Question chains in Chinese middle school high-quality English classes: A perspective of cultivating thinking qualities
Published Online: Feb 27, 2025
Received: Sep 28, 2024
Accepted: Jan 16, 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2025-0147
Keywords
© 2025 Zhongyi Xu et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Since the official release of the “Core Competencies for Chinese Students” framework in September 2016, “core competences” have taken center stage for academics and teachers. The core competencies to be cultivated in the English curriculum include language ability, cultural awareness, thinking qualities, and learning ability, among which the development of students’ thinking is an essential task in English education. How teachers can integrate the cultivation of thinking qualities throughout the activities in English classroom is a topic worth pondering for every educator. Good questioning skills among teachers is a basic competence to develop students' thinking skills [1]. As early as Ancient Greece, Socrates emphasized, through his method of “irony,” that teachers should ask questions that challenge students’ existing knowledge, using a series of logically layered counter-questions to provoke students’ thoughts. It is evident that question chains help stimulate students’ proactive learning awareness, providing a foundation for fostering students’ critical thinking skills [2]. Questions serve as both the origin and driving force of thinking. The process of students’ solving problems one by one is essentially the process of developing thinking, that is, reflection, question generation, inquiry, critique and problem-solving. And the essence of a “question chain” lies in its role as a “chain of thought.” The differences in questioning methods, content composition, and goal orientation lead to the diversification of question chain types. The teaching approach of question chains is grounded in the core thinking of various disciplines, with distinct methodologies of thinking applied across different subjects [3]. Similarly, different types of English courses have different emphasis on thinking training. Therefore, in English teaching, teachers should construct different types of question chains and use them strategically in different class types to serve the teaching content and enhance students’ thinking qualities.
This study adopts a combined quantitative and qualitative approach to explore the following two questions: (1) How are thinking qualities reflected in different types of question chains? (2) How can question chains be used to cultivate thinking qualities in different types of high-quality classes?
A question chain refers to a sequence of interconnected questions. It is a teaching method derived from classroom questioning and represents a new approach to designing questions for classroom instruction [4]. Wang defined a “question chain” as a sequence of carefully structured teaching questions, designed by the teacher to achieve specific educational objectives. These questions are based on students’ prior knowledge and experience and aim to address potential difficulties or confusions that might arise during the learning process [5]50. The goal is to guide students through a transition in their thinking, leading to conceptual breakthroughs. The design of sub-questions within the question chain should align with students’ existing cognitive levels, and attention should also be paid to the problem contexts created by the interconnected nature of these questions.
Regarding the classification of question chains, the perspectives of researchers differ, resulting in varied categorization approaches. In 1992, American educator Mack proposed the “Question Continuum Theory,” which classifies questions into five types: closed, semi-closed, semi-open, open, and fully open. These five types of questions align with the levels of students’ knowledge mastery and skill formation, ranging from factual, conceptual, generalized, and theoretical levels. The cognitive abilities required for these questions increase progressively, reflecting a corresponding rise in the levels of demonstrated competence. Reinsvold and Cochran, focusing on question formats, identified three categories of closed-ended, open-ended, and task-oriented questions [6]. Lu noted that there are primary and secondary questions in teaching, and the chain of “main questions” composed of “primary questions” has an inherent pull on the content of the textbook and the teaching process, playing a crucial role in the guidance of learning [7]. Wang, examining the teaching functions of question chains in chemistry classes, classified them into eight distinct types: introductory, differential, diagnostic, inquiry-based, transferable, elastic, summative, and progressive question chains [5]51-54. Liu, building on Wang Houxiong’s classification, applied it to English classrooms, identifying six types of question chains: introductory, diagnostic, inquiry-based, progressive, summative, and transferable question chains [8]. Through observing majority of question chain designs in English classrooms, the author found this classification to be relatively comprehensive and detailed. Therefore, this study adopts this classification to further explore its relationship with thinking qualities.
