Generating and Asking Questions¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 4 claims (4 for) · 10 studies (3 review, 2 causal, 2 quant-synthesis, 2 theoretical, 1 associational), q1–q4 · 1 of 10 report an effect size

Description¶

This strategy involves readers asking themselves questions throughout the reading process — before reading to activate prior knowledge and set a purpose, during reading to check understanding and connect ideas, and after reading to consolidate and summarize. Question generation shifts learners from passive reception to active construction: posing a question requires identifying what matters in the text, relating it to prior knowledge, and noticing gaps in understanding. Instructors typically scaffold the strategy with question stems, modeling, and gradual release of responsibility.

Design Implications¶

Question generation is one of the better-supported comprehension strategies: intervention reviews show reliable gains in reading comprehension across grade levels when students are taught to generate questions Rosenshine et al.'s review of question-generation interventions. [+M]. Its mechanism is twofold — it functions as elaborative processing that integrates new information with prior knowledge, and as a comprehension-monitoring device that flags breakdowns early Self-explanation improves conceptual understanding. [+M]. The quality of learning depends on question quality: generic literal questions ("what color was…") produce shallow processing, while main-idea and inference questions drive deeper integration [+M].

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Explicit modeling of effective questioning, ideally via Think-Aloud demonstration of how an expert reader generates questions while reading
• Question stems or frames (e.g., "How does X relate to Y?", "Why would…?") until learners can generate questions independently
• Opportunities to answer the questions — alone, in pairs, or in Class Discussion — since unanswered questions yield little benefit
• Sufficient background knowledge to formulate meaningful questions; where knowledge is thin, pair with Activating Prior Knowledge first

Constraints¶

• Learners with limited background knowledge generate fewer and lower-quality questions, often staying at the literal level [-M] — the strategy presupposes enough knowledge to recognize what is important or puzzling
• Poorly formulated questions can direct attention to trivial details and produce superficial comprehension [-M]
• Training effects fade without continued practice and fading of supports; one-off lessons do not establish the strategy as habitual [~M]
• Over-reliance on instructor-supplied question lists converts the activity back into passive question-answering, losing the generative benefit [-M]

Implementation Variability¶

• Reciprocal Teaching — question generation is one of four strategies (with predicting, clarifying, summarizing) practiced in small-group dialogue with role rotation; strong evidence for struggling readers [+M]
• Question-Answer Relationships (QAR) — teaches learners to classify questions by where answers are found (in the text vs. inferred), improving question quality
• Guided peer questioning — structured stems (King's "guided knowledge construction" cards) used in pairs before or after content instruction, also effective in non-reading domains [+M]
• Elaborative interrogation — simply asking and answering "why?" questions about stated facts; a lighter-weight variant with moderate support Dunlosky et al. utility review. [+M]

Target Learners¶

• Upper elementary through adult readers; effects are documented across grade levels but are strongest for students who already have decoding fluency [+M]
• Struggling comprehenders benefit substantially when the strategy is embedded in Reciprocal Teaching-style dialogue with coaching Palincsar & Brown reciprocal teaching study. [+S]
• Less effective for beginning decoders, whose working memory is consumed by word recognition Automatic word recognition frees resources for comprehension. [+M]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Reading comprehension: identifying main ideas, integrating information across a text, summarizing
• Metacognitive monitoring: detecting comprehension breakdowns and self-correcting Self-monitoring improves self-regulation. [+M]
• Inquiry and critical thinking: formulating answerable, generative questions as a transferable academic skill

Instructions¶

1. Before reading: Learners preview the text (headings, visuals) and generate questions they expect the text to answer; instructor models this with a Think-Aloud.
2. During reading: Learners pause at natural breakpoints to pose questions about confusing or important passages, using stems if needed; pair with Annotating to record questions in the margin.
3. After reading: Learners answer their own questions, identify which remain unanswered, and use the question set to build a summary.
4. Fading: Progressively remove stems and modeling as learners internalize the strategy, moving toward independent use across texts and subjects Fading support promotes transfer of responsibility. [+M].

Related Strategies¶

• Reciprocal Teaching — the best-validated multi-strategy package that includes question generation
• Summarization — question generation identifies the main ideas that summaries must capture
• Self-Explanation — a sibling generative strategy; questions prompt the explanations

Examples¶

• Reciprocal Teaching (Palincsar & Brown, 1984) — small reading groups rotate a "questioner" role, generating questions about each text segment before discussing answers; produced large comprehension gains with seventh-grade struggling readers.
• QAR (Raphael, 1986) — students learn to distinguish "Right There," "Think and Search," and "On My Own" questions, improving both the questions they ask and their ability to locate answers.
• Classroom practice — before a chapter on climate change, learners list questions they want answered; during reading they add questions in the margins; afterward they answer, summarize, and flag unresolved questions for Class Discussion.

Key Sources¶

• Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
• 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. doi:10.3102/00346543066002181
• King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338–368. doi:10.3102/00028312031002338
• Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students' learning with effective learning techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58. doi:10.1177/1529100612453266