COMPARISON OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE AND ... - CiteSeerX

6 downloads 84100 Views 1MB Size Report
Dec 31, 1973 - histori)were compared in a CAr course in computer programming. Various measures of .... office of the College of Business Administration, under whose auspices the research .... Highest lesson completed (TOP LESSON). 13 ...
COMPARISON OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE AND ATTITUDE UNDER THREE IESSONSEIECTION STRATEGIES IN COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION by Marian H. Beard, Paul V. Lorton, Barbara W. Searle, and R. C. Atkinson

TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 222 December 31, 1973

PSYCHOLOGY & EDUCATION SERIES

Reproduction in Whole or in Part is Permitted for Any Purpose of the United States Government

This research was supported jointly by the Advanced Projects Research Agency of the Department of Defense and by the Office of Naval Research, Personnel and Training Research Programs, Psychological Sciences Division, under Contract No. N00014-67A-0012-0054.

INSTITUTE FOR MATHEMATICAL STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES STANFORD

UNIVERSITY

STANFORD, CALIFORNIA

SECURITy CLASSIFICATION' OF THIS PAGE (When DeC. Bnt.red)

.

READ INSTRUcTIoNS. BEFORE COllPLETING FORM

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

2. GOVT ACe: I:SSION NO. S. ·ftECI"I!:NT'S CA.TALOG NUMBER

1. REPORT NUMBER

222 4. TITL.E (and Subtitle)

5. TYPE OF REP'OAT 6 PERIOD COVERED

COMPARISON OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE AND ATl'ITUDE UNDER TIffiEE-LESSON SELECTION STRATEGIES IN COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION 7. AUTHOR(_)

Technical Report .

,.

PER,"ORMtNG ORO. Pl:EP'OAT NUMBER

,.

CONTRACT OR GIlIANT NU,MeIERC_)

Marian H. Beard, Paul V. Lorton, Barbara W. Searle, and R; C. Atkinson

NooQ14-67-A~0012-0054 lu. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, T ....SK

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

AREA 6 WORK UNIT NUMBERS

Institute for Mathematical StUdies in the Social Sciences - Stanford University Stanford, California 94305 11., CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS

NR 154-326 REPORTD~TE

12.

Personnel & Training Research Programs Office of Naval Research Arlington, VA ·22217

:

.

31 December 1973 . IS. NUlleEft O. PAQES

Tl

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME &: ADDRESS(1f dlll.nnt from CenttoUl..,Olllee)

.

11. SECURITY ,CLASI. (al

u..a NJ'On)

·none ,~,.,

11•• OECL-ASS' ".CATIOW DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE

.

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (a/ thle Report)

Approved for pUblic release; distribution unlimited

17. DISTRISUTIONSTATEMENT (0/ the .b.craet ..t.,.d In Bloet JO. II dlll.,..,.,- &om Report)

..

18. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

.

I., KEY WORDS (Continue on

,.~•••Ide

II n.e. . ..,. .." Identify by block nUMb...)

Computer-assisted Instruction Instruction Control Strategy Computer Programming Education .

2•• ABSTRACT (CantJnue

Oft

NY.,.•••Ide II n.e•••.", Mcf Id.ntllr ." "oclr 1tUIft••,)

Three problem selectionst~egies (stuQent . ~(il'J.eQti.on-, program select:l:on weighted ~ past performance, and forced selection indepenclent of stUdent histori)were compared in a CAr course in computer programming. Various measures of aptitude, pe rfol'llla.nce and attitude were examined. No consistent differe.nce was observed' among the three groups. The results ai'll discussed .

DD 1 ~~:~s 1473

EDITION OF' 'f NOV IllS O.SOLETE

SIN 0102-014":6601 j

SECURITr CLASS'P'ICAT!ON OF' THI,-'''AGE (MI.,. D.t.

an,.e)

... ~("UIi\TY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(When Data Bntered)

in terms of the specific experiment and the general problem of curricuJ.um design for comparing path selection strategies. Continuing experimentation is described.

.......--"""'"

~",,-,-----------------------..,.-------SECURfT_Y 'CLA$SlFICATION'·OF .T.JoIIS PAGE(Wrien D.t.

