A Comparison of Prompting and Adjunct Questions in Learning from Text. Institute Report No. 102 [electronic resource] / Don F. Keller and Donald J. Cunningham.
This study was designed to explicate the nature of the processes utilized by students when learning from textual materials when the text has been augmented by interspersing questions at various points. Sixty undergraduate students were randomly assigned to one of six treatment groups. The experiment...
Saved in:
| Online Access: |
Full Text (via ERIC) |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Corporate Author: | |
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Electronic eBook |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
[S.l.] :
Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,
1972.
|
| Subjects: |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000cam a22000002u 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | b6503848 | ||
| 003 | CoU | ||
| 005 | 20080221101645.3 | ||
| 006 | m d f | ||
| 007 | cr un | ||
| 008 | 720927s1972 xx |||| o ||| | eng d | ||
| 035 | |a (ERIC)ed075809 | ||
| 040 | |a ericd |c ericd |d MvI | ||
| 099 | |f ERIC DOC # |a ED075809 | ||
| 099 | |f ERIC DOC # |a ED075809 | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Keller, Don F. | |
| 245 | 1 | 2 | |a A Comparison of Prompting and Adjunct Questions in Learning from Text. Institute Report No. 102 |h [electronic resource] / |c Don F. Keller and Donald J. Cunningham. |
| 260 | |a [S.l.] : |b Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, |c 1972. | ||
| 300 | |a 15 p. | ||
| 500 | |a ERIC Document Number: ED075809. | ||
| 500 | |a ERIC Note: Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Educational Research Association (New Orleans, February 25-March 1, 1973). |5 ericd. | ||
| 520 | |a This study was designed to explicate the nature of the processes utilized by students when learning from textual materials when the text has been augmented by interspersing questions at various points. Sixty undergraduate students were randomly assigned to one of six treatment groups. The experimental treatments were: (1) questions shortly before, underlined answers (SBU); (2) questions shortly after, underlined answers (SAU); (3) no questions, but same underlined materials as SBU and SAU (NQU); (4) questions shortly before (SB); (5) questions shortly after (SA); and (6) no questions, no underlining (NQ). The subjects worked through the text at their own rate. They were not permitted to review the text. Each group was informed that they would be tested on how much content they could remember, and, upon completing the text, they were given a 40-question criterion test. The same test was administered to all subjects again five days later. The results indicated that performance on the immediate test was better than performance on the delayed tests, that retention of practiced items was higher than retention of nonpracticed items, that question position was not significant, and that all time differences among treatment groups were significant. (WR) | ||
| 650 | 1 | 7 | |a Questioning Techniques. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Reading. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 1 | 7 | |a Reading Ability. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 1 | 7 | |a Reading Comprehension. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Reading Processes. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 1 | 7 | |a Reading Research. |2 ericd. |
| 650 | 1 | 7 | |a Reading Skills. |2 ericd. |
| 700 | 1 | |a Cunningham, Donald J. | |
| 710 | 2 | |a Indiana University. |b Institute for Child Study. | |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED075809.pdf |z Full Text (via ERIC) |
| 907 | |a .b65038484 |b 07-06-22 |c 10-19-10 | ||
| 998 | |a web |b 10-22-12 |c f |d m |e - |f eng |g xx |h 2 |i 1 | ||
| 956 | |a ERIC | ||
| 999 | f | f | |i fbea1bf1-76d8-5cf4-968a-87a4b3b4affa |s f0fe2908-06e8-571f-9f2c-f5045a3bf2d1 |
| 952 | f | f | |p Can circulate |a University of Colorado Boulder |b Online |c Online |d Online |e ED075809 |h Other scheme |i web |n 1 |