The term “thinking qualities” was first introduced by the American psychologist Guilford, who analyzed thinking qualities in terms of sensitivity to problems, fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration, and redefinition ability [9]. Subsequently, numerous international scholars have underscored the significance of cultivating thinking qualities in their follow-up research. Bruner initiated a curriculum reform movement in the early 1960s, which catalyzed a shift in American educational psychology towards the exploration of educational processes, student psychology, textbook content, teaching methodologies, and instructional techniques. In his seminal work,
As one of the core competencies in English education, thinking qualities refers to students’ ability of thinking in terms of logicality, criticality, and creativity, which include the ability to analyze specific phenomena related to language and culture, organize and summarize information, construct new concepts, analyze and infer the logic in information, made sound judgments of all kinds of ideas, and express their own views creatively [11]. Thinking qualities—logicality, criticality, and creativity— reflect students’ levels of understanding, analysis, comparison, inference, critique, evaluation, and innovation [12], aligning closely with the last four categories of the six levels in Bloom’s Taxonomy [13].
Logical thinking involves abstracting and deducing content using logical tools, such as reasoning and argumentation [14]82. Methods of logical thinking include definition, classification, generalization, delimitation, induction, deduction and so forth, making it one of the fundamental forms of thinking. Critical thinking is defined as interpreting, analyzing, evaluating, purposeful, self-regulating judgment that leads to conclusions, and evidence-based, conceptual, methodological, prescriptive, and evidence-based thinking and definition [15]. Creative thinking has the following characteristics: novel, unique and meaningful thinking activities; imagination in the content of creative thinking; inspiration; the combination of analytical thinking and intuitive thinking and the unity of divergent thinking and convergent thinking [16]. Key features of creative thinking include “expansion”— broadening perspectives, breaking free from existing conditions, and embracing imagination. It is often demonstrated through activities such as association, hypothesizing, transferring, and listing.
The American educator John Dewey was among the first to explore the relationship between problem-based teaching and the cultivation of thinking skills. He emphasizes the ways in which human beings ask questions and find answers. He argued that inquiry is reflective thinking and education should foster students’ thinking by creating teaching contexts conducive to cognitive development, particularly through questions that encourage inquiry-based learning [17]. Based on this premise, Dewey proposed the Five-step Inquiry Method, aimed at cultivating students’ critical thinking and independent thinking. Huang and Zhu considered that classroom questioning cultivates students’ thinking capacity by considering their level, asking different types of questions, and balancing the hierarchy of questions [18]. Researches aboard has focused heavily on the relationship between questioning and specific cognitive processes, such as the role of questioning in promoting critical thinking [19] and its impact on creative thinking [20]. Additionally, studies have shown that questioning can enhance the development of thinking skills within specific English competencies. For example, using questioning techniques, there was an 89% increase in critical thinking skills and 85% of students improving their grades, especially in the organization and coherence of their writing [21]. However, relatively few studies have examined the concept of question chains or approached thinking qualities holistically. Existing research tends to focus on details or the cultivation of specific cognitive traits rather than providing an overarching perspective.
On the other hand, a search in CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) using the keywords “question chains” and “thinking qualities” yielded 207 articles, of which 150 pertained to English education (as of September 2024). The volume of research has steadily increased since the release of the “Core Competencies for Chinese Students” framework in 2016 (see Figure 1). A further analysis of the retrieved literature indicates that most studies focus on reading classes (see Figure 2), with limited research on Listening and speaking, Writing, and Grammer classes. Moreover, studies combining thinking qualities and question chains are predominantly centered on the design of question chains, with relatively few investigations into their implementation or current usage.
Year trend of published papers on question chains based on thinking quality in English class
Distribution of the number of publications on question chains based on thinking quality
The above discussion holds significant value for this research; however, the depth and breadth of existing studies still require further expansion and deepening, as demonstrated in the following areas: (1) Although many researchers have mentioned the diverse types of question chains and their positive role in enhancing students’ thinking quality in teaching, these discussions are often broad and lack specificity. Specifically, there has been insufficient exploration into which types of question chains can specifically cultivate certain types of thinking qualities. (2) In terms of the selection of subjects, scholars tend to focus on reading classes, while research on the thinking qualities demonstrated through question chains in other types of classes such as listening and speaking, grammar, and writing appears relatively scarce. (3) The majority of the literature revolves around the design types, construction methods, and strategies of question chains in singular reading class contexts, yet there is a severe shortage of survey research on the status quo of the actual use of question chains.
