them

for wrong doing , so you will be expelled with them

- 339 -


No Speaker Talk

17.1 T Did you observe how friends affect your personalities?

17.2 S9 Yes teacher , but we love our friends

17.3 S7 Yes teacher we are forced by our friends to do every act so

we are compelled to do

17.4 S5 But if we have good friends then we will not involve in any

kind of wrong doing and will do right acts

17.5 S8 Yes I agree friends affect us rightly or wrongly

17.6 S11 Once my friend asked me to steal chips from canteen just for

a fun and I caught by canteen girl while stealing chips, she

fined me 200 rupees

17.7 S10 Yes I kicked my friend for not sharing with me

17.8 T We are discussing peer pressure not asking you about your

fight

17.9 S6 Yes teacher once my friend asked me to bring lunch from

another class fellow's bag, I did it and our class fellow

remained hungry because of us

17.10 S2 Teacher we should not join those friends groups who tease

others or hurt people, God does not like those people who

tease others

17.11 S9 Once my friends asked me to bring cheating mateial in exam,

we all caught by the teacher and our paper was cancelled

17.12 S1 Bad friends always forced us to do wrong acts butwhen

we do they disappeared from the scene left us alone to face

the consequences

17.13 T Yes we should be very careful in choosing friends because

bad company spoils good people as well

Yes teacher we agree with you

(Said whole class)

- 340 -

Appendix 26, Episode 19 (Cheating)

Table 26.1

No Speaker Talk

(Whole class was busy in doing final papers)

1.1 Sara Help me Zara, give me the cheating paper,

(asked in very low voice)

1.2 Zara Wait , teacher is around

(said slowly)

1.3 Sara Hurry up, we have very limited time

(again said with low voice)

(Zara exchanged cheating paper with Sara but unluckily

teacher caught them red handedly and cancelled their paper)

1.4 T Your paper is cancelled , you both will repeat the class 4

now

1.5 Sara Please teacher it is my final paper , my whole year will be

lost,

(beggad to teacher)

1.6 Zara Please teacher forgive us this time we will not repeat it again

(requesting her teacher)

1.7 T No I will not accept your paper and you will repeat the

whole class

(Both were shedding tears)

- 341 -


No Speaker Talk

19.1 T Did you see students' cheating is bad act?

19.2 S8 Yes teacher but if we ask small questions from our friends then

we should not be punished harshly

19.3 T Do you think cheating should be allowed to students?

19.4 S8 To some extent

(laughed whole class)

19.5 S9 No teacher cheating is really bad thing as we should study

thoroughly the topics then we will not need of cheating

19.6 S5 Teacher it is unfair for those students who are who get their

marks by doing hard work

19.7 S10 But some papers are very difficult so if ask verbally , we

should not be punished

19.8 S11 Cheating make us lazy , we should do hard work to get good

grades

19.9 S2 But what is hazard of asking minor spellings from each other

19.10 T But you should revise well your content for examination , then

you will not need for cheating

19.11 S5 Last year my friend has written spellings on her hand and she

caught by a teacher and her paper was cancelled

19.12 S9 I was saved last year

(laughed)

19.13 S6 Teacher I read a Islamic book in which cheating is disliked by

God and his Prophet

19.13 T No we all learnt that cheating is a bad act and we should be

called cheater rather a hard worker

- 342 -

Appendix 27, Episode 21 (Good man and his son)

Role play scenario

No Speaker Talk

1.1 Son Father , please sit on the donkey, he is ready to travel…

(father sits on a donkey )

1.2 Passerby oh , I wondered to see that a healthy and strong man is riding

on a donkey and a poor, skinny and young boy is walking on

foot..

1.3 Father Ok , son its your turn to take a ride of donkey, I will walk on

foot,

(After getting the remarks of a man, they discussed and

decided now son will riding on a donkey and father will walk)

1.4 Son Hunnn, ok as you wish

1.5 Woman oh very sad "in our time it never happened that a father is

walking and young boy is riding on a donkey".

