IntroductionResearchBackgroundEnglishteachinginseniorhighschooliscrucial.Ithelpsdevelopstudents’languageskills,culturalawareness,andcriticalthinking(MinistryofEducation,2020).However,thecurrentsituationofEnglishteachinginseniorhighschoolsisnotoptimistic.Someteachersstillsticktothetraditionalteachingconcepts,payingtoomuchattentiontotheimpartingofknowledge,ignoringthestudents’mainpositionandfailingintrainingstudents’abilities(Richards&Rodgers,2014).Intheclassroom,teachersareoftentheimpartersofknowledge,whilestudentsonlypassivelyacceptit,lackingtheopportunitytoactivelythinkandparticipate(Allwright,1984).Thiskindofteachingmodeleadstostudents’lowparticipationandunsatisfactorylearningeffect.Inclass,manystudentslacktheconsciousnessandenthusiasmofactiveparticipation,whichismanifestedaspassivelistening,unwillingtospeak,andlowenthusiasmforparticipatinginclassactivities.Thislowparticipationnotonlyaffectsthelearningeffectofstudents,butalsorestrictsthedevelopmentoftheirlanguageapplicationabilityandthinkingability(趙梅&陳威，2022).ResearchPurposeandSignificanceResearchPurposeThepurposeofthisstudyistodeeplyexplorethespecificrelationshipbetweenteachers’questioningmodeandstudents’participationinhighschoolEnglishclasses,andcomprehensivelyanalyzetheinfluenceofdifferentquestioningmodes,includingclosedquestioning,openquestioning,follow-upquestioningandguidedquestioning,onstudents’participation.Throughclassobservationanddataanalysis,itisclearwhichquestioningmodecanmoreeffectivelystimulatestudents’interestinlearning,improvetheirawarenessofactiveparticipationinclass,andpromotethedevelopmentoftheirlanguageexpressionandthinkingability.Atthesametime,thestudywillalsofocusontheinfluenceoftimingofquestioningonstudents’participation,soastoprovidescientificbasisforteacherstooptimizeclassroomquestioningstrategies.ResearchSignificanceFromatheoreticalperspective,thisstudyhelpstoenrichthetheoreticalsystemoftheimpactofteachingmethodsonstudents’learningbehaviorfromaninteractiveperspective.Inthefieldofeducation,interactiveteachinghasalwaysbeenoneofthehotspotsofresearch,andclassroomquestioning,asanimportantpartofinteractiveteaching,hasaprofoundimpactonstudents’learningprocessandlearningeffect.Throughempiricalresearch,thisstudywilldeeplyexploretheinfluencemechanismofdifferentquestioningmodesonstudents’participation,soastoprovideanewempiricalbasisforinteractiveteachingtheory.Theresultsofthisstudynotonlyhelptoenrichthetheoryofinteractiveteaching,butalsofurtherhighlighttheimportantpositionandroleofclassroomquestioningintheteachingprocess.Atthesametime,italsoopensupnewthinkingpathsandresearchperspectivesforeducationalresearchers.Inaddition,thediscussioninthispaperisnotlimitedtotheEnglishclassroom,butalsohasacertaininspirationalsignificanceforthestudyofclassroomquestioninginothersubjects.Itishopedthatthiscanbeusedasanopportunitytopromoteeducationaltheoriestomoveforwardinpracticeandinnovation,bringingmorepossibilities.Inpractice,theresultsofthisstudyhaveimportantguidanceforseniorhighschoolEnglishteaching.Atpresent,highschoolEnglishteachingisfacedwithmanychallenges,suchasstudents’lowlearningenthusiasmandlowparticipation,whichseriouslyaffecttheteachingqualityandstudents’learning.Throughthisstudy,teacherscandeeplyunderstandtheinfluenceofdifferentquestioningmodesonstudents’participationsoastoselectmoreeffectivequestioningmodesandoptimizeclassroomquestioningstrategiesaccordingtoteachingobjectives,teachingcontentandstudents’actualsituation.Inaddition,theresultsofthisstudycanalsoprovidereferencesforschoolsandeducationdepartmentstoformulateteachingpoliciesandteachingevaluationstandards,promotethereformanddevelopmentofseniorhighschoolEnglishteaching,improveteachingquality,andcultivatemorehigh-qualitytalentswithinnovativespiritandpracticalability.StructureofThisStudyThisstudyconsistsoffivemainsections,eachaddressingakeyaspectoftheresearch.Thefirstsectionintroducesthestudybyprovidinganoverviewoftheresearchbackground,purpose,andsignificance.IthighlightstheimportanceofclassroomquestioninginhighschoolEnglishteachinganditspotentialinfluenceonstudents’participation.Thesecondsectionreviewsrelevantliteratureonclassroomquestioningandstudentparticipation.Itexplorestheoreticalfoundationssuchasconstructivistlearningtheoryandinteractiveteaching.Furthermore,itexaminespreviousstudiesonquestioningstrategiesandstudentengagementinbothdomesticandinternationalcontexts,identifyingareaswherefurtherinvestigationisneeded.Thethirdsectionoutlinestheresearchdesign,includingtheresearchquestions,objects,methodsanddataanalysis.Itdescribestheobservationalapproachusedtoanalyzeteacherquestioningmodesandstudentparticipation,alongwiththecriteriaforassessingbehavioral,cognitive,andemotionalengagement.Thefourthsectionpresentstheresearchfindingsandprovidesadiscussionbasedondataanalysis.Itexaminesthedistributionofdifferentquestioningtypes,waitingtime,andpatternsofstudentparticipation.Thefindingsareinterpretedwithreferencetotheoreticalframeworksandpriorresearch,highlightingtherelationshipbetweenquestioningstrategiesandstudentengagement.Thefinalsectionsummarizesthemainconclusionsofthestudyanddiscussesitsimplicationsforteachingpractice.Itprovidessuggestionsforteachersonoptimizingquestioningstrategiestoenhancestudentparticipation.Additionally,itacknowledgesthelimitationsofthestudyandsuggestsdirectionsforfutureresearch.ThisstructureensuresalogicalprogressionofideasandfacilitatesacomprehensiveunderstandingoftherelationshipbetweendifferentquestioningmodesandstudentparticipationinhighschoolEnglishclassrooms.LiteratureReviewConstructivismLearningTheoryConstructivismlearningtheoryholdsthatknowledgeisnotacquiredpassivelyfromteachersbutisactivelyconstructedthroughsocialinteraction,collaboration,andcontextualizedproblem-solving

(Vygotsky,1978).InseniorhighschoolEnglishclasses,thistheoryemphasizestheroleofteacher-studentinteractioninco-creatingknowledgeandfosteringcriticalthinking

(Dewey,1938).Fromaconstructivistperspective,teacherstransitionfromknowledgetransmitterstofacilitatorswhoscaffoldlearning.Bydesigningauthentictasksandposingopenquestions,teachersguidestudentstoconnectnewinformationwithpriorknowledge

(Bruner,1996).Forinstance,inEnglishreadinglessons,strategicquestioning(e.g.,

“Howdoestheauthor’schoiceofwordsreflectthetheme?”)candeepenstudents’textualanalysisandindependentexploration.Suchpracticesalignwiththenotionof“cognitiveapprenticeship”(Collinsetal.,1989),whereteachersmodelthinkingprocesseswhilegraduallytransferringresponsibilitytolearners.InteractiveTeachingInteractiveteachinghasrichandimportantconnotationinthefieldofteaching.Itemphasizesthattheteachingprocessisnotaone-wayknowledgetransferbyteachers,butadynamicprocessofmulti-directionalinformationexchange,emotionalinteractionandcommongrowthbetweenteachersandstudents(Vygotsky,1978).Theinteractionbetweenteachersandstudentsisthekeycomponentoftheinteractiveteaching.Inclassroomteaching,teacherscommunicateandinteractdirectlywithstudentsthroughquestions,explanations,andguideddiscussions.Thiskindofinteractionisnotonlythetransferofknowledge,butalsothecommunicationofemotionsandtheguidanceofvalues(Chaudron,1988;Lyster,2007).Forexample,anencouraginglookoranaffirmativewordfromateachermaystimulatestudents’enthusiasmforlearningandenhancetheirself-confidence(Nunan,1992).Atthesametime,students’feedback,suchasaskingquestions,answeringquestions,expressingopinions,etc.,alsoprovidesanimportantbasisforteacherstoadjustteachingstrategiesandimproveteachingmethods(Walsh&Sattes,2005).