This study employs a mixed method of quantitative and qualitative analysis, focusing on the classroom videos of high-quality English class from the past three years as the research subjects. Twenty classes were randomly selected, including listening and speaking, grammar, reading, and writing classes, taught by twenty teachers from different regions in China. The students spanned all middle school grades, with textbooks sourced from People’s Education Press, Yilin Press, Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, and Beijing Normal University Press. By observing classroom videos and analyzing the manifestations of critical, creative, and logical thinking qualities, the study assesses the correlation between six types of question chains and specific thinking quality characteristics. It also records the frequency and quality of the six types of question chains used in each class, excluding single question occurrences from the statistics. Furthermore, this research focuses on higher-order thinking, thereby excluding lower-order cognitive processes such as memorization from the analysis. Ultimately, a total of 115 effective question chains were identified, with 25 each in listening and speaking as well as grammar classes, 33 in reading classes, and 32 in writing classes.
In the process of conducting an in-depth classroom observation analysis based on Liu Honggang’s (2023) classification of six types of question chains in English classrooms, the researcher noted that the boundaries between these categories are not distinctly defined, but rather exhibit certain levels of ambiguity and intersection. Specifically, a particular question chain often integrates multiple types of characteristic elements; for instance, most question chains display some degree of sequential progression during their construction. Therefore, in determining the categorization of question chains, the researcher primarily relied on the main function highlighted by the question chain for an overall assessment. Building on this, the researcher attempted to match the types of question chains with students’ levels of thinking to gain a deeper understanding of the application of question chains in English classrooms and their potential impact on students’ cognitive development (see Figure 3).
Question chain types in English classroom and their corelation with thinking levels
Such question chains typically stimulate students’ imagination and association by unfolding associative thoughts, posing hypothetical or open-ended questions, and expanding the cognitive space. They encourage students to consider problems from various perspectives and generate novel ideas, thereby fostering innovative thinking in students. For example:
The introductory question chain is a series of questions employed by teachers to introduce a topic, laying the groundwork for subsequent instruction and providing students with an overview of the knowledge system for the current chapter. Alternatively, it can be a type of question chain designed to capture students’ attention and stimulate their intense desire for knowledge [22]. These question chains are characterized by their contextual relevance, real-life connection, and engaging nature, typically positioned at the introductory stage of the lesson. The purpose is to fully activate students’ prior knowledge, linking it to familiar concepts and creating a “zone of proximal development” where new knowledge can be easily accessed through existing knowledge.
For instance, in Unit 14 of the Grade 9 English textbook, which discusses reminiscing about middle school life, the teacher begins by providing a context: Students may take part in all kinds of extracurricular activities in school. The teacher then shows a video of extracurricular activities and designs the following question chain within this context:
Q1, prompted by the video, encourages students to associate the shown activity with other school activities, expanding their cognitive space. Q2 and Q3 are open-ended questions with no fixed answers, allowing students to freely express their ideas about extracurricular activities they would like to have in school and their reasons. This process fosters students' creative thinking and expressive abilities.
Transferable Question Chains are characterized by their ability to generate other significant questions either horizontally or vertically. Teachers typically employ these question chains in the middle or later stages of instruction, once students have grasped and understood the lesson content. By integrating students’ daily life experiences, recent social events, or knowledge from related disciplines, teachers carefully design a series of engaging and highly relevant questions that encourage the transfer of learning.
For example, in the Unit 2 of the Grade 8 English textbook one,
Q1 and Q2 aim to review the sports and activity vocabulary introduced in the textbook and provide an opportunity for practical application of the key sentence patterns, laying a foundation for subsequent knowledge transfer. Answering Q3 requires students to creatively organize language to describe specific situations of family members, transferring their understanding of personal exercise habits to describe those of others. Q4 challenges students to take on the role of a health advisor and propose reasonable health recommendations for their family members based on their exercise habits. This requires students to synthesize their understanding of health knowledge and familiarity with their family’s circumstances, engaging in creative thinking and planning.
Students’ logical thinking typically progresses through three stages: intuitive perception, inductive generalization of rules, and abstract deduction to application [14]82. To foster the development of intuitive perception and abstract deduction, progressive question chains can be employed for training, gradually deepening students’ understanding of textual information. For example, in reading instruction, teachers may begin with simple questions about the main idea of the text and then gradually delve into understanding specific details and analyzing the logical relationships between paragraphs. This approach provides students with a progressively deeper intuitive understanding. Deduction, on the other hand, starts from general principles or rules, guiding students to apply these principles or rules to analyze specific situations. Viewed from another perspective, this process reflects a layered, iterative relationship: one progresses bottom-up, while the other moves top-down. For inductive reasoning, question chains can be designed using an inductive approach, leading students to generalize universal conclusions or principles from specific examples or phenomena. This may also be referred to as a summarizing method. Through a series of questions, students are guided to organize information and identify patterns, thereby enhancing their ability to infer generalizations.
