By Angelo Ross, PSIA-AASI Education Development Manager

“Hi, how are you?” “Fine, how are you?” “Fine, thanks.”

In terms of types of exchanges, this common back-and-forth is classified as phatic, “denoting or relating to language used for general purposes of social interaction, rather than to convey information or ask questions.” It is language intended to set a mood and to maintain social connection without an exchange of substantive information. Phatic language is ritualistic and commonly called small talk.

Other common phatic expressions are, “How ya doing?”, “Cold enough for ya?”, “Hey, what’s up?”

In our world of snowsports instruction, the most prevalent phatic expression, posed often after assigning students a task and giving them a chance to try it, is, “How did that feel?”, which typically generates the automatic, and mostly inert, response, “Good,” which usually precipitates assigning another task, observing another attempt, and asking, “How did that feel?” “Good.” And so on.

I think that comparing, “How did that feel?” to other common, off-snow phatic expressions paints a picture of the purpose – and profound limitations – of that type of exchange when used in a learning environment. Below, you will find several suggestions of refined inquiry that will better serve our needs, and the needs of our students.

Phatic+

First, let’s not abandon phatic language entirely. As stated, phatic language serves the purpose of setting a mood and maintaining social connection. Used to kickstart an exchange with a particularly quiet student; for example, “How did that feel?” can prime the verbal exchange pump and set the wheels in motion for a substantive follow-up question, like, “Oh, cool! What specifically about that run felt better than our previous runs today?” So, we’re likely wise to keep phatic questions in our Inquiry Arsenal, but let’s think of it as “Phatic+” with the plus being the follow-up question that yields information we can build on.

Framed-Closed Questions

Closed-ended questions get a bad rap and, often, rightfully so as they elicit limited responses, can limit student choice and stifle conversation, and generate short responses that are easily misinterpreted. Framed well, however, closed questions can focus student self-coaching so students can continue targeted practice in the absence of a teacher. During a lesson, when students have demonstrated a desired performance change, but are still in the lower Fitts and Posner Zones of Skill Development [see Teaching Snowsports Manual, p. 65], a framed-closed question can provide just what they need to continue progressing after the conclusion of the lesson.

It works like this: The instructor observes the desired performance change, perhaps a more athletic stance that allows better access to the entire length of the board or skis. The instructor may say, “That was it! I was able to see the nose/tips engaged more with the snow! Let’s repeat that last drill exactly, but this time, when we stop, I’m going to count to three and say “point” and I want you all to point to the body part where you are feeling something different happening.”

During the next stop, after, “One…two…three…point,” in a group of six people, for example, it is not uncommon to have two people point toward their lower leg, two people point to their abs/core, one point at her shoulder, and one point at his upper leg. The takeaway is this: People can be kinesthetically aware very differently for a multitude of reasons. Their ability to self-coach after the lesson concludes is dependent on their ability to recreate body performance to affect gear performance effectively in the absence of feedback from a trained eye. Having each student identify and then reflect upon their sensations and experience increases likelihood of purposeful practice.

I warn against telling people what they should feel. Rather, an effective coach will recognize performance change – be objective, external eyes for their students – and have students express what they do feel. This personalization of progress serves students much more effectively.

Scaling Questions

Asking students to scale or rank experiences on a spectrum allows them to compare their performance across multiple attempts. Scaled questions may look like this: “On a scale from 1-10, with 1 being Not Awesome At All and 10 being SO AWESOME!, rank how helpful the Tall & Small practice was for when we were off-piste,” or “On a scale from 1-5, with 5 being the highest, how much did you like our run on Upper Wildcat?” Benefits of ranking experience for students include increasing likelihood of self-awareness, open-minded thinking, and voice or agency in a learning setting. Benefits for teachers include having a quick diagnostic tool on hand, opening the door for more profound conversation with students, tracking progress through time, and increasing trust with students.

There are many ways to elevate your inquiry beyond the contents of this article. Ultimately, refining the way we ask questions is about more than shaping conversation – it’s about shaping learning. When we move beyond default phatic exchanges and use intentional prompts, we align with best practices in teaching and learning that strengthen long-term memory and help guide students toward the autonomous stage of Fitts and Posner’s skill development model.

Thoughtful questioning increases student engagement and trust, fostering a learning environment where individuals feel seen, supported, and capable of self-coaching. The result is not just better performance in the moment, but a greater likelihood that students will return for more days on snow and specifically more days on snow with us.