Consider the following questions:

• ‘What is the answer?’
• ‘What might the answer be?’

The meaning of the sentence is significantly altered by the word ‘might’.

In sentence (1) there is an implied presumption that the questioner knows the answer and expects the person answering to give a response that fits with this.

It is akin to asking someone to guess what you are thinking.

In sentence (2) there is an implied presumption that the questioner expects the person answering to use reasoning in their response.

The word ‘might’ signals possibility.

In sentence (2) the suggestion is that several possible answers may exist, and it is for the person asking the question and the person answering the question to explore these.

In sentence (1) there is a closing down of possibilities.

The use of the word pairing ‘is the’ implies the notion of prior existence and the concept of oneness.

The question suggests there is a single answer that exists and that, by necessity, this is the correct answer.

In many situations, this formulation is appropriate. Particularly when checking knowledge, assessing what learners know, and seeking specific answers:

• What is the capital of France?
• Who is this?
• What is the answer to the question: ‘Where is the Forth Bridge?’

France has only one capital, a person happens to be who they are and only who they are, and the Forth Bridge spans the Firth of Forth in Scotland.

If we take a closer look, however, we may find that, despite appearances, even these questions can afford more than one possible answer:

• Paris; the administrative centre of the country; the letter ‘F’; it depends on the time period to which your referring; the centre of government.

• A specific person (Bob Smith); a policeman (who also happens to be Bob Smith); my brother (Bob Smith, a policeman); a criminal (my brother Bob Smith, the corrupt policeman); to me, that person no longer exists (my disgraced brother Bob Smith, a corrupt policeman who the family have excommunicated).

• In Scotland; north-west of Edinburgh; suspended above the Firth of Forth; just south of Dunfermline; in between North Queensferry and Queensferry

Several issues are thrown up by this, not least of which is the relative vagueness of language.

As teachers, we run the risk of assuming that how we are thinking is how learners are thinking.

This can lead to us hearing what learners say and mistaking it for what we think they’ve said.

A classic example is when a learner correctly guesses an answer and the teacher assumes they understand the reasoning which leads to that answer being correct.

In fact, the teacher has no information on which to make a judgement.

They must elicit more than the answer itself if they are to have knowledge of where it came from and whether it was the result of correct thinking.

Imagine that a particular answer to a particular question is, in the teacher’s mind, a small branch at the top of a large, ancient tree.

The answer is wholly dependent on everything that came before it.

The teacher asks a question like ‘What is photosynthesis?’.

A learner gives an answer that looks like the branch in the teacher’s mind.

To all intents and purposes, it appears to be identical to the branch.

There is no evidence, however, that the branch is at the top of a large, ancient tree.

It could be a branch that has been broken off the tree and now lies on the floor.

It could be a branch that is being waved in the air by a child.

It could be a papier-mâché model of a branch that has been painted to look real.

When posing questions to learners it is worth inserting the word ‘might’.

Doing so consistently can alter the atmosphere of your classroom in the following ways:

• It makes clear to learners that their perspectives are welcome.
• It shows that reasoning is prioritised over simply giving a correct answer (the most powerful answer is the one that is correct because of the reasoning underpinning it).
• It gives learners a sense of ownership. The message is that knowledge is being constructed together, and everybody in the classroom can play a part.
• It encourages learners to speculate and to use their own thinking skills to put forward possible answers. This contrasts with the ‘what is it?’ formulation that can put learners off if they fear being wrong.
• It indicates that, in many situations, a range of interpretations are possible and that it is less about guessing what’s in the teacher’s head and more about justifying and explaining why you think what you do.

The implications for discussion are clear.

Using the word ‘might’ opens a range of possibilities that might be suggested, explored, and discussed.

Always using closed questions sacrifices this in favour of a belief that finding the correct answer is the aim of questioning.

It is not.

It is one of the aims.

But so too is teaching how to find an answer that is correct.

Through repeated experience of discursive reasoning, learners are likely to come to understand the logical formulas, modes of analysis, and relationships to evidence that strong, persuasive interpretations or arguments require.

If there are specific facts that learners need to know, tell them what they are (or ask them to find out) and then ask them to do something with them.

For example, in a lesson on gravity you could begin by explaining what gravity is and at what rate objects fall, both on the Earth and on the moon.

The follow-up question could be:

• Why might the rate of fall be different on the Earth from what it is on the moon?

This gives learners an opportunity to think and discuss.

It may be the case that no one puts forward an answer that is correct.

However, this is still valuable, because you and the class can analyse the suggestions and demonstrate why they are not correct (perhaps due to faulty reasoning or a lack of evidence).

Finally, you can always explain the correct answer if it isn’t yielded through discussion.

And you can do so in a way that makes the evidence and reasoning explicit.

Using ‘might’ does not mean descending into relativism (where all answers are equal).

Nor is it about removing the expectation on the teacher to teach.

Rather, it’s a way to open up discussion and encourage learners to think, share, and reason.

In so doing, it provides a powerful aid to learning.