A progressive question chain is a series of sequential questions designed either forward or backward based on the structure of the knowledge point and students' cognitive processes [23]. The questions follow a progressive relationship, moving from simple to complex and from easy to difficult. Throughout the problem-solving process, students advance their thinking both in depth and breadth by analyzing and reasoning, thereby enhancing the logical and hierarchical nature of their thought processes. Progressive question chains are a commonly used teaching strategy in the reading phase of reading classes [24]. For example, in Unit 7,
Q1 involves extracting basic information from the text, which is relatively simple. Q2 requires students to further understand specific details from the text. Q3 prompts students to analyze the reasons behind the popularity of the attractions, with increasing complexity, pushing their thinking to a deeper level.
A summative question chain refers to a series of questions designed by the teacher at the end of a class, unit, or thematic instruction to help students recall and summarize the knowledge structure of the lesson or unit [5]53. By guiding students to review, integrate, and deepen their understanding of the learned content, such question chains effectively promote the development of their logical thinking, helping them form a clear logical sequence during the process of thinking and answering questions.
For example, in a reading and writing class on the topic of “Travel Plans,” the teacher summarizes the text and asks the following questions before students begin writing:
Q1 aims to guide students in reviewing and summarizing the basic components of a travel plan, such as destination, travel dates, transportation, accommodation, and sightseeing choices. Through Q2, students are required to explain their choice, which involves logical reasoning and considering factors such as the destination’s appeal, personal interests, and cultural context. Q3 asks students to elaborate on how they planned their daily itinerary based on the destination's characteristics and their own interests, including time distribution between attractions and the choice of transportation. The three questions progressively build upon one another, organically and systematically connecting the knowledge points, creating a coherent, layered, and logical network of ideas for writing. This approach helps students solidify their grasp of the content while developing their inductive and summarizing skills, thereby enhancing their logical thinking ability.
This kind of question chain design often has the form of comparison, analysis, evaluation, etc., through the comparison of different things, ideas or methods, to encourage students to analyze and evaluate. Students need to think about their similarities and differences, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each.
A diagnostic question chain refers to a series of new questions posed with the aim of addressing the issues or misconceptions that have already arisen in students’ learning processes [25]. Simply “imparting” new knowledge to students is neither conducive to maintaining their long-term interest in the subject nor to fostering the development of their cognitive abilities. In contrast, by guiding students to actively self-examine and reflect on the key challenges and common errors in their learning, they can continually enhance their critical thinking and autonomous learning skills. Such question chains are used to identify and analyze problems to find solutions, typically focusing more on assessing students’ understanding and application of specific concepts, skills, or knowledge.
For example, when teaching the use of the third-person singular form in the present simple tense, a key aspect is helping students grasp the verb conjugation rules. Based on common mistakes such as forgetting to add “es” or incorrectly adding “s,” the teacher designs the following question chain:
For Q1, most students would respond with the structure “I + base verb.” In Q2, if students make mistakes, the teacher does not directly point out the error but instead prompts them with Q3, encouraging students to identify the problem themselves, thus fostering their ability to self-assess and think critically. In addition to the closed questions above, diagnostic question chains can also include open-ended questions. In Q4, students are not only prompted to check their understanding of the third-person singular verb form but also encouraged to use their imagination and creativity by practicing more verb transformations, deepening their understanding of the rule. Through this design of question chains, students are guided to continuously reflect, question, and explore during their learning process of the third-person singular form in the present simple tense, thereby cultivating their critical thinking skills.
This type of question chains aims to guide students in deeply exploring the content, meaning, structure, or themes of a text. They are typically used to encourage students to think, analyze, and evaluate the text to cultivate their critical thinking and deep understanding abilities. Inquiry-based question chains can effectively train students’ thinking and are considered a core element of effective teaching [5]52. The curriculum reform in basic education advocates for student-led inquiry, and inquiry-based question chains are a means of returning the classroom to students, guiding them to actively construct knowledge. For example, when judging whether the information in a reading text is appropriate, the perspectives of the reader and the author may not necessarily align, and students should be given the space to think, evaluate, and express their viewpoints. In cases where questions often do not have clear answers or singular solutions, a dialectical perspective is required to analyze and judge [14]83.
