7. The Testing and Validation of Programs

Knight, Margaret

doi:10.1080/1355800650020208

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

The Problem1

Introduction1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

1967

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This objective is indeed desirable and the case for it together with some applications have been stated before, e.g., Annett (1964); Duncan (1964); Greenway (1965); Knight (1965).…”

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 96%

A Route Recorder for the Validation of a Branching Program

Crooks¹

1967

Programmed Learning and Educational Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This objective is indeed desirable and the case for it together with some applications have been stated before, e.g., Annett (1964); Duncan (1964); Greenway (1965); Knight (1965).…”

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 96%

A Route Recorder for the Validation of a Branching Program

Crooks¹

1967

Programmed Learning and Educational Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In works dealing with the evaluation of programmed learning the mention of such comparisons s6em to be either absent or else relegated to second place (e.g., Bjerstedt 1965, Criteria 1964, Jacobs, et ah, 1966, Knight 1965. Empirical investigations comparing traditional classroom lecturing and programmed instruction appear to have been based on a theoretical framework which encompasses little more than the variables ability, motivation and initial knowledge of the experimental subjects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Comparisons Between Traditional and Programmed Learning as a Function of the Contents of the Comparison Test

Pikas

1967

Programmed Learning and Educational Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the discussion concerning comparisons between traditional teaching and programmed learning the function of the contents of the comparison achievement test seems to have been neglected. In the present investigation the dependency of the results on the correspondence between the learned material and the test contents was measured by two different methods. In the first study the achievement test was compiled independently of the learning material. After the analysis of the correspondence in content between the test and the programme, the content similarity between the test and the learning task appeared to be the decisive variable in performance differences between traditional teaching and programmed learning. In the second study, the degree of similarity between the test and the program was prepared in advance. The results showed a linear connection between this degree of similarity and the difference between programmed-learning and traditional teaching groups but not between the similarity and the group performances taken separately. Because of the experimental design, the programmedlearning group showed better performance than did the traditional group. In a re-test sixteen days later the rank order of the groups was reversed, the traditional group showing significantly better performance than programmed-learning.

show abstract

7. The Testing and Validation of Programs

Cited by 2 publications

References 10 publications

A Route Recorder for the Validation of a Branching Program

A Route Recorder for the Validation of a Branching Program

Comparisons Between Traditional and Programmed Learning as a Function of the Contents of the Comparison Test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About