學生出題策略： WHY, WHAT AND HOW?

學生出題策略：WHY, WHAT AND HOW? 于富雲教授成功大學教育研究所

Gained Insights • Instructors can better assess students’ current knowledge level by having them come up with the question(s) matched with learned instructional content than simply asking students to provide answers  The other way around. • Its assessment value—by revealing insight into students’ abilities in the subject content and providing an accurate assessment of what learners are capable of accomplishing.

Any Theoretical Base for a Student-Generated Questions Strategy? • Questions that teachers think are important, relevant and interesting • Q: Are teachers and students think alike? • Aikenhead (2006): 7 types of relevance • Wish-they-knew science: academic scientists, education officials, and many science teachers • Need-to-knowscience: experienced public faced in real-life problems/decisions. • Functional science: employers/workers in the science-based occupations. • Enticed-to-know science: media • Have-cause-know science: experts with public • Personal-curiosity science: students themselves • Science-as-culture: culture interpreter • Teachers and students DO NOT think alike • Constructivism: what students think out of their experience

How Student-Generated Questions Affect Students’ Cognitive Processes? • Tend to engage students in the process of reflecting on the information received • Elaborate and transform received information into personally meaningful forms • for themselves as well as their potential audience • Induced into a habitual state of constructing personal knowledge through the employment of various learning strategies.Q: Like? • Rehearsal: Review and recite • Organization: Locate what’s important content in the materials • Elaboration: Extensions and linkage with personal experience, other topics, subjects • Planning: goal-setting

How Student-Generated Questions Affect Students’ Cognitive Processes? • Induced into a habitual state of constructing personal knowledge through the employment of various learning strategies? • Rehearsal • Organization • Elaboration • Planning • Monitoring: understanding, comprehension • Evaluation: goal-attainment status, progress assessment • Revision: in terms of strategy if goal/progress not satisfactory • Help-seeking: peers, teachers • Time management: balance between good-enough quality of posed questions and limited time allocated in class • …

Any Empirical Bases? • Accumulating benefits of student-generated questions • Developing a deeper understanding of the subject content learned • Shifting from “acquiring” to “using”knowledge • Giving students a sense of ownership of the subject content as well as their learning experience • Developing higher-order thinking skills • Generating more diverse and flexible thinking (away from one-answer syndrome) • Encouraging students to be more involved in and in control of their learning • Facilitating small group communication about the interacting topic • Building up students’ confidence about the subject matter • Sparking students’ interest and ability in the follow-up problem-solving activity. • Legitimize asking questions…

Why Need to Support Students Engaged in Question-Generation? • Researchers have indicated that a considerable proportion of students do not experience question generation during formal schooling and are not accustomed to authoring questions (Moses, Bjork, and Goldenberg, 1993; Vreman-de Olde, and de Jong, 2004; Yu & Liu, 2008). • According to a recent survey of 191 students enrolled in teacher education programs in 5 universities around Taiwan, which was conducted by Yu • 46.3% of students reported never being directed by their instructors to construct questions on covered contents (i.e., experience-deprived). • 55% reported the task as difficult and 4% reported it as very difficult. • Yu and Wu (2008) found that perceived task difficulty had a moderate effect on the relationship between task value and students’ activation of learning strategies. Essentially, task value significantly contributed to explanations of the variance in cognitive and metacognitive strategies scores only when learners perceived the question generation task as easy. (value expectancy theory)

Some Scaffolds to Consider • Signal words提示語 • Main ideas重點 • Story grammar故事結構 • The answer is/target words關鍵字詞

1. Signal Words提示語 • It is identified as one of the most frequent used and easily learnt procedural prompts. • It mainly consists of training students to use 5W1H for framing questions on studied contents and intends to help focus the question-generation task. • Used as question-starters (who, what, where, when, why, and how) • Suitable a wide array of subjects: Chinese, English, science, history, math, etc. • It’s just that different subjects might emphasize on different types. • Q: Only limit questions to factual information, or recall type of questions? • Not really, actually encourage students to come up with questions aiming at higher levels cognitive process (e.g., evaluation; meaningfulness, relevance construction, etc.).