For instance, a question chain designed for the topic “Protecting the Environment” might include the following:
Q1 asks students to recall and list various environmental issues, prompting them to form a preliminary understanding of the current environmental situation, which lays the foundation for subsequent critical thinking. Q2 asks students to analyze the causes of these environmental problems. Students need to consider different perspectives, such as human activities, industrial development, consumption habits, etc. This helps to develop students’ analytical skills and critical thinking, encouraging them not only to see the surface of the issues but also to delve into the root causes. Q3 encourages students to propose actions they can take in their daily lives to protect the environment. Students need to think about the impact of their actions on the environment and suggest feasible solutions. Q4 prompts students to assess the effectiveness of the environmental actions they proposed. Students must reflect on the efficacy of these actions, as well as any potential limitations. This helps cultivate students’ critical thinking and reflective abilities, teaching them to objectively evaluate their viewpoints and actions.
Through detailed classroom observations and comprehensive data analysis (see Figure 4), the results show that the six types of question chains are used across different class types, and their overall distribution exhibits a relatively balanced pattern, with no class type showing a significantly higher or lower number of questions compared to others. This reveals that the use of question chains is given appropriate attention and adoption across all course types.
Distribution of question chains between different types of high-quality English classes in middle schools
Specifically, the distribution of introductory question chains across the four class types demonstrates a high level of balance. This further suggests that teachers generally tend to design a series of question chains at the beginning of the class aiming to quickly capture students' attention, stimulate their curiosity and desire for knowledge, and then guide students to engage in associations, thereby activating their creative thinking.
It is noteworthy that inquiry-based question chains occupy the largest share in all course types except for grammar classes, highlighting the importance teachers place on cultivating students’ deep thinking. By guiding students to think, analyze, and evaluate, these question chains aim to enhance their critical thinking skills. In contrast, grammar classes primarily involve direct explanation and demonstration to teach grammatical knowledge, with students reinforcing their understanding through extensive practice. This approach focuses on knowledge delivery and skill training, with limited time and space for students to engage in independent inquiry, thus lacking the development of investigative and critical thinking.
In comparison to the other types, diagnostic and summative question chains are used less frequently. Classroom observations indicate that teachers often adopt a direct output approach during knowledge review and summary stages, or use a single question in a self-question-and-answer format, which does not allow sufficient time for students to reflect and summarize on their own. This approach hinders the development of students’ ability to make logical generalizations and inductions. Additionally, this one-way output approach is also reflected in teachers' insufficient attention to students' understanding of specific learning difficulties and common errors, failing to diagnose in real-time students' grasp of key concepts or misconceptions, thus neglecting the development of students' self-reflection awareness. However, diagnostic question chains are used most frequently in grammar classes, mainly due to the nature of the course, where teachers need to ask numerous questions to assess students' mastery of specific grammatical points. While this approach emphasizes the cultivation of students' reflective and critical thinking, the author found that in some cases, teachers overuse grammatical terminology, making the explanations rigid, and students’ application of the knowledge is not flexible enough. Examples of analogical thinking are infrequent, with most examples drawn from textbook content, lacking transferable materials and assessments of students’ flexible application.
As shown in Figure 5, the distribution of different types of question chains in middle school English listening and speaking classes is uneven, with inquiry-based question chains and introductory question chains being the most prominent, accounting for 32% and 24%, respectively. These classes primarily focus on cultivating critical and creative thinking, while the development of logical thinking is relatively insufficient. This can be analyzed from the following aspects:
Distribution of question chain types and thinking qualities in listening and speaking class
First, the inquiry-based question chains in listening and speaking classes primarily aim to guide students in conducting in-depth analysis and discussion of listening materials, encouraging them to express their viewpoints and opinions. This approach fosters their critical thinking and helps them accumulate material for subsequent speaking activities.
Second, regarding introductory question chains, classroom observations reveal two main forms in listening and speaking classes: one involves introducing the topic during the lesson’s opening, and the other introduces the materials that students are about to listen to. For example, in Unit 5 of the Grade 8 textbook (People’s Education Press),
These questions capture students’ interest and introduce the lesson’s topic of
Third, further observations indicate that the progressiveness of question chains in listening and speaking classes is evident not only within individual chains but also between chains. For instance, in the lesson
Through these questions, students learn how to evaluate specific topics and express their opinions. Moreover, activities such as role-play encourage students to creatively apply the knowledge they have learned, thus developing their innovative and critical thinking. However, it was observed that many students lack coherence and structure in their spoken communication, indicating that their logical thinking skills need further enhancement.
