Advertisement

The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher

, Volume 27, Issue 5, pp 395–408 | Cite as

Promoting Middle School Students’ Learning Motivation and Academic Emotions via Student-Created Feedback for Online Student-Created Multiple-Choice Questions

  • Fu-Yun YuEmail author
  • Wan-Shan Wu
  • Hsun-Chih Huang
Regular Article

Abstract

The comparative effects of student-created feedback for online student-created multiple-choice questions (the experimental group) and online student-created multiple-choice questions alone (the control group) on middle school-aged students’ learning motivation and both positive and negative academic emotions were examined. A non-equivalent control group design was adopted. One hundred and nine seventh graders from four intact classes participated for 9 weeks. The results of the ANCOVA indicated that students in the experimental group scored significantly higher than those in the control group in learning motivation and positive academic emotions in the subject matter studied. No statistically significant differences in negative academic emotions in the subject matter studied between the two groups were supported by the ANCOVA results. Based on the findings, suggestions for instruction and future studies were provided.

Keywords

Academic emotions Learning motivation Online learning environments Problem posing User-created content 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan under the Grant Number: MOST 105-2511-S-006-005-MY3.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Abu-Elwan, R. (2002). Effectiveness of problem posing strategies on prospective mathematics teachers’ problem solving performance. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 25(1), 56–69.Google Scholar
  2. American Psychological Association. (1997). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school redesign and reform. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  3. Arguedas, M., Daradoumis, T., & Xhafa, F. (2016). Analyzing how emotion awareness influences students’ motivation, engagement, self-regulation and learning outcome. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 87–103.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (2005). The art of problem posing (3rd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cherng, B. L. (2012). The measurement, development, and domain specificity of junior high school students’ academic emotions. Taipei: National Science Council Project Annual Report.Google Scholar
  7. Chin, C., Brown, D. E., & Bruce, B. C. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 521–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Ann Arbor: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  9. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dempsey, J. V., Driscoll, M. P., & Swindell, L. K. (1993). Text-based feedback. In J. V. Dempsey & G. C. Sales (Eds.), Interactive instruction and feedback (pp. 21–54). Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  11. Dori, Y. J., & Herscovitz, O. (1999). Question-posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: Analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 411–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Drake, J. M., & Barlow, A. T. (2008). Assessing students’ levels of understanding multiplication through problem writing. Teaching Children Mathematics, 14(5), 272–277.Google Scholar
  13. Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. (1989). Stage/environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for early adolescents. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3, pp. 139–181). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., et al. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage–environment fit on young adolescents’ experience in school and in families. American Psychologist, 48(2), 90–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eccles, J. S., & Roeser, R. W. (2009). Schools, academic motivation, and stage-environment fit. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology, 2 (pp. 404–434). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. English, L. D. (1997). Promoting a problem-posing classroom. Teaching Children Mathematics, 4(3), 172–179.Google Scholar
  17. Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gillet, N., Vallerand, R. J., & Lafrenière, M. K. (2012). Intrinsic and extrinsic school motivation as function of age: The mediating role of autonomy support. Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal, 15, 77–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gnambs, T., & Hanfsting, B. (2016). The decline of academic motivation during adolescence: An accelerated longitudinal cohort analysis on the effect of psychological need satisfaction. Educational Psychology, 36(9), 1691–1705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gottfried, A. E., Fleming, J. S., & Gottfried, A. W. (2001). Continuity of academic intrinsic motivation from childhood through late adolescence: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Greenglass, E. R., Burke, R. J., & Moore, K. A. (2003). Reactions to increased workload: Effects on professional efficacy of nurses. Applied Psychology, 52(4), 580–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Head, L. Q., & Lindsey, J. D. (1983). Anxiety and the university student: A brief review of the professional literature. College Student Journal, 17(2), 176–182.Google Scholar
  23. Ho, Q. Y., Bin, J. S., & Chang, J. W. (2012). Investigation of junior high schools’ learning: Saving the unmotivated generation. Education, Parenting and Family Lifestyle. Retrieved December 20, 2017 from http://topic.parenting.com.tw/issue/2013/futurelearning/article2-1-2.aspx.
  24. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.Google Scholar
  25. Hung, C. C. (2002). Effects of question-posing and cooperative learning on students’ learning outcomes within a web-based learning environment (master’s thesis). National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  26. Jacobs, S. R., & Dodd, D. (2003). Student burnout as a function of personality, social support, and workload. Journal of College Student Development, 44(3), 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kausar, R. (2010). Perceived stress, academic workloads and use of coping strategies by university students. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 20(1), 31–45.Google Scholar
