Wait Time in Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Learning

A common practice in synchronized online learning is for an educator to ask a question to gauge how well students understand the material. An educator might follow the question by immediately calling on a specific student for a response, randomly selecting a student for an immediate response, pausing before calling on a student, or having students individually brainstorm before sharing their thoughts. In each of these options, how time is used has the potential to impact a variety of outcomes for students.

“Wait time” is a concept that originated in the research of Mary Budd Rowe [1]. Rowe documented that, on average, once an educator asked a question of a specific student, the educator waited less than one second before rephrasing their question, commenting on the student, or moving on to another topic. Rowe found that educators who intentionally waited three to five seconds before soliciting a response yielded improvement in the quantity and quality of student responses [2]. Since this work, scholars have expanded definitions of wait time and contextualized its use in ways that illustrate the importance of educators thinking about time in learning, especially online.

Defining Wait Time

A broad definition of wait time increases its usefulness in thinking about time and learning in online contexts. Rowe’s original conceptualization of wait time was narrowly defined as the time an educator allowed a particular student to take in responding to a specific question. Scholarship has gone on to create subcategories to distinguish between types of wait time [3]. Other scholars have since pushed to reframe wait time more expansively, using terms such as “think time” and “thinking time.” Stahl argued for the use of the term think time for the phenomenon primarily because it “names the primary academic purpose and activity of this period of silence—to allow students and the teacher to complete on-task thinking” [4].

Scholarship on Wait Time

Scholarship has outlined problems associated with the use of wait time. In ordinary conversation, speakers work to minimize pauses to about one second [5], likely because too much time between speaking in a conversation has been shown to be interpreted as problematic by those in the dialogue [6]. Roberts et al. found that American listeners are likely to perceive trouble in a conversation around the 600-millisecond mark in a lapse of conversation, with peak troublesomeness at 900 milliseconds [7]. Such socialization around less than one second of silence while turn-taking in conversation seems to influence how educators handle dialogue in the classroom. Early scholarship highlighted the fast pace of instruction in classrooms [1]. Gambrell’s work documented how educators asked a new question every 43 seconds, on average [8]. Other scholarship highlights barriers to using wait time in the classroom, such as the belief that waiting disrupts the pacing of a lesson, young students do not know what to do with the extra time, and pressure for educators to get through content [9].

Scholarship has also documented the positive impacts of using wait time. Rowe documented several benefits of utilizing three seconds of wait time among middle and high school students. Incorporating wait time increased the number of students volunteering to speak, while the quality of student answers increased, as well as the length of their answers. Subsequent scholarship has also linked increased wait time directly with increased academic achievement [10], retention of information [11], higher quality student responses [12], longer and more student-driven responses [13], and generally improved engagement in the classroom [14]. Behaviorally, the use of wait time decreased instances of activities that may result in disciplinary problems [2].

Additionally, the use of wait time has been shown to have benefits for educators. Middle and high school teachers who introduced the use of wait time were shown to decrease the number of questions they asked while improving the quality and variety of posed questions [15]. Other scholarship has documented how educators who introduced wait time began to use more varied forms of questioning strategies in checking for understanding [2].

Though current scholarship regarding synchronous and asynchronous online learning is limited, online environments have been shown to be unique contexts for wait time. Kozar’s work on wait time in online modalities indicated educators’ average wait time while audio conferencing was 2.7 seconds and 3.9 seconds while video conferencing, both nearing the 3 to 5 second threshold suggested by Rowe [16]. However, online learning modalities can also exacerbate students’ desire to multitask while in class [17]. These realities place the responsibility of maintaining student engagement on the educator. Scholarship indicates the central role that wait time can play in increasing the engagement of online learners, especially when students utilize chat functions as part of the live online learning experience [18].

How to Use Wait Time Online

Synchronous online learning can utilize wait time similarly to face-to-face instruction with minimal modification. Synchronous online learning refers to course delivery in which instruction and content happen in real time, typically using a tool such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or Webex. Wasik and Hinderman provide strategies for promoting wait time, which can be applied to online learning [9]. Several of these strategies are outlined below and are accompanied by simple narratives, contrived by the author, to showcase possible applications for a variety of grade levels.

Educators can introduce the concept of wait time by explaining that wait time is a purposeful pause to allow students time to think of a response after a question is asked. Educators can help students understand the benefits of wait times using pedagogic reasoning, citing scholarship, and contextualizing the practice for the online space.

Educator: In our classroom, I want high-quality responses from a variety of students. So, I am going to use wait time. Wait time means I will ask a question and then pause or perhaps have you think before you share with the class. Research seems to suggest that when students have a moment to think, their answers are better. So, while it may seem a bit odd at first, we are going to practice using wait time. Since we are online, I will call on a particular student, or I will ask you to use your hand raise feature.

The educator can then model what waiting three seconds looks and feels like for their students. To further demonstrate the concept, educators can have students ask a question and model wait time by pausing for three seconds before responding.

Educator: Someone, please ask me a question.

Student: What is your favorite food?