2. Main ideas重點 • “Main ideas” involves teaching students identifying the main idea (or key ideas) of an article (or a paragraph, page, section, entire chapter, or book, etc.), and then having them use the identified idea for the follow-up question-generation activities (Dreher & Gambrel 1985; Wong & Jones, 1982; Ritchie, 1985; Blaha, 1979; Lonberger, 1988). • Procedural steps might involve: • Identifying the main idea of an article; • Forming questions asking for new examples of the main idea, or writing a question about a concept in the article in a paraphrased form, if finding new examples for the identified idea is hard to be attained. • Note: In addition to main ideas, identifying the significant details under main ideas

3. Story grammar categories故事結構 • Q: What are some important elements for a story? • Different sets of elements have been proposed to guide generating questions based on story grammar categories. • Nolte and Singer (1985) proposed four elements • Setting(s): in a temporal and/or spatial, historical sense. Situational circumstances, background. • Main character(s) • Character's goal(s) • Obstacle(s) encountered on his or her way to achieve or not achieve the goal

4. The Answer Is/Target words關鍵字詞 • Procedural steps: locate the “target(s)” of the contents (the answer is/target words). • Example 1:清末歷史事件. The answer is 馬關條約. • What are some potential questions? • 甲午戰爭簽訂哪一個條約將台灣全島及所有附屬島嶼(澎湖列島)割讓給日本？ • 1895年李鴻章與日本首相伊藤博文所共同簽署的條約為？ • 哪一個條約是日本在西方列強的支持下，強加於中國的不平等條約，也是《南京條約》以來最嚴重的喪權辱國條約 • … • Q: Learning effects? • Associate words/web of knowledge; descriptive/explanatory knowledge versus fragmented knowledge • Can have more than one identified “answers”  “target words.”

What is Student-Generated Questions? • Having students construct questions on covered instructional contents that can assess their own or peers’ level of understanding/mastering. • Terms used: • Student-developed (constructed, produced) exam (assessment) items, • Students item construction • Posing questions (questioning) • =擬題? =出題? =佈題? =命題? • 佈題：教師為配合其教學目標而設計題目讓學生解答 • 命題：為考試而設計題目

Any roles technology can play to facilitate/promote the process?

In view of students’ inexperience and perceived difficulty regarding question generation, the construction of various mechanisms to support students during question-generation

Framework Guiding the System and Its Associated Designs • Adopted the conceptual framework proposed by Lin, Hmelo, Kinzer and Secules (1999). • Widely referred by online systems • Emphasizing how technology-based scaffolds can be intentionally built to support the processes of meaning-making and reflection for knowledge construction and restructuring

Customizabilityof QuARKS • Emphasizes functions and support mechanisms that can be dynamically adjusted to suit individual instructors’ educational goals and instructional plans in different situations dynamically • Kinds of sub-systems/functions students have access to • Types of generated questions • Sets of criteria for question-assessment • Sets of generic question stems and sample questions • Item selection criteria to be included in observation space • Types of online ranking lists • Modes of interaction: one-way, two-way, multi-way • …

Yu, F. Y. (in press). Any Effects of Different Levels of Online User Identity Revelation? Educational Technology and Society. (SSCI) • Yu, F. Y. (2010). Multiple Peer Assessment Modes to Augment Online Student Question-Generation Processes. Computers & Education,56(2), 484-494. (SSCI) • Yu, F. Y. & Liu, Y. H. (2009). Creating a psychologically safe online space for a student-generated questions learning activity via different identity revelation modes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40 (6), 1109-1123. (SSCI) • Yu, F. Y. (2009). Scaffolding student-generated questions: Design and development of a customizable online learning system. Computers in Human Behavior, 25 (5), 1129-1138 (SSCI). • Yu, F. Y. & Liu, Y. H. (2008). The comparative effects of student question-posing and question-answering strategies on promoting college students’ academic achievement, cognitive and metacognitive strategies use. 教育與心理研究，第31卷，第3期，頁25-52。（TSSCI） • Yu, F. Y. & Liu, Y. H. (2005) Potential values of incorporating multiple-choice question-construction for physics experimentation instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 27(11), 1319-1335. (SSCI)

學生出題策略 ： WHY, WHAT AND HOW?