As shown in Figure 6, diagnostic question chains are the most frequently used in grammar classes, accounting for 24%, while summative question chains and inquiry-based question chains each account for 16%. Transferable question chains are the least used, comprising only 4%. Grammar classes primarily focus on cultivating critical thinking, as detailed below:
Distribution of question chain types and thinking qualities in grammar class
First, unlike traditional grammar instruction, which involves teaching students rules one by one, teachers should design questions, create problem scenarios, and inspire students to think, design, and summarize key points [26]. Therefore, teachers should emphasize the design of inquiry-based question chains and summative question chains.
Given the instructional objectives of grammar classes, teachers also need to consistently monitor students’ understanding of specific grammatical concepts. Thus, diagnostic question chains are particularly important in grammar classrooms as they promote students’ reflection and critical thinking. However, during classroom instruction, it was observed that some teachers relied heavily on grammatical terminology and rigid explanations. As a result, students’ application of grammar was insufficiently flexible, with few opportunities for analogical thinking. Most examples were drawn directly from the textbook, lacking transferable materials and assessments of students’ ability to apply grammar flexibly.
According to the principles of the English Learning Activity View, after students have grasped English grammar, teachers should design diverse learning activities that encourage students to transfer, innovate, reflect on, and evaluate their newly acquired knowledge. This approach facilitates students’ creative application of grammar in new contexts, enabling deeper learning. By expressing their opinions and attitudes, students further develop their core English competencies, fostering critical and creative thinking skills.
As shown in Figure 7, inquiry-based question chains and progressive question chains dominate reading classes, accounting for 37% and 24%, respectively, while summative question chains are the least utilized, at only 3%. Reading classes primarily focus on cultivating critical thinking, with relatively limited emphasis on the development of logical thinking. This can be analyzed as follows:
Distribution of question chain types and thinking qualities in reading class
First, for teachers, the core of reading teaching is to design questions of different thinking levels, guide students to read, and guide students to construct associations among information to form structured knowledge [27]. Classroom observations reveal that while teachers consciously design progressive question chains to guide students in gradually understanding the text, the progression between questions is often unclear. Additionally, the difficulty of the questions varies significantly, with some being overly simple and failing to foster higher-order thinking, while others are too challenging, leading to periods of silence among students. As a result, the development of students’ logical thinking is somewhat insufficient.
Second, inquiry-based question chains are a common teaching strategy in reading classes. During the reading phase, they are used to explore the content and structure of the text, while in the post-reading phase, they guide students to critically evaluate the text. For example, in Unit 6 of the Grade 9 textbook, the teacher posed the following question chain:
Through hypothetical scenarios and reflective thinking, these questions develop students’ dialectical and critical thinking while helping them appreciate Shen Nong’s courage and pioneering spirit, and understand the relationship between language, culture, and thought.
Finally, summative question chains are relatively scarce in reading classes and often appear as single questions. Most teachers focus on students’ summaries of the text content while neglecting guidance on reading strategies. As a result, students are unable to systematically reflect on and summarize transferable reading techniques through guided questions. This limitation restricts the development of their logical thinking to some extent.
As shown in Figure 8, inquiry-based question chains are the most frequently used in writing classes, accounting for 31%, followed by progressive question chains, which make up 28%. Diagnostic question chains are the least utilized, at only 6%. Writing classes focus equally on developing logical thinking and critical thinking, with slightly less emphasis on cultivating creative thinking. This can be analyzed as follows:
Distribution of question chain types and thinking qualities in writing class
First, in writing, the design of question chains should address areas where students are prone to misinterpret the prompt, areas where they struggle with writing content, and areas where their thinking becomes blocked. Therefore, it is essential to emphasize the design of diagnostic question chains in writing classes. However, observations reveal that five teachers paid limited attention to students’ current writing challenges, relying primarily on direct instruction. This approach makes it difficult for students to engage in self-reflection, deepen their thinking, and develop critical thinking skills.