Throughtheinteractionbetweenteachersandstudents,theclassroomatmosphereismoreactiveandtheteachingeffecthasbeensignificantlyimproved(Allwright,1984).Theinteractionbetweenstudentsandstudentsalsoplaysanimportantroleinteaching.Cooperativelearning,groupdiscussion,roleplayandotheractivitiesamongstudentsaretheconcreteformsofstudent-studentinteraction(Johnson&Johnson,1999).

Incooperativelearning,studentscompletetaskstogether,communicatewitheachother,inspireeachother,andsolveproblemstogether.Forexample,ingroupdiscussionactivitiesinEnglishclasses,studentsdiscussaroundacertaintopicandsharetheirviewsandexperiences,whichnotonlyimprovestheirlanguageexpressionskills,butalsocultivatestheirteamworkspiritandcriticalthinkingskills(Ellis,1994).Interactionbetweenstudentsandstudentsenablesthemtolearndifferentwaysofthinkingandproblem-solvingfromtheirpeers,broadeningtheirhorizonsandpromotingtheirall-rounddevelopment.Teacher’sClassroomQuestioningModeTeachers’questioningintheclassroomisanimportantforceinpromotingeffectiveteachingandlearning.Theso-calledclassroomquestioningmodereferstothevariousquestioningmethodsandstrategiesusedbyteachersintheteachingprocesstoachieveteachinggoals,stimulatestudents’thinkingandpromotelearning(Walsh&Sattes,2005).Commontypesofquestioningincludeclosedquestioning,openquestioning,follow-upquestioning,andguidedquestioning,whicharecharacterizedbydifferenttypesandapplicabletodifferentteachingsituations.Closedquestionsusuallyhavepredeterminedanswersandareprimarilyusedtoteststudents’masteryofthebasics(Chaudron,1988).Forexample,Suchquestionslike“Howdoyoupronouncethisword?”,“Whoistheauthorofthisarticle?”canhelpteachersquicklyunderstandstudents’knowledgelevelandidentifylearningproblemsintime(Nunan,1992).However,thiskindofquestioninghasitslimitationsthatstudentsmostlyjustrecallwhattheyalreadyknow,anditisdifficulttoleadthemtodeeperthinkingandinquiry(Brooks&Brooks,1993).Incontrast,openquestioningrequiresstudentstoanalyzeandrespondbasedontheirownunderstandingandexperience,withopenandvariedanswers(Lyster,2007).Questionssuchas“Whatdoyouthinkthisstoryistryingtotellus?”and“Whatdoyouthinkaboutthisquestion?”stimulateactivethinkingandencouragestudentstoexpresstheirpersonalopinionswhiledevelopingcriticalthinkingandcreativity(Wiggins&McTighe,2005).Openquestioningalsohelpstoenhancestudents’analyticalandproblem-solvingskillsbyguidingthemtoexplorethefullrangeofissues.Follow-upquestionsthatbuildonstudents’initialresponsesareanothercommonstrategyforimprovingthequalityofclassroominteraction.Follow-upquestionsusuallyencouragestudentstofurtherelaborateontheirideasorprovidemoredetailedexplanations.Forexample,afterastudentanswersanopenquestion,theteachermayaskafollow-upquestion,“Canyougivemeanexampletosupportyourpoint?”