(After crossing some distance a women met with them)

(Now they decided to ride on donkey together)

1.6 Old man After crossing some distance another old man crossed them

and said

it is very unethical to ride together on a poor donkey.

(They negotiated with each other what to do then they decided

to both walk together with their donkey.

In the meanwhile another girl came across the way and

critically laughed at them for not riding on donkey and

walking on foot)

1.7 (They sat together for a while and discussed about next plan)

1.8 Father (I think we should do what we feel good for us and should not

listen to others)

1.9 Son Yes you are right, we cannot make everyone please..

(They decided that they will complete their journey by dividing

the way into two halves, half the way man will ride on donkey

and the other half away boy will ride on donkey).

- 343 -


No Speaker Talk

1.1 T Did you observe how people give suggestions to detract you?

1.2 S2 Yes teacher people always misguided us in our decisions

1.3 S8 Yes teacher I read a moral story from my English book that we

should always rely on our parents and true friends in any

decision otherwise we will suffer

1.4 S1 Yes my mother told me an old man story who advised his sons

to rely on themselves and not share their secrets with people ,

they ignored their father's advise and shared their treasure

secret with their friends and lost their treasure by following

their instructions

1.5 S9 But I always take my friends opinion in any case

1.6 S10 Yes we can take our friends opinion but if these are not

harmful for us

1.7 S3 But friends are always good

1.8 S5 Yes we should be wise in taking decisions that do not hurt

others

1.9 S11 yes my mother says always use you own brain if things are as

good as for others then you can adopt these

1.10 S2 Once I advised my friend to take leave as I m taking leave ,she

availed her leave but I did not take leave and teacher scolded

her for her leave

(laughing sarcastically)

1.11 T Ok all the discussion shows that we should be very careful in

taking opinion of other people until it is required

Yes teacher

(whole class said)

- 344 -

Appendix 28, Episode 23 (The blind man and elephant)

No Speaker Talk

1.1 Man1 Oh this is a monster

(touching the elephant)

1.2 Man 2 No it is a hard case

(touching his leg)

1.3 Man3 You are wrong, it is long soft fish

(touching his tail)

1.4 Man4 You all are telling a lie, It is big fan

(touching his ear)

1.5 Man 1 Why are you sharing wrong information, I said it is like a

monster

(said angrily)

1.6 Man 3 No you are telling a lie, it is not a monster, it is a soft fish , I

told you

(became annoyed)

(All blind men were exchanging hot talk and quarreling )

1.7 Mahuat Don’t fight with each other , it is an elephant , it is not a

monster, not any other thing

(all blind men stopped fighting)

1.8 Mahuat You all know that reality is one but we see it diffrently,

but we should respect each other opinions and should not

hurt others with hot words

(All blind men felt ashamed and said sorry to each other)

- 345 -

Appendix 29, Episode 23 Debriefing Questions

Table 29.1

No Speaker Talk

23.1 T What did you learn from the activity?

23.2 S2 Teacher I don’t understand what these men were saying

23.3 S4 Oh they all were thinking one part of elephant

23.4 S1 And everybody was thinking he is right but they are not

imagining elephant correctly

23.5 S6 Teacher once my friend became angry with me and one day

she was talking with another girl , I thought she is planning

against me and I broke my friendship with her but actually

she was not against me

23.6 T In the story , every blind man thinks he is right, bt

actually he was not correct, if he shares with his other fellows

about elephant they may tell him different opinions

23.7 S11 Teacher I never trust on anybody and act only for me not for

others

23.8 S4 But we should not only think for ourselves and do not do acts

for our benefits

23.9 S2 Yes you are right

23.10 S3 We should follow right things

23.11 S6 I always follow right things

23.12 S8 Yes I too

23.13 T Yes we should always take suggestions and opinions from our

true friends to protect from making wrong decisions

- 346 -

Appendix 30, Episode 25 (Earth day)

No Speaker Talk

There was ground scene in which one student was cutting trees

(a small plant is used for the purpose).