Bn'.~ct)

! I

ARPA Order Number:

2284/8-30-72

Contract Number:

N00014-67- A-0012 -0054

Program Code Number:

3D20

ONR Project Number:

NR 154-326

Principal Investigator:

Richard C. Atkinson Professor of Psychology (415) 321-2300, Ext. 3487

Contractor:

Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences Stanford University Stanford, California 94305

Scientific Officer:

Dr. Joseph Young Assistant Director Personnel and Training Research Programs Office of Naval Research (Code 458)

Effe cti ve Date:

1 August 1970

Expiration Date:

31 July 1974

Sponsored by Advanced Research Projects Agency and Office of Naval Research ARPA Order No. 2284 The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Advanced Research Projects Agency or the Office of Naval Research or the U. S. Government. Reproduction in whole or in part is permitted for any purpose of the U. S. Government. Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

TECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY This study investigated the effects on student attitude

of

three different

strategies

performance and

for selecting

course in computer programming presented by computer. investigation

was

a

comparison

of

computer

lessons

in a

The focus of the

selection

vs

student

selection of instructional material, 1 A

commonly held

belief is

that students

prefer

to exercise

control over their course of study; this assumes that they

are capable

of making such decisions, and that provision for such control will be a motivating factor reflected in experimental data even

known how

an increased rate of

exist to support

fact, it

is not

In

given the

examine the

effect of

The study was conducted using eight remote terminals

linked by

This

control students

Little

when

option.

much

this belief,

learning,

study was designed,

will exercise

in part, to

student control on both performance and attitude,

telephone

lines

to

the

PDP-10

computer

at

the

Instruction (CAl) Laboratory of the Institute for in the Social inexpensive terminal,

Sciences (IMSSS) at device

(Model-33

The CAl program

Computer-assisted

Mathematical Studies

Stanford University,

teletype)

was

used

as

imposed no time constraints;

A simple and the

student

students were

free to spend as much time as they chose on any lesson, The course, "Computer Programming in AID," waS d'esigned for one

quarter or Dialogue

one semester of (AID), a

instruction in the

mathematically oriented

1

Algebraic Interpretive

programming

language,

It

consists of 36 parallel sets of short and long lessons as well as tests and extra-credit problems, Long lessons cover the same material

as the

corresponding short lessons, but in greater detail,

of the

An outline

course is shown in Table 1, Three experimental

conditions were established:

no choic.;>, and program choice, were

permitted to

free choice,

Students in ·the "free-choice" condition

alter their

position in

the course

at

Students in the "no choice" condition followed a straight the long lessons, with a allowed to alter choice" condition

lessons,

followed a modified

with a test after every fourth lesson, was monitored

by the

program, and the

presented when a student performed short lessen or

o~

a

path through

test after everY fourth .lesson, and

the sequence of

any time,.

were not

Students.in

the "program-

P?th through the

short lessons

The progress.of

these students

corresponding long

lesson was

below a set criterion, either

in a

te~to

Sixty students, distributed

between both schools and

over the

entire 1972-1973 school year, were selected as subjects for this study, Three equal groups were created by random assignment to

each

sele~tion

con 2.7) 34.2 SET Y = X/2 - 1 34.3 TYPE Y DO PART 34 Y = _

Rewrite each set of commands, using the fewest possible commands, preserving all indicated actions.

42.

DELETE X DELETE Y DELE'rE Z SET Z = 2.5

43.

44.

SET W "" X + 1 SET W; W/2 SET W ; 5 - W TYPE W

SET X ;

5

DO PART 2

DELETE X SET X ; 6 DO PART 2

DELETE X SET X; 7 DO PART 2

45. Write the AID commands that would cause Part 8 to be put into permanent storage.

46.

Write the AID command that would print the value of the natural logarithm (to the base e) of 4.75.

47.

Complete step 3.1 in program B below so that programs A and B are equivalent. Program A 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

SET A ; 1 TYPE A/3 SET A ; A + 1 TO STEP 1.2 IF A

Program B 3.1 DO PART 4 FOR A ; 4.1 TYPE DO PART