  28. Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 279–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Larson, R. W. (2000). Toward a psychology of positive youth development. American Psychologist, 55(1), 170–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lasry, N., Charles, E., & Whittaker, C. (2014). When teacher-centered instructors are assigned to student-centered classrooms. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 10(1), 010116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lenhart, A., Simon, M., & Graziano, M. (2001). The Internet and Education: Findings of the Pew Internet & American Life Project. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  32. Lyubomirsky, S., Tucker, K. L., Caldwell, N. D., & Berg, K. (1999). Why ruminators are poor problem solvers: Clues from the phenomenology of dysphoric rumination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(5), 1041–1060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Miles, D. E., Borman, W. E., Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2002). Building an integrative model of extra role work behaviors: A comparison of counterproductive work behavior with organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(1–2), 51–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2005). The concept of flow. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 89–105). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Nakata, Y. (2006). Motivation and experience in foreign language learning. Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  36. Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2004). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multimedia learning. In H. M. Niegemann, D. Leutner, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Instructional design for multimedia learning (pp. 181–195). Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  37. Nardone, C. F., & Lee, R. G. (2011). Critical inquiry across the disciplines: Strategies for student-generated problem posing. College Teaching, 59(1), 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nelson, E. E., Lau, J. Y., & Jarcho, J. M. (2014). Growing pains and pleasures: How emotional learning guides development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(2), 99–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Offerdahl, E. G., & Montplaisir, L. (2014). Student-generated reading questions: Diagnosing student thinking with diverse formative assessments. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 42(1), 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Peetsma, T., Hascher, T., van der Veen, I., & Roede, E. (2005). Relations between adolescents’ self-evaluations, time perspectives, motivation for school and their achievement in different countries and at different ages. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 10, 209–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2012). Academic emotions and student engagement. Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 259–282). Amsterdam: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pekrun, R., & Schutz, P. A. (2007). Where do we go from here? Implications and future directions for inquiry on emotions in education. In P. A. Schutz & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  44. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Printrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual of the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  46. Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rosli, R., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. M. (2014). The effects of problem posing on student mathematical learning: A meta-analysis. International Education Studies, 7(13), 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–33). Rochester: The University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
  49. Sanchez-Elez, M., Pardines, I., Garcia, P., Miñana, G., Roman, S., Sanchez, M., et al. (2013). Enhancing students’ learning process through self-generated tests. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(1), 15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sapolsky, R. M. (1994). Why zebras don’t get ulcers: A guide to stress, stress-related diseases and coping. New York: WH Freeman.Google Scholar
  51. Schwartz, F., & White, K. (2000). Making sense of it all: Giving and getting online course feedback. In K. W. White & B. H. Weight (Eds.), The online teaching guide: A handbook of attitudes, strategies, and techniques for the virtual classroom (pp. 57–72). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  52. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology-An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shaw, R. G., & Mitchell-Olds, T. (1993). ANOVA for unbalanced data: An overview. Ecology, 74(6), 1638–1645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2014). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Ed.), Applications of flow in human development and education (pp. 475–494). Amsterdam: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Steinberg, L. D. (2014). Adolescence (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  57. Toluk-Uçar, Z. (2009). Developing pre-service teachers understanding of fractions through problem posing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 166–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wigfield, A., Byrnes, J. P., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Development during early and middle adolescence. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 87–113). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  59. Wu, H.-C., & Chang, C.-Y. (2006). Development and validation of an animation-based test in the area of earth sciences. In R. Mizoguchi, P. Dillenbourg, & Z. Zhu (Eds.), Learning by effective utilization of technologies: facilitating intercultural understanding (pp. 491–494). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  60. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Yu, F. Y. (2018). The learning potential of online student-constructed tests with citing peer-generated questions. Interactive Learning Environments.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1458040.Google Scholar
  62. 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. Journal of Education & Psychology, 31(3), 25–52.Google Scholar
  63. Yu, F. Y. & Liu, Y. H. (2016). Development and evaluation of student-generated feedback in an online student-generated multiple-choice questions learning space. In Workshop proceedings of the 24th international conference on computers in education, Nov 28–Dec 2 (pp. 413–418). Mumbai, India: IIT Bombay.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© De La Salle University 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of EducationNational Cheng Kung UniversityTainan CityRepublic of China

Personalised recommendations