A Modification of Think Pair Share to Make it More Learner-Centered by Using Student-Generated Questions

Think Pair Share is a learning activity first introduced by Lyman (Lyman 1981) for use in Specieal Education settings. Since then, it has grown in popularity and is used in a wide variety of higher education settings. Usually the teacher poses a question, the students write about the topic (think), Then pair up to discuss their answers (pair), and then present their answers to the entire class (share) (Barkley, Cross, and Major 2005, 103–7; Millis and Cottell 1998, 115–16; Prahl 2017). In order to make Think Pair Share more learner-centered, I have altered it slightly by doing it at the beginning of class, and having students develop two questions based on reading done before class. I emphasize that the questions should seek insight rather than require simple recall. I then have them pair up and answer their partner’s questions. Next, I have them count off into groups of about five, thus breaking up the pairs, and have the groups answer every member’s questions. Each group is also responsible for choosing two questions as the best questions that will be asked for me to answer. I leave it up to the group to determine what is “best,” though when giving instructions for this part, I refer back to the notion of seeking insight. I usually answer the first one or two questions from the groups directly, but as soon as possible, I open up the questions for the whole class to answer so that I act more as moderator and final arbiter on accuracy, and allow students to bring their own perspectives to the questions. At the end, I ask if anyone’s questions did not get answered. By having students develop their own questions, I am allowing them to explore aspects of the topic of greatest interest to them. As a result, I have seen a large increase in the student’s investment in doing the exercise. When I first altered this activity to having the students develop the questions, I only did the pairing and sharing, but too often, the students were asking superficial/ recall questions such as “what is the origin and insertion of the supraspinatus?” By including the “squaring” groups and having the students choose the best questions, they are performing a low level of peer evaluation. This has led to better questions such as, “how does the supraspinatus lead to frozen shoulder?” This Think Pair Share modification could be further altered to make it more adaptable to different classrooms. First, it could be performed later in the class period rather than at the beginning and could focus on material presented that day, thus reinforcing the day’s material. An advantage to doing it at the beginning of class though, is that this allows me to know what areas the students already have a good comprehension of, and what areas I need to focus on more, and creates more opportunities for interleaving. A different option to help the students engage in metacognition and develop deeper questions would be to project an image of Bloom’s taxonomy while the students developed their questions. Another variation could be to skip the squaring and have the students all present their questions to the class and write them on the board grouped by question themes, perhaps using Bloom’s taxonomy to group them.