The effects of group size and exposure time on microcomputer learning

Baron, Lois J.; Abrami, Philip C.

doi:10.1016/0747-5632(92)90029-e

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(text continues on page 510) Baron & Abrami (1992) grade 5-6 reading/language arts individual achievement group of 2 23 0.18 Baron & Abrami (1992) grade 5 Bloomer (1984) college computer skills individual achievement 84 0.34 Butler (1991) grade 6 social studies group task performance 50 0.71 Butler (1991) grade 6 social studies individual achievement 80 0.07 Carrier & Sales (1987) college education individual achievement 33 0.19 Carrier & Sales (1987) college education task completion time 24 0.81 Cavalier & Klein (1998) grade 5-6 earth science individual achievement 125 0.34 Cavalier & Klein (1998) grade 5-6 earth science task completion time 125 -1.19 Chang & Smith (1991) college foreign language individual achievement 113 0.08 Chapman (1985) college medicine attitude toward 88 -0.03 computers Chapman (1985) college medicine attitude toward group 88 0.32 work Chapman (1985) college medicine individual achievement 81 -0.12 Cheney (1977) college Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem group task performance group of 2 12 1.66 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem group task performance group of 3 12 1.44 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem group task performance group of 5 12 1.12 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem task completion time group of 2 7 -0.10 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem task completion time group of 3 7 -0.38 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7 Foot (1986, Exp. 2) grade 3 problem solving individual achievement dual4ceyboard 40 -0.32 Foot (1986, Exp.…”

Section: Strengths Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…(text continues on page 510) Baron & Abrami (1992) grade 5-6 reading/language arts individual achievement group of 2 0.18 Baron & Abrami (1992) grade Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem group task performance group of 2 1.66 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem group task performance group of 3 1.44 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem group task performance group of 5 1.12 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem task completion time group of 2 -0.10 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade 7-8 science problem task completion time group of 3 -0.38 solving Cox & Berger (1985) grade Foot (1986, Exp. 1) grade 3 problem solving individual achievement 0.32 Foot (1986, Exp.…”

Section: Strengths Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Small Group and Individual Learning with Technology: A Meta-Analysis

Lou

Abrami

d’Apollonia

2001

Review of Educational Research

Self Cite

527

309

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study quantitatively synthesized the empirical research on the effects of social context (i.e., small group versus individual learning) when students learn using computer technology. In total, 486 independent findings were extracted from 122 studies involving 11,317 learners. The results indicate that, on average, small group learning had significantly more positive effects than individual learning on student individual achievement (mean ES = +0.15), group task performance (mean ES = +0.31), and several process and affective outcomes. However, findings on both individual achievement and group task performance were significantly heterogeneous. Through weighted least squares univariate and multiple regression analyses, we found that variability in each of the two cognitive outcomes could be accounted for by a few technology, task, grouping, and learner characteristics in the studies.Computer technology (CT) and the tremendous growth of information technologies are transforming the world and the way education is conducted. Electronic data processing, information systems, graphic designs, and computer-mediated communication are making the computer an increasingly indispensable tool in nearly every aspect of work and life. In schools, students are using CT to facilitate their learning in various subjects as well as to acquire CT knowledge and skills to meet the challenges in this rapidly changing technological and information age.

show abstract

Section: Strengths Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Strengths Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Small Group and Individual Learning with Technology: A Meta-Analysis

Lou

Abrami

d’Apollonia

2001

Review of Educational Research

Self Cite

527

309

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using a One‐way Analysis of Variance, there were no significant differences between the three conditions on the pre‐test. As established in previous studies (Baron & Abrami, 1992; Kutnick, 1997), drill and practice performance is often affected by initial attainment, thus the quantitative comparisons of performance on the trials was covaried by the initial pre‐test performance. