International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 8, Issue 12 (December 2021), Pages: 56-62

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Title: The impact of students’ generating and answering questions on their performance

 Author(s): Anas Mohammed Alshalan *

 Affiliation(s):

 Instructional Technology Department, College of Education, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6355-7610

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2021.12.008

 Abstract:

The aim of the research is to measure the effect of students' use of the strategy of writing questions and answering them on their achievement performance. The researcher used the achievement test to measure the differences between variables, and checked the research tool from validity-consistency-experimental application. But for the implementation of the research experiment, the students were divided into three groups, namely: The experimental group 1 (generating questions and answering them by the learners in groups), the experimental group 2 (forming and answering the questions of the learners individually), and the control group (forming questions by the teacher). In addition, the researcher used the mean and standard deviation to answer the research question and compare student performance in all three research groups. The results showed that there were significant differences between the averages of the research groups, as the experimental group 2 achieved a higher average (26,474) than the experimental group 1 (24,333) and the control group (24,857). 

 © 2021 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: ANOVA, Generation, Students, Questions

 Article History: Received 19 March 2021, Received in revised form 27 June 2021, Accepted 26 September 2021

 Acknowledgment 

No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Alshalan AM (2021). The impact of students’ generating and answering questions on their performance. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 8(12): 56-62

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 Fig. 2

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7   

----------------------------------------------    

 References (25)

  1. Al-Dahdouh A (2015). The effect of employing the question of self-question in developing the skills of solving the physical problem compared to the peer learning strategy of students of the eleventh grade–Gaza. M.Sc. Thesis, Alazhar University, Gaza, Palestine.   [Google Scholar]
  2. Asfour A (2016). The effectiveness of employing a self-questioning strategy to develop systemic thinking skills in the biology subject for eleventh grade students in Gaza governorates. M.Sc. Thesis, Alazhar University, Gaza, Palestine.   [Google Scholar]
  3. Braxton JM, Milem JF, and Sullivan AS (2000). The influence of active learning on the college student departure process: Toward a revision of Tinto's theory. The Journal of Higher Education, 71(5): 569-590. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2000.11778853   [Google Scholar]
  4. Byun H, Lee J, and Cerreto FA (2014). Relative effects of three questioning strategies in ill-structured, small group problem solving. Instructional Science, 42(2): 229-250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9278-1   [Google Scholar]
  5. Cohen L, Manion L, and Morrison K (2000). Research methods in education. 5th Edition, Routledge Falmer, London, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  6. Daniel J and Williams KJ (2019). Self-questioning strategy for struggling readers: A synthesis. Remedial and Special Education, 42(4): 248-261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932519880338   [Google Scholar]
  7. Fraenkel JR and Wallen NE (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education. 7th Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  8. Hidayat L, Patel S, and Veltri K (2012). Active-learning implementation in an advanced elective course on infectious diseases. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 76(5): 87. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe76587   [Google Scholar] PMid:22761528 PMCid:PMC3386038
  9. Joseph LM, Alber-Morgan S, Cullen J, and Rouse C (2016). The effects of self-questioning on reading comprehension: A literature review. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 32(2): 152-173. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2014.891449   [Google Scholar]
  10. Khaki N (2014). Improving reading comprehension in a foreign language: Strategic reader. Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 14(2): 186-200.   [Google Scholar]
  11. King A (1991). Improving lecture comprehension: Effects of a metacognitive strategy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(4): 331-346. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350050404   [Google Scholar]
  12. King A (1992). Comparison of self-questioning, summarizing, and notetaking-review as strategies for learning from lectures. American Educational Research Journal, 29(2): 303-323. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312029002303   [Google Scholar]
  13. Miciano RZ (2002). Self-questioning and prose comprehension: A sample case of ESL reading. Asia Pacific Education Review, 3(2): 210-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03024914   [Google Scholar]
  14. Piaget J (1936). Origins of intelligence in the child. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  15. Preszler RW, Dawe A, Shuster CB, and Shuster M (2007). Assessment of the effects of student response systems on student learning and attitudes over a broad range of biology courses. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(1): 29-41. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-09-0190   [Google Scholar] PMid:17339392 PMCid:PMC1854854
  16. Rosenshine B, Meister C, and Chapman S (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2): 181-221. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066002181   [Google Scholar]
  17. Rowles CJ and Russo BL (2009). Strategies to promote critical thinking and active learning. In: Billings DM and Halstead JA (Eds.), Teaching in nursing: 238-262. Saunders, St. Louis, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  18. Rubio DM, Berg-Weger M, Tebb SS, Lee ES, and Rauch S (2003). Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social Work Research, 27(2): 94-104. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/27.2.94   [Google Scholar]
  19. Singer H (1978). Active comprehension: From answering to asking questions. The Reading Teacher, 31(8): 901-908.   [Google Scholar]
  20. Taboada A and Guthrie JT (2006). Contributions of student questioning and prior knowledge to construction of knowledge from reading information text. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(1): 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3801_1   [Google Scholar]
  21. Tofade T, Elsner J, and Haines ST (2013). Best practice strategies for effective use of questions as a teaching tool. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(7): 155. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe777155   [Google Scholar] PMid:24052658 PMCid:PMC3776909
  22. Vygotsky LS (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  23. Watts GH and Anderson RC (1971). Effects of three types of inserted questions on learning from prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 62(5): 387-394. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031633   [Google Scholar]
  24. Weinstein Y, McDermott KB, and Roediger HL (2010). A comparison of study strategies for passages: Rereading, answering questions, and generating questions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16(3): 308-316. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020992   [Google Scholar] PMid:20853989
  25. Wong BY (1985). Self-questioning instructional research: A review. Review of Educational Research, 55(2): 227-268. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543055002227   [Google Scholar]