A follow-up question is a key feature of my model of responsive teaching. If we have evidence that understanding is not secure, a clear teacher explanation, followed by a re-check for understanding using a question that assesses the same skill, provides much more reliable evidence that our response has had the intended impact than the classic: Does that make sense?
Many maths teachers I work with are tempted to create this follow-up question on the spot. This saves planning time, and sometimes they get away with it. But there are two reasons why I think this is a risky strategy:
1. You might make up a bad question
A teacher I observed recently asked the following diagnostic question:
Students struggled, so the teacher explained why the correct answer was D. He then made up a follow-up question on the spot to re-check his students’ understanding:
Do you see the problem? One of the critical misconceptions students have about the laws of indices is knowing whether to add or multiply the powers. With a 2 and 2, you can do it either way and still be correct.
Or how about this one? A teacher asked the following question:
The mistake several students made was not to factories enough:
So the teacher modelled the solution, and then made up a question to check students’ understanding:
But of course, the question does not test that same mistake as 5 and 25, which do not have any other common factors.
The challenge of writing good follow-up questions was highlighted during a recent session with an ECT I have been coaching.
On the left, we have the four retrieval questions she chose for her Do Now. On the right, we have the four follow-up questions that I asked her to write to be used as the re-check for understanding if her students struggled.
Before I start prattling on, what are your initial thoughts on her choice of follow-up questions?
I think each follow-up question is problematic. Let’s go through them in turn.
1. The subtraction question
12 – 7 challenges students to subtract across the threshold of 10. As a result, they must change from 2 digits to 1 digit. Students don’t have enough fingers for this. However, the follow-up question does not assess this.
2. The multiplication question
Here, we have a shift in difficulty from dealing with a 6 to dealing with a 2. If students get the first question wrong, it is likely that their issue concerns either the 6 times table or multiplications with numbers greater than 5. Either way, the follow-up question does not assess this.
3. The question about perimeter
If students go wrong on the original question, it is probably because they either confuse the area with the perimeter and hence multiply the two numbers, or they remember that the perimeter has to do with addition but just add the two numbers shown. In the follow-up question, all dimensions are labelled, hence a key step in the process has been done for them.
4. The question about ratio
The original question assesses students’ ability to share in a ratio. The follow-up question tests a different skill: writing a ratio.
In each of the cases above, the students could get the follow-up question correct, but still not understand a key concept within the original question.
But it is all too easy to go too far the other way – to write a follow-up question so similar to the original that little thought beyond changing a few numbers is needed. Here is an example of the latter:
The original question tests students’ ability to correctly find the percentage multiplier, ready to input into their calculator. However, the follow-up question uses the exact same percentage, so that skill is not tested.
In the heat of a lesson, with many things vying for our limited attention, the chance of us making up as good a follow-up question as we would outside this environment is minimal.
2. You might not be able to think of a follow-up question
Students struggled with the subtracting fractions question, so the teacher made them up a follow-up question on the spot:
But they also struggled with this question:
So what did the teacher do following his explanation? Ask them “Does that make sense?”.
In the coaching session afterwards, I asked him why he did a follow-up question for the fractions question but not one for the Venn Diagrams question. He replied, “Because I couldn’t think of a Venn Diagram question in the moment.”
But when planning the lesson, he could have.
Conclusion
Creating a follow-up question on the spot may be tempting. But for an extra couple of minutes of planning time, I recommend preparing it in advance. It ensures that you have a question to ask and that the data you get about your students’ understanding will be more reliable.