1.1 Girl hey , why are you cutting a beautiful green tree?

1.2 Woodcutt

er

I will sell it in the market and get handsome money

1.3 Girl "Oh you know it will increase environmental degradation

(she pointed out her wrong act)

1.4 Woodcutt

er

But if I will look for pollution then who will look for my hugry

stomach, this is my profession

"She replied arrogantly"

1.5 Girl But only for your own interest you are making all other people

in trouble because if there are less greenery then there will be

less rains and we have to face more hot and bitter weather.

(she taught her about severe effects of cutting trees)

1.6 Woodcutt

er

(The woodcutter kept thinking for some time and convinced by

her remarks and promised her not to cut more trees and said)

We should give message to all people to grow more and more

trees to make our environment healthier and make our earth

safe.

Girl In the second scene, there was girl who was busy in diging and

dumping trash and garbage underground.

What are you doing,

(The girl was crossing through asked her about her act).

Woman I'm dumping garbage in the ground to clean my house and

streets

Girl But this is not the right way, you should throw your all arbage

in street garbage drum, municipality people will collect it from

the drum, you are not saving the earth but spoiling the earth,

You are also spoiling the water course as well because dumping

trash in the ground will mix in the underground water pipes that

will become poisonous for humans and animals" she told her

about the hazards of her act

"she advised her".

Oh, I'm sorry, I don’t know about that, I will be careful in future

she replied with embarrassment).

Girl In the third scene, one girl was burning some garbage and bad

smell smoke was spreading everywhere, a girl passes through

- 347 -

asked her about what she was doing?

Oh, very bad smell, what are you doing like?

Woman I'm burning all trash to safe everyone from dirty garbage.

Girl But you are increasing air pollution, don’t you know that,,

(she asked her seriously)

Woman How could it influence air ,

(she asked her in return)

Girl This poisonous smoke will spoil the air and ozone layer that

save us from bitter environmental hazards. When ozone layer

ruptures, there will be extreme weather change and the whole

mankind will suffer, (she provided her realistic information)

Woman Oh, thank you very much for providing me such useful

information,

(she said humbly)

Then all three girls who were symbolizing different pollution

types get together and shared this information.

Water

pollution

You know why do we celebrate earth day every year?

Environm

ental

pollution

we celebrate it to revise our promise to safe our earth from

pollution

Yes you are right, we should convey a message to all others to

daily celebrate earth day by cleaning your environment from all

pollutant substances said air polltion.

They shake their hands and left back with a promise to work

together to protect their environment from pollution.

- 348 -

Appendix 31, Episode 25

Debriefing Questions

Table 31.1

No Speaker Talk

25.1 T Ok students from today's role play what did you learn about

"Earth Day"

