Files in this item
|(no description provided)|
|Title:||Academic Achievement of Agricultural Mechanics Students Using Computer-Assisted Versus Written Review and Testing|
|Author(s):||Kaczor, Coleen Teufer|
|Department / Program:||Education|
|Degree Granting Institution:||University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign|
|Abstract:||Purpose. The purpose of this study was to address the lack of knowledge to date on the relationship of computer-assisted instruction to academic achievement gains of secondary vocational agriculture students. The study was conducted to provide further information on a type of computer-assisted instruction which would support or refute current research findings in computer-assisted instruction.
Procedure. The sample in this study consisted of Illinois secondary vocational agriculture mechanics classes (grades 9-12) taught during the spring semester of 1985. The methodology employed in this investigation was a combination of a non-equivalent control group study design and the causal-comparative method. The instruments used in this study were the California Reading Test (CRT); AAVIM Volume I Supplement (software package); written review and testing materials (identical to the software minus immediate feedback and moving graphics); Pretest, Midterm, and Final; student demographic questionnaire; student activities book; teacher notebook; student feedback questionnaire; and teacher questionnaire. Final usable test results were obtained from 33 students (75%) originally identified for the study. Statistical techniques utilized in analyzing the data were means, frequencies, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA), t-tests, and Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient.
Findings and Conclusions. (1) Students using the computer-assisted review and testing materials obtained a mean achievement gain (final-pretest) of 42.63, while students using the written review and testing materials obtained a mean achievement gain of 29.02. (2) Younger students (grades 9 and 10) using the computer-assisted materials may have performed significantly better in achievement gains because of eager attitudes to work with and be challenged by computers. In addition, they were higher achievers, as determined by the California Reading Test, than older students (grades 11 and 12) and this factor may have contributed to better usage of the computer-assisted review and testing materials. (3) Although lower achievers, predominantly in the higher grades of 11 and 12, did not have great achievement gains, there were significant positive gains by the students using the computer-assisted materials. In light of this finding, it has been concluded that both low and high achievers can benefit from using CAI in agricultural mechanics classes. (4) The computer-assisted review was proven to be a viable instructional aid in the agricultural mechanics classes, but was not demonstrated to be an educational cure-all.
Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1986.
|Date Available in IDEALS:||2014-12-15|