october 2012 - TOJET the Turkish online journal of educational ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – October 2012, volume 11 Issue 4 THE TYPES, FREQUENCY AND QUALITY OF ELEMENTARY PUPILS’ QUESTIONS IN AN ONLINE ENVIRONMENT Hsin-Wen Hu, Graduate Institute of Information and Computer Education National Taiwan Normal University husw@ksmail.seed.net.tw Guey-Fa Chiou Graduate Institute of Information and Computer Education National Taiwan Normal University gueyfa@ntnu.edu.tw ABSTRACT This study explored the types, frequencies and quality of student questioning based on three kinds of questionstems (detailed-stem, simple-stem, and no-stem). A questioning-supported thinking and learning system (QSTLS) was developed to scaffold stem-based student questioning. One hundred fifth-grade students participated in this study. Students were assigned to three groups: a detailed-stem group, simple-stem group, and no-stem group. Results show that the detailed-stem groups used more types (11) of questions, asked a greater number of questions (472) and asked questions of higher quality than both the simple-stem group and the nostem group. The conclusion of the study is that online questioning is a useful learning strategy, and more specifically that detailed question-stems in particular help students to develop their questioning skills. This study also shows that with the assistance of question-stems, the QSTLS system can provide a student-centered and active learning environment for elementary pupils. Keyword: online questioning, question type, question frequency, question quality, question stem 1. INTRODUCTION Student questioning, which plays an important role in student’s active learning, has several advantages. Firstly, student’s attention can be focused (Chin & Osborne, 2008; Rosenshine, Meister, & Chapman, 1996), and cognitive comprehension can be enhanced (Koch & Eckstein, 1991; Pedrosa de Jesus, Almeida, & Watts, 2004). Secondly, students’ knowledge can be elaborated (Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall & Wiliam, 2004; Chin & Osborne, 2008; King, 1992; Rosenshine et al., 1996; Schmidt, 1993). And thirdly, productivity, creativity and high-order thinking can be promoted (Gallas, 1995; Shodell, 1995). The frequency of student questioning in classroom is relatively low (Dillon, 1988; Graesser & Person, 1994; Van der Meij, 1988). Graesser and Person (1994) pointed out that only 1.3 to 4 questions were asked each hour in classroom (the median is 3). Dillon (1988) indicated that there were approximately 26.7 students in a class the average of question number a student asking was just 0.11 questions. Scholars have indicated that students’ questions are mostly factual questions (Chin & Osborne, 2008). The phenomena of low questioning frequencies and of mostly factual questions might be caused by the insufficient ability of students, limited time of classroom instruction, and unfriendly atmosphere in the classroom (Chu, Li, & Hsia, 2007; Pedrosa de Jesus, Teixeira-Dias, & Watts, 2003). To avoid the disadvantages of classroom questioning and to improve the quality of student questioning, network-supported online questioning is a possible alternative. A specific online environment may have advantages for promoting student questioning. In such an environment, students will have more opportunities to think, ask, and answer questions. Students also can avoid the sometimes uncomfortable classroom atmosphere (Chu et al., 2007). Some online questioning systems have been developed for student questioning, such as P&Q (Point and Query) ( Graesser & McNamara, 2005; Langston & Graesser, 1993), NATA (Not afraid to ask) (Chu et al., 2007), QSIA (Question Sharing and Interactive Assignments) (Barak & Rafaeli, 2004), DFAQ (Dynamic Frequently Asked Questions environment ) (Ng’ambi & Hardman, 2004), and QBISS (Question-Based Instructional Support System) (Chiou, Liao, & Hu, 2007) . Studies based on these systems indicate that students can have a good learning experience, that is, their learning can benefit from various online questioning activities. Although an online questioning system can stimulate students’ questioning, unfortunately those systems were developed for high school, undergraduate, or postgraduate students. An online questioning system for elementary pupils is needed if educators want to understand the online questioning of elementary pupils. Introducing online questioning activities into elementary classrooms can provide pupils with more questioning opportunities and thinking time; however, elementary pupils’ prior knowledge and meta-cognitive skills aren’t as good as those of high school and college students. If elementary pupils are placed in an online environment Copyright © The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 325
TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – October 2012, volume 11 Issue 4 without guidance, they may not get any substantial learning benefit. Scholars have proposed some strategies to assist students in their questioning. For example, researchers used the strategies of “peer-questioning” and “questioning tips” to guide students’ questioning (Choi, Land, & Turgeon, 2005). King (1989, 1993) used the strategy of “question-stems” to scaffold students’ elaborative questioning. King found that question stems have clearly positive effects on student questioning, that is, they have a positive learning effect. In this study, we want to know whether these supportive strategies are also effective for elementary pupils in an online environment. This study uses three question-stem conditions (detailed-stem, simple-stem, and no-stem) to understand the types, frequencies and quality of pupils’ online questioning. Pupils use a questioning-supported thinking and online learning system (QSTLS) to read a teacher-selected science text, to post/ask questions, and to answer posted questions. The purpose of this study is to explore pupils’ questioning under different question-stem conditions. The research questions are: What types of questions do pupils tend to ask? Does the detailed-stem group manifest more questioning frequencies and types than both the simple-stem and the no-stem groups? And does the detailed-stem group demonstrate a better (higher) quality of questioning than both the simple-stem and the no-stem groups? In this study, “question” and “questioning” are alternately used. “Question” refers to the actual question that is asked, either mentally or as a spoken (interrogative) sentence. And questioning refers to the process or act of asking. 