25.2 S9 Teacher , it is pollution

25.3 T No I ,m asking you that why did we celebrate earth day

25.4 S6 We celebrate earth day to reduce pollution

25.5 T How can we avoid water pollution

25.6 S2 When we will grow more trees we can avoid water pollution

25.7 S6 No teacher I learnt from the story that if we do not bury trash

underground we can avoid water pollution

25.8 S5 But if we bury trash it will become a tree

25.9 S1 No how could a trash become a tree it will spoil water

underground and make us sick

25.10 S8 Yes you are right

25.11 T And how can we stop air pollution?

25.12 S8 If we control smoke of factories and vehicles we can control

air pollution

25.13 S11 People burn their trash to keep their houses clean but burning

of trash spoils the whole environment

25.14 S12 Fire makes environment dirty

25.15 S2 No not fire but when we burn trash it makes environment

polluted

25.16 T What is land pollution?

25.17 S3 Teacher when we pollute our land with trash and poisonous

smoke it increases pollution

25.18 S2 And teacher it is unfair to cut trees for own purpose and to

make whole environment polluted for whole humanity

25.19 T Yes you all have discussed different types of pollution and

learn the difference of pollution ,

25.20 Yes teacher , we understand the different types of pollution

- 349 -

Appendix 32, Episode 27,

Debriefing Questions

Table 32.1

No Speaker Talk

27.1 T What did you learn from today's lesson

27.2 S2 I learnt that we should not destroy others belongings only for

a fun

27.3 S5 Yes teacher once I broke remote car of my brother and one

day he blotted my final exam project with ink and then I felt

that how feeling became hurt

27.4 S2 Yes teacher once my brother broke our servants cycle , he has

only one transport mean, in return he complained to my father

and my father stopped pocket money of my brother

27.5 S7 My mother used to help our servants with extra money if they

do some extra work for us

27.6 S1 Yes we should not take servants extra service without paying

them extra money

27.7 S8 My mother mistakenly broke my aunt's purse , my father paid

money to my aunt because she cannot afford a new purse

27.8 S2 Yes, we should not ignore poor people because of their

poverty but acknowledge their work by giving them true

reward for their work

27.9 S3 Yes we should always care others, I agree with you

27.10 S9 My mother told that we should treat people politely

27.11 S5 Yes and we should not hurt them because of poverty

27.12 S9 And we should not making fun of others

27.13 S10 Yes because they are humans

27.14 S2 No we should not hurt animals as well

27.15 S1 Yes I take care of my cat and dog at home

(shared personal example)

27.16 S3 I have also parrot, and I never hurt him

27.17 S2 Yes we should take care of humans and animals both

27.18 S6 We should take care of belongings of our parents and teachers

as well

27.19 S1 We should take care of all humans

(yes you are right, the whole class agreed)

- 350 -

Appendix 33, Strong Episode 29 (God is great)

Table 33.1

No Speaker Talk

1.1 Beggar 1

Nadeem (old

man)

Oh his highness, God bless you ,please give me some

money , I'm hungry for the last 3 days

(Begged with painful voice )

(King gave him some money)

(He thanked God and returned back to home)

1.2 Beggar 2,

Shamim

Oh merciful king, I'm hungry for the whole week, please

help me,

(King gave him some money , he thanked king for his

kindness and returned back to home)

King was annoyed to hear from Nadeem while he was

thanking to God, he made a plan to test both beggars

beliefs, he called both beggars next day

1.3 King (When both beggars came)

Said, you both will go through the King's street and let

me know what have you seen or found there

(Both beggars went towards the King's street)

1.4 Shamim (Thinking when crossing the street)

I should close my eyes in honor of Kings street , he

crossed the street with closed eyes

1.5 Nadeem (Next day came and crossed through the Kings street)

He found a bag in the street and kept it to his house, he

cut down the bag and found gold coins and thanked God

1.6 King (The next day king called both beggars)

Tell me what did you get yesterday, asked both beggars"

1.7 Shamim I did not find anything because I kept my eyes closed

throughout crossing the street,

1.8 Nadeem I found a gold coin bag and I thanked God for his

kindness

(King was very annoyed to listen the story, he made

another plan to test their beliefs, he called only Shamim

next day)

1.9 King I'm giving you the Pumpkin as a gift , go and cook it at

home and enjoy,,,

1.10 Shamim (hun,,,Pumpkin is not a good gift, I will sell it in the

market, he went to the market and sold the pumpkin

(Saying saying desperately)

- 351 -

1.11 Nadeem (Went to the market to buy some vegetable and by

chance he bought the same pumpkin that Shamim sold

it)

Give me the pumpkin, asked to shopkeeper, and went

back to his home

1.12 Nadeem When he cut pumpkin, he found silver coins in it,

Oh thank you God you are great, he was very happy to

get these coins

1.13 King Call the both beggars and asked Shamim first,Yesterday

I have given you the pumpkin, what did you do with that

vegetable,

(He asked him)

1.14 Shamim Oh his highness, I sold that pumpkin to the market as I

need money not pumpkin,

(said politely)

1.15 Nadeem I got the same pumpkin from the market that you gave to

the Shamim, I'm thankful to God for his kindness,

1.16 King (Looked embarrassed)

Oh , thank you Nadeem you opened my eyes, I ,m

convinced now that it is the only God who provided

everything to everyone whenever he wants to give


No Speaker Talk

29.1 T What did you learn from the play

29.2. S2 We learnt that God is great and he gives everything to

everyone

29.2 S4 Yes teacher , we should not beg to anyone but to ask

from Allah

29.3 S1 Oh, another thing that if will not pray to God he will

punish us..L

29.4 S5 Yes but Allah says to help each other so we should take

gifts from others….

29.5 T No it is not right, we should help others but only for the

pleasement of Allah

(she intervened while observing student's unclarity)

29.6 S9 I read from Holy Quran that we should only pray to

Allah and should not beg to humans…

29.7 S7 Yes, I also read from Holy Quran that we should

- 352 -

always thank to God for his blessings

29.8 S4 How could we thank to God?

29.9 S6 We should not beg from others but always pray to

Allah for everything because he gives more to those

who only depend on him…

29.10 T What Allah says about beggars?

29.11 S6 Beggars will be punished by Allah on day of

judgment….

(Said angrily)

29.12 S9 On day of judgment they will get a black mark on their

foreheads..

(She quoted a religious thought)

29.13 S7 Yes teacher, (agreed with S6)

I read from my Islamiyat book that beggars will be

marked with black mark on their foreheads on the day

of judgment

29.14 S2 Our prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H) was very kind with

poor but not with beggars…..

29.15 T Yes you see in the play that when we thank to Allah, he

gives us more blessings ….

29.16 S2 We should not become harsh with poor but to give

them whatever they need…

29.17 S1 We should give poor best food then Allah will give us

more food….

Yes teacher, (whole class agreed)

- 353 -

Appendix 34, Questionnaire critical thinking Attitude

Integrity SA

=4

A

=3

SD

=2

D

=1

1 I always stick with my beliefs either they are

wrong

2 I change my opinion frequently -

3 I always respect others as much as myself

4 I always accept my faults and try to improve my

mistakes

Humility

5 I never proud of my knowledge

6 I never feel ashamed in taking help from others in

problem solving

7 I always consult other sources of knowledge to

increase my information

8 I always think that I have sufficient knowledge

about any issue -

9 I always rely on my knowledge -

Courage

10 I never accept wrong opinions under pressure

11 I always challenge wrong ideas of others and

present my opinion what I think is right

12 I accept the opinions of my friends in any case -

13 I always willing to correct my wrong beliefs

Empathy

14 I always try to protect my point of view when I

disagree with others -

15 I explain my point of view politely when I disagree

with others

16 I always show sympathy for my opponents when

they disagree with me

Perseverance

17 I always show patience in difficult situations

18 I always accept challenge and finish my task

19 I use different strategies to deal with problems

20 I give up my assignment in pressure -

- 354 -

Autonomy

21 I always take decisions independently

22 I never follow others blindly

I take help of others while taking decision -

23 I face problem alone and never care about

criticism of others

- 355 -

Appendix 35, Questionnaire Critical thinking

No Statements SA A SD D

1 I never feel difficulty in clarifying my ideas to

others (c)

2 I use examples in explaining my ideas (c)

3 I always feel difficulty in presenting my point of

view with reasoning (logic)

4 I always present logical conclusion (logic)

5 I feel difficulty in giving relevant examples

according to the topic (relevance)

6 I convey my messages to others without any valid

references from book or TV (accuracy)-

7 I always scarifies for others (fairness)

8 I love to have gift for myself and don’t care about

others (fairness)-

9 I always consider my faults and never criticize

others (fairness)

10 I show sympathy for others when they face

trouble (fairness)

11 My thinking is mostly related to the task

(relevance)

12 I feel difficulty in giving logical examples to the

question at issue (logic)-

- 356 -

Appendix 35: Transcription coding

The following are the codes used for the transcription of data.

Description Transcription coding

Non-verbal behavior observed (observation) (italic)

Non-word utterances such as „mm‟/‟ooh‟(e.g. to

show surprise, agreement, or to extend a

speaker's turn in the face of possible

interruptions)

„mm‟/‟ooh‟(

The accurate transcription of a word is in doubt (?)

Utterances, which cannot be understood [unintelligible]

Students when pauses …

Teacher T

Student S

Students Number e,g, S1

Episode (period) Turn number e.g. 12.1

developing critical thinking through questioning and …

Documents