高中英语课程标准明确了“思维品质”是一种核心素养，而阅读无疑是培养学生思维品质的一个重要途径。如何有效地运用阅读，选取有效的教学方法来提升学生的思维品质，是目前教师亟待解决的问题。“问题链”是当前英语阅读教学中普遍采用的一种教学方法，它是由老师根据一定的教学目标，将各个层面的知识相结合，设计出不同认知层级的问题，使其从低级到高级，从而提高学生的思维水平。

本研究旨在通过个案研究探索SOLO分类理论视角下高中英语阅读课堂中“问题链”的设计和实施现状，并提出针对性的改进策略，以期通过提高课堂提问的有效性去提高学生的思维水平。本研究选取北京S中学两位老师的英语阅读课堂进行研究，通过课堂观察、访谈等形式收集数据，并逐字地转录及分析。研究发现如下：

在问题链设计过程中，教师能设计多种类型的问题链，且问题数量适中，通过一连串的问题辅助教学目标的达成。在问题链实施过程中，教师根据问题的SOLO水平，给予学生不同的候答时间，但大多数候答时间不够充足，尤其在高水平问题上。此外，教师根据问题的SOLO水平，选择不同的叫答对象。低层次的问题，教师倾向于集体回答或者个人回答，高层次的问题教师倾向于小组讨论。最后，教师的反馈大多数只关注答案正确与否，且比较笼统。

基于此，本研究提出了针对性的改进策略。首先，在设计问题链时，要整体考虑问题的SOLO水平以及学生的学情，设计出适度、适量的问题，同时运用多种形式的问题链。其次，教师要给予学生充足的思考时间，在学生思考很久却回答不出时可以给予学生一定的指导。此外，教师要根据学生的水平和问题的水平，选择合适的叫答方式。最后，教师要及时的给予学生针对性的反馈。通过以上的策略，才能更好的发挥“问题链”在阅读教学中促进学生思维发展的作用。

总而言之，从SOLO分类视角出发去设计和实施高中英语阅读课堂中的“问题链”，能充分发挥课堂提问的作用，使学生的阅读理解更准确、更深入，更能发展学生的思维能力。最后，作者对本研究的研究结果进行了总结与反思，以期能为一线教师和教育工作者提供一定的思路与参考。

The new curriculum standard defines the thinking quality as one of the core literacies, and reading is undoubtedly an important vehicle for developing students’ thinking quality. It has become an urgent task for teachers to make full use of reading and to choose effective ways to improve students’ thinking skills. The “question chain” is a common approach in English reading class, where teachers design questions at different cognitive levels to guide students’  cognitive development from lower to higher levels and to improve their thinking skills, according to certain teaching objectives and in conjunction with various aspects of teaching.

This study aims to explore the current situation of design and implementation of “question chain” in English reading class from the perspective of SOLO theory through the case study, and propose some practical strategies for improvement, so as to improve students’ thinking by enhancing the effectiveness of classroom questioning. This study selects the English classroom of two teachers in S school for research, collects the data through classroom observation, interview, and physical analysis, and then all the data are transcribed into words and analyzed. The major findings of this study are as follows:

During the process of design, the teachers can design multiple types of “question chain” with a moderate number of questions to aid the achievement of the teaching objectives. During the process of implementation, teachers give students different wait time based on the SOLO level of the questions, but most of the wait time is insufficient, especially for higher-level questions. In addition, teachers’ distribution of questions is also based on the SOLO level of the questions, for questions at lower level, teachers tend to let the whole class or individual student to answer, while for questions at higher level, teachers prefer pair or group discussion. Finally, most of the teachers’ feedback focus only on whether the answers are correct or not, and is rather generic.

Based on the above, this study proposes targeted strategies for improvement. Firstly, when designing “question chain”, it is important to consider students’ learning and give a holistic view of questions at different levels of SOLO, design moderate and appropriate questions, and use multiple forms of “question chain” at the same time. Secondly, teachers should give students sufficient time to think and can give them some guidance when they cannot answer after thinking a lot. In addition, teachers should choose appropriate respondents according to the student’s language proficiency and the level of the questions. Finally, teachers should give students timely and specific feedback. Through the above strategies, teachers can better play the role of “question chain” in promoting students’ thinking development in reading teaching.

In conclusion, designing and implementing the “question chain” in high school English reading class from the perspective of SOLO theory can maximize the effectiveness of classroom questioning, improve students’ reading comprehension, as well as develop students’ higher thinking skills. Finally, this paper is summarized and reflected upon in the hope that it can provide some ideas and references for front-line teachers and educational researchers in their exploration of the “question chain”.