2. RELATED STUDIES 2.1. Advantages and difficulties of the student questioning Student questioning has the advantages of guiding self-learning, monitoring self-understanding, driving knowledge construction, triggering deep-thinking, improving learning comprehension, helping self-evaluation, enhancing discussion, and strengthening the quality of dialogue (Chin & Osborne, 2008). These advantages are important for science learning and have been emphasized by some scholars (Black et al., 2002; Chin & Osborne, 2008; Graesser, 1993; Pedrosa de Jesus et al., 2003; Rosenshine et al., 1996). The difficulties associated with student questioning are primarily the tendency toward lower questioning frequencies and more factual questions being asked in the classroom (Chin & Osborne, 2008; Dillon, 1988; Graesser & Person, 1994; Van der Meij, 1988). The causes of these difficulties include students’ lack of ability to detect contradictory information (Grasser & Person, 1994), to identify their own knowledge deficits (Glenberg, Wilkinson, & Epstein, 1982; Markman, 1979; Pressley, Ghatala, Woloshyn, & Pirie, 1990), and to acquire questioning skills. Students also fear that their questions might induce negative reactions from classmates or teachers (Dillon,1988). 2.2. Strategies for student questioning To promote students’ questioning skills, some studies have proposed strategies that may help students ask questions. King (1989, 1991, 1992, 1993) uses question-stems to help students ask effective questions. In her 1989 study, King used question-stems to guide the questioning of college students in an education course. The question-stems provide some words to help students form complete questions. Examples of question-stems are “How is … related to …?”, “What is example of …?” and “What do I (you) still not understand about …?” King’s study’s results show that the stem-guided questioning group has a significantly improved lecture comprehension ability and more explanatory ability than the unguided group. However, the frequency of questioning wasn’t significantly different. In her 1993 study, 34 fifth-grade pupils were randomly assigned to three conditions (highly-elaborated, less-elaborated, and unguided) under which to learn science material presented in classroom lessons. The highly-elaborated group used highly-elaborated question stems such as “Why is…important?” The less-elaborated group used signal words such as “How”. Study results showed that the highly-elaborated group had better material comprehension than the other two groups, and also a higher retention score than that of the unguided group. Choi et al., (2005) designed “questioning tips” to assist the questioning of thirty-nine college students. When students clicked a specific situation on the screen, they could see “Tips” (specific explanations of what to do), “Generic examples” (such as “Would you clearly differentiate between…?”), and “Specific examples” (such as “Does the atmospheric temperature slow down or speed up transpiration rates?”). Study findings revealed that this questioning–tip strategy was useful in increasing the frequency of students’ questions. However, this guidance in the form of tips didn’t appear to significantly improve students’ questioning quality and learning outcomes. 2.3. Online questioning To alleviate the students’ pressure in the classroom, some online questioning systems were developed to facilitate the asking of questions. Forty-eight undergraduate students used the P&Q (Point and Query) system (Graesser & Copyright © The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 326
Page 2 and 3:
THE TURKISH ONLINE JOURNAL OF EDUCA
Page 4 and 5:
Dear Colleagues, TOJET: The Turkish
Page 6 and 7:
TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal o
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Annotation retrieval TOJET: The Tur
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Stage 2 Process Stage 3 Output Stag
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Learning effectiveness TOJET: The T
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Appendix A: Questionnaire TOJET: Th
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 TOJET: The Turk
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Computer Use Transformational Leade
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Diverger TOJET: The Turkish Online
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
clarify their misconceptions. TOJET
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
*p < .05 TOJET: The Turkish Online
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287: TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal o
Page 300 and 301: section to the user. TOJET: The Tur
Page 370 and 371: Statement Analysis TOJET: The Turki
Page 386 and 387:
Page 388 and 389:
Appendices TOJET: The Turkish Onlin
Page 390 and 391:
Page 392 and 393:
Page 394 and 395:
Page 396 and 397:
Page 398 and 399:
Page 400 and 401:
Page 402 and 403:
Page 404 and 405:
Page 406 and 407:
Page 408 and 409:
Page 410 and 411:
Page 412 and 413:
TOJEET: The Turkish Online Journal
Page 414 and 415:
TOJEET: The Turkish Online Journal
Page 416 and 417:
Page 418 and 419:
Page 420 and 421:
Page 422 and 423:
Page 424 and 425:
Page 426 and 427:
eactions TOJET: The Turkish Online
Page 428 and 429:
Page 430 and 431:
Page 432 and 433:
Page 434 and 435:
Page 436 and 437:
Page 438 and 439:
Page 440 and 441:
Page 442 and 443:
Page 444 and 445:
Page 446 and 447:
Page 448 and 449:
Page 450 and 451:
Page 452 and 453:
Page 454 and 455:
Page 456 and 457:
Page 458 and 459:
Page 460 and 461:
Page 462 and 463:
Page 464 and 465:
Page 466 and 467:
Page 468 and 469:
Page 470:
show all

october 2012 - TOJET the Turkish online journal of educational ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?