Effectiveness of Mastery Learning Programs: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

Beyond just desserts: The gendered nature of the connection between effort and achievement for accounting students

“…Whether mastery learning approaches are successful has been problematic, since not many empirical tests of their results have been conducted. Nonetheless, the continued belief that more than a single chance should be extended to students underlies the search for positive learning outcomes (Kulik, Kulik, & Bangert-Drowns, 1990). …”

Effects of Frequent Classroom Testing

“…Keller's (1968) PSI, a mastery-oriented individualized teaching approach often used with college students, has an extraordinarily strong record of effectiveness (Kulik, Kulik, & Cohen, 1979; Kulik, Kulik, & Bangert-Drowns, 1990). Bloom's (1968) Learning-for-Mastery approach, a group-based teaching approach often used in elementary and secondary schools, also has a strong record of effectiveness (Block & Bums, 1976;Guskey & Gates, 1985; Kulik, Kulik, & Bangert-Drowns, 1990). Those studies do not focus on mastery testing, however; rather, they compare the effects of conventional teaching to effects of teaching systems that include mastery testing as one of their features.…”

Mastery Learning and the Decreasing Variability Hypothesis

“…Kulik, Kulik, and Bangert-Drowns (1990) and Kulik and Kulik (1991) argued that support for the hypothesis would be demonstrated by disproportional effects of LFM on fast versus slow learners. If both groups benefit equally, compared with nonmastery controls, then variability would remain the same, thus contradicting the decreasing variability hypothesis.…”