Second, questions in writing classes should maintain a natural and smooth connection between them, forming a coherent and well-structured question chain that enables students to comprehend, imitate, and consciously apply the concepts [28]. It was noted that teachers provided frameworks for writing sentences and ideas within progressive question chains, helping students form an internal logic chain for their writing. This facilitated orderly writing and enhanced students’ logical thinking abilities.
Finally, the process of writing can effectively exercise children's creative ability and thinking activity [29]. Writing instruction should prioritize the training of students’ creative thinking, stimulate their interest in learning, and encourage divergent and reverse thinking to broaden their perspectives and innovate their ideas. Teachers should also employ empathetic thinking to help students view issues dialectically and develop their ability to think innovatively.
Overall, the skillful application of question chains in middle school English classes plays a pivotal role in cultivating students’ cognitive abilities. The six types of question chains are widely utilized across various class types, and their overall distribution appears relatively balanced. This phenomenon highlights the teachers’ emphasis on effectively integrating question chain strategies into different class types and their active engagement in teaching innovation. However, a closer analysis of the specific distribution of question chains in each course type reveals significant quantitative differences, leading to diverse emphases on the cultivation of cognitive abilities.
In listening and speaking classes, inquiry-based and introductory question chains dominate, accounting for notable contributions to fostering students’ critical and creative thinking. However, the cultivation of logical thinking remains insufficient. In grammar classes, the frequent use of diagnostic question chains underscores a focus on critical thinking. Yet, some teachers employ rigid teaching methods, lack sufficient transferable materials, and fail to enhance students’ flexibility in applying grammar knowledge. Reading classes emphasize developing students' critical thinking through inquiry-based and progressive question chains. While there are attempts to foster logical thinking, further efforts are needed to deepen its development. In writing classes, the combined use of inquiry-based and progressive question chains achieves a relatively balanced cultivation of logical and critical thinking, but creative thinking requires additional emphasis.
The flexible use of question chains across different types of middle school English classes reflects teachers’ innovative exploration of teaching strategies and provides robust support for the comprehensive development of students’ cognitive abilities. However, given the differences in question chain distribution and their varying impacts on cognitive cultivation across class types, teachers should further refine and optimize their instructional strategies to achieve balanced and indepth development of students’ thinking skills. To this end, the following suggestions are proposed for designing question chains aimed at enhancing cognitive abilities:
First, for the cultivation of logical thinking, the design of progressive question chains in listening and speaking, as well as reading classes, should guide students to gradually comprehend the logical structure of listening materials, spoken discourse, or reading texts. This would help students articulate their viewpoints logically and coherently. In writing classes, scaffolding in vocabulary, structure, and idea frameworks can support students in organizing their thoughts and producing well-structured written work.
Second, for critical thinking, teachers in listening and speaking classes should encourage students to evaluate and reflect on the content they hear or express. In reading classes, inquiry-based question chains can prompt students to critically analyze the text’s arguments, perspectives, and reasoning. Furthermore, diagnostic question chains can be used to monitor students’ mastery of writing techniques and specific grammar points in real-time.
Third, for creative thinking, students should be encouraged to use their imagination in listening and speaking activities, presenting diverse viewpoints and expressions. Thus, open-ended questions should dominate the introductory phase of lessons. In reading classes, hypothetical questions such as “If Nancy could go back in time, what might she change?” or “What would you do at home, and what would you want to say to your mom?” can inspire imaginative thinking. In writing classes, teachers should stimulate students’ writing inspiration, encouraging innovation in content and form.
In conclusion, thinking activities are omnipresent in English learning. The design of question chains, as an effective instructional strategy, holds great significance in enhancing students’ cognitive abilities and optimizing the teaching process. When designing and applying question chains in middle school English classes, teachers should carefully consider the characteristics of different class types and the diverse needs of students’ cognitive development. By meticulously constructing progressive, inquiry-based, diagnostic, and other types of question chains and integrating them into listening, speaking, grammar, reading, and writing classes, teachers can effectively promote the comprehensive development of students’ logical, critical, and creative thinking.
In future teaching practices, teachers should continue to refine question chain design strategies, emphasizing their progression, coherence, and inspiration. By doing so, they can enhance teaching quality while laying a solid foundation for the cultivation of students’ higher-order thinking skills and overall competence. Through ongoing exploration and practice, it is possible to establish a highly efficient and thought-provoking cognitive development system within middle school English classrooms.