The Effect of Reading with PQRST Technique: Intergroup Comparison

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of reading with PQRST technique on the recalling levels of high school senior students. Research grounded on quantitative paradigm. Experimental model used with experimental and control groups with pre-test post-test design. Direct comparison method was implemented. Success of reading recall is dependent variable, PQRST and normal reading applications are independent variables. According to the results of homogeneity of variance test, data were found to be homogeneous (p.05). The data obtained from the pretest-posttest results were found normally distributed (Mean=4.06, Median=4.00, Mode=5.00;  1); thus, parametric tests were used to analyze the data. The data were analyzed with independent samples t test. Thirty-two participants were divided into experimental and control groups and read the same text with two different ways. The experimental group read with PQRST, the control group read normally. It was found that the group studying with PQRST did not make any difference in comparison to normal reading in the immediate recall. However, in delayed recall, participants who read with PQRST recalled statistically better than the group who read normally. In addition, there was no statistically significant difference between reading normally and reading with PQRST, in terms of gain scores.

Keywords

• PQRST
• SQ3R
• reading
• recall

References

1. Apriliaswati, E. R. (2014). Teaching Reading Comprehension of Descriptive Text Through PQRST Technique Based on Whole Language Approach. Journal Pendidikan dan Pembelejaran, 3(9), 1-10.
2. Artis, A. B. (2008). Improving Marketing Students’ Reading Comprehension with the SQ3R Method. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(2), 130-137.
3. Ausubel, D. P. (1960). The Use of Advance Organizers in the Learning and Retention of Meaningful Verbal Material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(5), 267-272.
4. Aygören, F. (2020). The Effect of PQRST Technique on Recalling What You Read. Elementary Education Online, EEO, 19(1).
5. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. New York: David Mckay.
6. Carlston, D. L. (2011). Benefits of Student-Generated Note Packets. Teaching of Psychology, 38(3), 142-146.
7. Chapman, C. A. (1976). Teaching Comprehension to the Disabled Reader. Journal of Reading, 20(1), 37-42.
8. Ciaramelli, E. N. (2015). Improving Memory Following Prefrontal Cortex Damage with the PQRST Method. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 1-9.

9. Dale, E. (1969). Audio Visual Methods in Teaching: Third Edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart&Winston.
10. Donald, S. M. (2014). The SQ3R Method in Grade Seven. Journal of Reading, 11(1), 33-43.
11. Duran, E. &. (2019). An Action Research on the Development of Text Summarising Skills: PQRST Technique. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 48(221), 215-230.
12. Estes, T. H. (1971). A Scale to Measure Attitudes Toward Reading. Journal of Reading, 15(2), 135-138.
13. Gentile, D. A. (2003). Violent Video Games: The Newest Media Violence Hazard. In Media Violence and Children: A Complete Guide for Parents and Professionals (pp. 131-152). Westport, Connecticut; London: Praeger.
14. Jairam, D. K.-K.-H. (2013). SOAR Versus SQ3R: a Test of Two Study Systems. Instructional Science, 32(3), 409-420.
15. Johns, J. L. (2013). The SQ3R Study Technique: A Forgotten Research Target. Journal of Reading, 23(8), 705-708.
16. Karasar, N. (1999). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi (9th Edition) Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
17. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
18. Malia, N. (2015). Using PQRST Strategy to Improve Students’ Reading Comprehension of Hortatory Exposition Texts at Grade XI IPS of MA Diniyah Puteri, Pekanbaru. Journal English Language Teaching (ELT), 1(1), 1-6.
19. Martin, D. (1991). How to be a Successful Student: Second Edition. La Honda, CA: Marin Trails Publishing.
20. McCormick, S. &. (1991). Can SQ3R Facilitate Secondary Learning Disabled Students’ Literal Comprehension Of Expository Test? Three Experiments. Reading Psychology, 12(3), 239-271.
21. Miqawati, A. H. (2014). The PQRST Strategy, Reading Comprehension, and Learning Styles. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 123-139.
22. Roe, B. S.-H. (2011). Secondary school literacy instruction. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.
23. Ruggeri, M. (2005). Effectiveness of ‘PQRST’ Strategy in the Rehabilitation of Story Recall Disorders. Life Span and Disability, 8(2), 163-184.
24. Siah, P. C. (2010). The Value of Reading and the Effectiveness of Sustained Silent Reading. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(5), 168-174.
25. Simatupang, L. &. (2012). The Effect of PQRST Method on Students’ Reading Comprehension of Descriptive Text. Journal of English Language Teaching of FBS Unimed, 1(2), 1-19.
26. Simatupang, L. ve Sihombing, L. (2012). The Effect of PQRST Method on Students Reading Comprehension of Descriptive Text, Journal of English Language Teaching of FBS Unimed, 1, 2. http://jurnal.unimed.ac.id/2012/index.php/eltu/article/view/399 It was downloaded from this web site on 03.08.2017.
27. Tadlock, D. F. (1978). SQ3R Why It Works, Based on an Information Processing Theory of Learning. Journal of Reading, 22(2), 110-112.
28. Trauzettel-Klosinski, S. (1997). Eccentric Fixation with Hemianopic Field Defects: A Valuable Strategy to Improve Reading Ability and an Indication of Cortical Plasticity. Neuro-Ophthalmology, 18(3), 117-131.
29. Turkington, C. A. (2000). 12 Steps to a Better Memory, Pocket Books. New York, NY: A Division of Simon&Schuster, Inc.
30. Turkington, C. A. (2001). The Encyclopedia of Memory and Memory Disorders: Second Edition. New York: Facts on File, Inc.
31. Wilson, B. A. (1987). Single-Case Experimental Design in Neuropsychological Rehabilitation. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 9(5), 527-544.
32. Wilson, B. A. (2009). Memory Rehabilitation: Integrating Theory and Practice. New York; London: The Guilford Press.
33. Wormeli, R. (2005). Summarization in Any Subject: 50 Techniques to Improve Student Learning. Alexandria, Virginia, USA: ASCD (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development).