A comparison of student performance following instruction by interactive videodisc versus conventional laboratory

Leonard, William H.

doi:10.1002/tea.3660290109

Cited by 24 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Eleven of the studies appeared to be randomized, parallel-group trials, [20][21][22][23][24][25]27,[30][31][32],c 4 involved comparative groups to which participants were not randomly assigned or for which the randomization process was not clear, 26,28,29,33 1 was a 2-period crossover study, 14 and 1 involved a retrospective review of grades. b…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of comparative studies examining alternatives to the harmful use of animals in biomedical education

Patronek¹,

Rauch²

2007

javma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of comparative studies examining alternatives to the harmful use of animals in biomedical education

Patronek¹,

Rauch²

2007

javma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because they enable students to explore their theoretical understanding and to conduct investigations they consider relevant to that understanding, quickly, reliably and safely, computer-based activities may often be superior to conventional bench work at bringing about concept development. Interactive video and the technology of virtual reality offer even more exciting possibilities (Ferrington and Loge, 1992;Leonard, 1992). Often, these more 'controlled' learning experiences can be used to assist students towards the kind of conceptual understanding specified in the curriculum.…”

Section: It May Be the Only Way Of Experiencing At First Hand Many Ofmentioning

confidence: 98%

Re-thinking Old Ways: Towards A More Critical Approach To Practical Work In School Science

Hodson

1993

Studies in Science Education

321

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The predominant ideology among science educators is that hands-on experience is at the heart of science learning. As important as laboratory experience is thought to be, there has been little systematic analysis of just what can be achieved in the science lab. (Nersessian, 1989) A BRIEF HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Gee and Clackson (1992) trace some of the early history of practical work in universities and public education (including the development of guidebooks for conducting experiments in the home) and describe how early attempts to establish practical work in school science were frustrated by lack of facilities. They describe how this problem was overcome through various grants and government training initiatives. What is of more immediate interest in this article is the rationale employed in the promotion of practical work and the ways in which this has changed over time. Layton (1990) advances the view that practical work achieved prominence in the mid-nineteenth century because it afforded early pioneers of chemical education a justification of their subject in terms identical to those used for established subjects such as classics and mathematics -namely, that it teaches students how to learn. Subsequently, the argument was extended to biology and physics. However, Lock (1988) maintains that, in practice, practical work during this period 'filled a largely supportive role, that of confirming the theory that had already been taught', and that teacher demonstrations were much more widespread than individual experimentation by students. Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 21:21 05 February 2015 86Derek HodsonIn the later years of the century, with the work of Meiklejohn and Armstrong, the rationale for practical work shifted from a concern with the promotion of generalized learning skills transferable to other areas of knowledge, to a justification in terms of training in scientific method (Brock, 1973; Layton, 1973;van Praagh, 1973; Jenkins, 1979;Waring, 1985). The thrust of Armstrong's approach, published in 1898 as The Heuristic Method of Teaching or The Art of Making Children Discover Things for Themselves, was doing science in order to understand science: 'once the methods of experimental investigation had been acquired in the workshop, these would be used continually in subsequent science lessons to 'find out' the information which others were forced to acquire by rote and demonstration' (Layton, 1990).Whether principally through changes in thinking in the psychology of learning (Brock, 1973) or in the philosophy of science (Jenkins, 1979), or because of a significant shift in the overarching goals of science education (Uzzell, 1978; Layton, 1973, 1990), Armstrong's heurism fell into disrepute and, with the impetus provided by the Thomson Report's (1918) declaration that too much time was wasted on repetitive individual practical work, attention switched back to teacher demonstration. The 1927 edition of the Board of Education's Handbook of Suggestions stressed the value of the demonstration experim...

show abstract

“…There has been much evidence concerning the positive effects of computer use on cognitive learning outcomes in science. Learning was shown to have improved in a number of science skills, such as reading data and interpreting graphs, manipulating variables, constructing hypotheses, ability to conduct experiments, generate creative questions, draw conclusions, and think critically (Friedler et al, 1989;Wise, 1989;Leonard, 1992;Maor & Fraser, 1993). However, the introduction of computers into the science classroom is viewed not only as a way of influencing the cognitive outcomes, but also as an interactive tool affecting the social processes within the classroom in terms of teaching Levine & S. Donitsa-Schmidt culture, learning conditions, and student and teachers' goals (Papert, 1980;Weir, 1989;Laboratory for Comparative Human Cognition, 1989;Cochran-Smith, 1991;Swan & Mitrani, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classroom Environment in Computer‐integrated Science Classes: effects of gender and computer ownership

Levine

Donitsa‐Schmidt

1996

Research in Science & Technological Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Classroom environment in science classes was explored in two groups employing different instructional strategies. The experimental group implemented an instructional strategy which incorporated multimodal computerbased activities with traditional instructional materials in a multitask environment. The control group used a traditional science instruction strategy. A total of 1009 seventh grade students was sampled. Six dimensions of class climate were examined: cognitive involvement, scope and novelty of science tasks, peer relations, computer contribution to learning, student responsibility, and student-teacher relations. The results showed that for all climate dimensions, with the exception of student-teacher relations, students in the experimental group perceived their classroom in a more positive light than did students in the control group. The most meaningful differences between the two groups were observed in the climate dimensions relating to the degree of student involvement in the learning process and the perception of their own responsibility for learning. Interaction effects of gender, computer ownership and instruction were found, suggesting that the computer-integrated classroom has the potential to reduce differences in student perception regarding the positive roles computers can play in science learning.

show abstract

A comparison of student performance following instruction by interactive videodisc versus conventional laboratory

Cited by 24 publications

References 7 publications

Systematic review of comparative studies examining alternatives to the harmful use of animals in biomedical education

Systematic review of comparative studies examining alternatives to the harmful use of animals in biomedical education

Re-thinking Old Ways: Towards A More Critical Approach To Practical Work In School Science

Classroom Environment in Computer‐integrated Science Classes: effects of gender and computer ownership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About