(Wells,1999).Inastudyrelatedtohigh-schoolEnglishteachingstrategies,itwasemphasizedthatfollow-upquestionsareeffectiveindeepeningstudents’understandingofcomplextopics(劉暢&范思遠(yuǎn)，2023).Asforguidedquestioning,itismorelikebuildingaladdertounderstanding.Throughaseriesofstep-by-stepquestions,teachershelpstudentstoovercomecomplexknowledgeordifficultpointsstepbystep(Rosenshine,Meister,&Chapman,1996).Inhigh-schoolEnglishreadingclasses,guidedquestionscanbeusedtoleadstudentsthroughthetext,helpingthemunderstandtheplot,characters,andthemesmoreeffectively(陳敏，2023).StudentParticipationStudentengagementisanimportantindicatorformeasuringstudents’involvementandenthusiasminclassroomteaching,encompassingthreelevels:behavioral,cognitive,andemotionalengagement(Fredricks,Blumenfeld,&Paris,2004).Avisualrepresentationofstudentengagementisthebehaviorexhibitedintheclassroom(Finn&Zimmer,2012).Forexample,studentsactivelyraisetheirhandstospeak,activelyparticipateindiscussions,answerquestionscarefully,orcollaboratewithpeerstocompletetasks.Theseexternalbehaviorsareadirectreflectionofstudents’motivationandwillingnesstoengageinlearning,aswellasanimportantbasisforteacherstoassessstudents’learningstatus.Inadditiontothebehaviorallevel,cognitiveengagementinlearningcannotbeignoredaswell.Itfocusesmoreonstudents’inputsatthethinkinglevel,suchasthinkingdeeplyaboutquestionsposedbytheteacher,exploringnewknowledgeindependently,orengaginginhigher-ordercognitiveactivitiessuchasanalyzing,synthesizing,andevaluating.Itcanbearguedthatcognitiveengagementisacoredriverofdeeplearningandthedevelopmentofcriticalthinkingskills(Hattie,2019).Emotionalengagementofstudentsisalsoanimportantfactorthataffectsthelearningstate.Emotionalengagementreferstotheemotionalexperiencesandattitudinalresponsesthatstudentshaveduringthelearningprocess(Skinner,Kindermann,&Furrer,2009).Whenstudentshaveastronginterestandpositiveemotionsinasubject,theyusuallydemonstratestrongmotivationandpersistence.Conversely,whenthereisalackofinterest,negativeemotionsandresistanceoftenfollow,impedinglearning.ResearchGapLiteraturehasdoneabundantlyinthestudyofteacher-studentinteraction,questioningstrategies,andstudentparticipationinclassroomsettings,whichshowsthatthequestionmodesteachersadoptcaninfluencehowstudentsparticipateinclass(Fredricksetal.,2004).However,therearestillalotofgapsonthisissueinChinesehighschoolEnglishclassrooms.Somestudieshavefocusedonsimpletypesofquestions,suchas“yes/no”questions,orhowteacherscorrecterrorsafteraskingquestions,butfewhaveexploredhowteachersflexiblyusedifferentquestioningstrategies,suchasfollow-upquestionsandguidedquestions,tocontinuouslystimulatestudents’participation.Moststudiesalsomeasureengagementbycountinghowoftenstudentsanswerquestions(e.g.,李雪,2019),buttheyrarelyaskstudentshowthey

feel

(e.g.,stressedorinterested).Westerntheoriesaboutinteractivelearning(Vygotsky,1978)don’tfullyexplainthechallengesinChina’slargeEnglishclasses,whereteachersmustcovertextbookcontentquicklywhiletryingtoaskmeaningfulquestions(張艷,2018).ThesegapssuggestaneedforresearchthatexploresrealclassroompracticesinChina’shighschools,usingmethodsthattrackbothteachingstrategiesandstudentexperiences.ResearchDesignResearchQuestionsThisstudyaimstodeeplyexplorethespecificrelationshipbetweenteachers’questioningpatternsandstudents’participationinhighschoolEnglishclassrooms.Basedonthis,thefollowingspecificresearchquestionsareproposed:HowaredifferentquestionmodesusedinhighschoolEnglishclasses?Whatistherelationshipbetweenmodesofquestioningandstudents’participation?ResearchObjectsInthisstudy,