[wait three seconds]

Educator: Burritos are my favorite food.

Educators should model using the think-aloud technique in a similar way. Here, the educator uses a think-aloud to help students see and hear how one can utilize wait time to formulate a response.  Think-alouds can help students and educators identify areas of need as students move towards proficiency on a particular learning goal for an online instructional unit.

Educator: Please ask me the same question again.

Student: What is your favorite food?

Educator: I am thinking in my brain about delicious food. I am torn between burritos and pizza. I think I have to go with burritos. Burritos are my favorite food.

Through the practice of wait time, educators and students learn to embrace patience as part of the online learning experience. Utilizing wait time constitutes introducing a new conversation style that pushes against socialized speaking patterns. Effective use of wait time will take practice for both the educator and student. They will begin to recognize that the purpose of educational interactions is not to fill time or get rid of silence, but to utilize aspects of the classroom, like silence, for the benefit of learning.

Think-pair-share utilizes a more expansive form of wait time. The technique involves an educator asking students a question, giving students time to individually think or write a response, students sharing their ideas with a partner, and then students potentially sharing the response with the entire class [20]. Online, the ability to turn and talk to a partner can be facilitated by utilizing breakout rooms found within most software interfaces. Clear directions, practice, and pre-programming of breakout rooms can streamline the process of transitioning from whole class to small groups and back without major disruption to the learning process.

Asynchronous online learning options pose unique challenges to utilizing wait time. Asynchronous online learning occurs when instruction and content access do not happen in real-time. Some asynchronous online delivery platforms include Canvas and Blackboard. Educators can embed the benefits of wait time into the asynchronous online learning experience for students. During a pre-recorded lecture that uses slides or video, for example, an educator may pose a question or prompt to students. The educator may then prompt students to “take two minutes and brainstorm your ideas” (see Figure 1). The educator would then pause speaking for two minutes and allow the student to come up with their ideas before moving on. Alternatively, the educator might train students to pause their video while they respond to the questions. Having a recurring visual cue on the screen can help students know that this is an opportunity for them to use wait time. Educators may use a visual that says, “PAWS [pause] the video while you do this” (see Figure 2). Such maneuvers do not allow for immediate feedback to the educator but may leverage the benefits of wait time for student learning.

Figure 1. Slide with question prompt.

[click to enlarge]

Figure 2. Slide with pause prompt.

[click to enlarge]

Considerations in Using Wait Time

Online educators, like their in-person counterparts, must work to align pedagogical strategies, such as wait time, with learning outcomes and goals in light of their instructional context and learner population. In light of these demands, the integration of wait time in online learning should consider power, conversation, and silence, as well as the utilization of broader pedagogical frameworks.

A power imbalance exists between teachers and students, which must be considered when seeking to utilize wait time. Scholars have documented the rules, norms, and structures of conversational turn-taking [14]. Importantly, educators need to recognize the existence of differing rights and obligations regarding classroom discourse [21]. As previously noted, wait time is typically not aligned with normal conversational cadence or norms. Therefore, online educators have a responsibility to help students understand and practice wait time before expecting students to use wait time correctly. Wait-time integration strategies, such as those outlined above, can aid in alleviating this power imbalance.

Conversation and silence are culturally understood phenomena connected with wait time. Scholars have noted the existence of cross-cultural differences in understandings around silence, particularly between Native Americans and Anglo-Americans [22]. Such studies have documented how educational experiences can be developed according to Anglo-American principles, which systematically marginalize other groups. As such, learning about the communities from which your students are drawn is essential, including their use of silence in learning, their use of non-verbal cues, and when specific strategies are most effective. For example, Tharp and Yamauchi [22] suggest that the use of wait time would be more beneficial amongst Native American students after an initial demonstration of the target knowledge or skill. Such targeted integration of wait time amongst native populations has been shown to have positive impacts on their learning [23].

Isolated strategies, such as wait time, are likely most effective when integrated into larger pedagogical frameworks that address power, conversation, and silence. For example, culturally relevant pedagogy is a pedagogical framework that centers students’ experiences and identities in the learning process [24]. Online educators who utilize culturally relevant pedagogy commit to knowing their students and building an inclusive learning partnership with them [25]. Such learning partnerships would entail developing mutual understandings around the role of conversation and silence in synchronized online learning. Doing so would complement the documented benefits of using wait time in synchronized learning environments while inviting students to participate in a conversation about themselves, their learning online, and how educators can help facilitate their success as students. 

References

About the Author

Dr. Steven Drouin is a professor of education at Stanislaus State University. He identifies as a teacher-scholar who works to understand how to support diverse groups of students in classroom contexts. His current research focuses on first-generation graduate students' experiences in the classroom. At Stanislaus State, he teaches research methods, multilingual and multicultural courses, advises master’s students, and is the chair of the Advanced Studies in Education Department and UIRB.

© Copyright 2025 held by Owner/Author. Publication rights licensed to ACM. 1535-394X/2025/08-3702010 $15.00 https://doi.org/10.1145/3760213.3702010