twoclassesofsenioroneinDazhuMiddleSchool,DazhouCity,SichuanProvincewereselectedastheresearchobjects,oneofwhichwasanexperimentalclassandtheotherwasanordinaryclasswithatotalnumberof100studentparticipants.Thetwoclassesrepresentedstudentsofdifferentlevels,whichcanmorecomprehensivelyreflecttheactualsituationofseniorhighschoolEnglishclassroom.Inchoosingtheclasses,factorssuchasstudents’Englishlevel,learningabilityandlearningattitudewerefullyconsideredtoensurethediversityandrepresentationofthesample.Atthesametime,theresearcherfullycommunicatedwiththeschoolandteachers,andwontheirsupportandcooperationtoensurethesmoothprogressoftheresearch.ResearchMethodThemethodofclassroomobservationwasusedasthemainresearchmethodinthisstudytocollectdataonteacherquestioningpatternsandstudentengagement.ClassroomobservationswasconductedoveramonthfromJanuarytoFebruary,coveringtwoclassesofEnglishclasses.Theresearcherobserved5Englishlessonsineachclass.Theobservationmainlycoveredtheteacher’squestioningpatternandthestudents’participationperformance.Intermsoftheteacher’squestioningmode,eachquestionraisedbytheteacherwasrecordedindetail.Theresearcheraccuratelyrecordedthespecificcontentofthesequestions,suchas“Isthisasimplesentence?”and“Whatdoyouthinkarethemaincausesofenvironmentalpollution?”,andhowthestudentsrespondedtothesequestions.Atthesametime,theresearcheralsorecordedthewaitingtimeofquestions.Theobservationofstudents’participationwascarriedoutfromthethreelevelsofbehavioral,cognitiveandemotionalparticipation.Atthelevelofbehavioralparticipation,recordsweremadeofthenumberoftimesstudentstooktheinitiativetoraisetheirhandstospeak,thelengthoftheirspeeches,andtheaccuracyandcompletenessoftheiranswerstoquestions.Forexample,studentAtooktheinitiativetoraisehishandtospeak3timesinacertainclass,eachspeechlastedabout1-2minutes,andtwovaluableviewswereputforward.Atthelevelofcognitiveparticipation,theresearcherobservedthedepthofthinkingofstudentswhenansweringquestions:whethertheyareabletoanalyze,reasonandjudgewithwhattheyhavelearned,andwhethertheyareabletoputforwarduniqueinsightsandsolutions.Forexample,whendiscussingthequestionof“HowtoimproveEnglishwritinglevel”,StudentBcannotonlylistcommonmethods,suchasreadingmoreandpracticingmore,butalsocarryoutin-depthanalysisfromtheaspectsofthelogicoflanguageexpression,theaccuracyofgrammarandtherichnessofvocabulary,andputforwardauniqueopiniononimprovingwritingabilitybyimitatingexcellentmodelessays.Atthistime,studentB’sanswercontentandthinkingprocessshouldberecordedindetail.Attheemotionalengagementlevel,theresearcherfocusedonstudents’facialexpressions,bodylanguage,emotionalstate,andlevelofinterestandengagementinthelearningtask.Forexample,itwasobservedthatstudentCalwaysremainedattentiveinclass,smiled,activelyparticipatedinvariousactivities,andshowedastronginterestinlearningEnglish.WhilestudentDwasabsent-mindedinclassandhadnegativeattitudetowardslearningtasks.Alloftheseshouldberecorded.DataAnalysisThetopicanalysismethodwasusedtoanalyzetheteacher’squestioningmode,andthetypesofquestionweredefinedasclosedquestion,openquestion,follow-upquestionandguidedquestion.Theresearchercarefullystudiedthepartaboutteachers’questioningintheobservationrecords,classifiedthesequestionsintotheabovementionedfourtypes,countedthenumberofoccurencesofeachtypeofquestionandcalculatedtheirpercentages.Meanwhile,theaveragewaitingtimewasalsocalculated.Inordertoexplorestudents’classroomengagementindepth,thisstudysystematicallyanalyzedtherelationshipbetweendifferentquestioningtypesandstudents’engagementintermsofbehavioral,cognitive,andemotionaldimensions.Onthebehavioraldimension,thefocuswasonstudents’classroomperformanceinthefaceofdifferenttypesofquestioning.Thenumberoftimesstudentstooktheinitiativetoanswerquestionswasrecordedindetail.Bycomparingstudents’behavioraldataunderdifferentquestiontypes,itwaspossibletounderstandtheirclassroomparticipation.Forexample,itwasexaminedwhetheropenquestionsweremorelikelytopromptstudentstoparticipateingroupactivitiesthanclosedquestions.Thecognitivelevelofanalysisfocusesonthethinkingskillsdemonstratedbystudentsinansweringdifferentquestions.Byassessingthequality,logicandcreativityofstudents’answers,thedepthoftheirunderstandingofthecontentisjudged.Forexample,whenfacedwithguidedquestions,studentswereobservedfortheirabilitytoanalyzeknowledgeindepthandinastructuredmanner,whilewhenrespondingtoopenquestions,attentionwaspaidtowhethertheywereabletopresentoriginalideasandwhethertheirargumentswerereasonable.Asfortheemotionaldimension,theresearchfocusesmoreonstudents’emotionalstatesandtheirresponsestodifferentquestioningtypes.Students’emotionalengagementisjudgedbyobservingtheirnon-verbalbehaviorssuchasfacialexpressions,toneofvoiceandbodylanguage.Forexample,itwasanalyzedwhetherstudentsshowedinterestinrespondingtochallengingopenorfollow-upquestions,andwhethertheyshowedsignsofburnoutorindifferencewhenfacedwithclosedquestions.Bycarefullyanalyzingtheseobservationrecords,thisstudyrevealedtherelationshipbetweenteachers’questioningpatternsandstudents’participation,whichnotonlylaidasolidfoundationforthesubsequentfindingsanddiscussions,butalsomadethefindingsmorecomprehensive,in-depthandconvincing.ResearchResultsandDiscussionQuestioningMode:ThePresentSituationinEnglishclassroominHighSchoolProportionofQuestionTypesThroughdetailedstatisticsandanalysisofclassroomobservationdata,itisfoundthatthetypesofteachers’questioninginhighschoolEnglishclassesshowcertaindistributioncharacteristics.Amongthem,theproportionofclosedquestionsisrelativelyhigh,accountingfor65%ofthetotalnumberofquestions.Thiskindofquestioningismainlyusedtoquicklyacquirestudents’graspofbasicknowledge,suchasquestionsaboutwordspellingandgrammarrules.Forexample,whenexplainingEnglishtenses,theteachermayask,“Whatconstitutesthepresentsimpletense?”“Whichtenseshouldbeusedinthissentence?”Thiskindofquestioncanhelpteacherstoknowthestudents’familiaritywithbasicknowledgeintime,soastofacilitatetargetedexplanationandintensivetraining.openquestionsaccountfor20%,whichislowerthanclosedquestions,buttheyplayanimportantroleinstimulatingstudents’thinkingandpromotingtheirlanguageexpression.openquestionencouragesstudentstothinkaboutproblemsfromdifferentanglesandexpresstheirownopinionsandinsights,whichcultivatesstudents’criticalthinkingandinnovativeabilities.Forexample,intheteachingofreading,theteacherwillaskthequestion,“Ifyouweretheauthor,howwouldyoucontinuethestory?”Thiskindofquestioncanguidestudentstodeeplyunderstandthecontentofthearticle,digoutthedeepmeaningbehindthearticle,andexercisestudents’languageorganizationandexpressionskills.Theproportionoffollow-upquestionsis10%.Itisusuallyaquestioningmethodadoptedbyteacherstofurtherguidestudents’thinkingandexpandtheirthinkingafterstudentshaveansweredthequestions.Forexample,afterstudentshaveansweredthereasonsforacertainhistoricalevent,theteacherwillask,“Thenwhatspecificinfluencesdidthiseventhaveonthesocietyatthattime?”Byaskingthiskindofquestion,teacherscanhelpstudentsbuildamorecompleteknowledgesystemandcultivatetheirlogicalthinkingabilityandtheabilitytoexploreproblemsmoredeeeply.Guidedquestions,aimingtoguidestudentstothinkinaspecificdirectionandhelpthemfindwaystosolveproblems,accountfor5%.Forexample,whenstudentshavenoideaforaproblem,teachercanuseguidedquestionstograduallyinspirestudentstothink.Guidedquestioningcanreducethedifficultyoftheproblem,makeiteasierforstudentstounderstandandsolvetheproblem,andenhancestudents’confidenceinlearning.Table1.ProportionofQuestionTypesQuestionTypesUsageProportionTypicalExamplesClosedQuestions65%“Whatisthepasttenseof‘break’?”“Whichconjunctionconnectstheseclauses?”O(jiān)penQuestions20%“Howdoestheauthor’stonereflectsocietalattitudes?”“Ifyouwerethecharacter,howwouldyourespond?”Follow-upQuestions10%“Youmentionedculturalidentity—canyoufindtextualevidencesupportingthisidea?”GuidedQuestions5%“Let’sanalyzethesentencestructurefirst—whatfunctiondoesthesubordinateclauseservehere?”WaitingtimeforquestionsWithregardtoquestionwaitingtime,thestudyfoundthatteachersgenerallyspentlesstimewaitingforstudentstoanswerafteraskingquestions.Theaveragewaitingtimewasabout2.3seconds,andthewaitingtimeof1-3secondswasmorecommon,accountingfor72%ofthetotalnumberofquestions.Forsomesimplequestions,suchwaitingtimemaybeenoughforstudentstothinkandanswer,butforquestionsthatrequirein-depththinkingandanalysis,shortwaitingtimemaylimitstudents’thinking,resultingintheirinabilitytoadequatelyorganizelanguagetogivecompleteandaccurateanswers.Forexample,whendiscussingtheopenquestionof“Howtosolvetheproblemofenvironmentalpollution”,duetotheshortwaitingtime,studentsmayonlysimplylistsomecommonsolutions,butfailtoconductin-depthanalysisanddiscussionoftheproblem,suchasproposingcomprehensivesolutionsfrommultiplelevelssuchaspolicy,technologyandsocialconsciousness.Inaddition,18%ofthequestionswaitlessthanonesecond,inwhichcase,studentshavelittletimetothinkandcanonlygivehastyanswers,whichmayeasilyleadtowrongorincompleteanswers,affectingstudents’learningenthusiasmandself-confidence.However,afewteachersareawareoftheimportanceofwaitingtimeandgivestudentsplentyoftimetothinkafteraskingquestions.Intheseteachers’classes,10percentofthequestionshadawaittimeofmorethanfiveseconds.Whenstudentshadenoughtimetothink,theywereabletoanalyzequestionsmoredeeplyandcomeupwithmoreinnovativeandin-depthideas.Forexample,intheappreciationofliteraryworks,ifstudentsaregivenenoughwaitingtime,theycananalyzetheworksfrommultipleperspectivessuchasthetheme,characters,writingtechniques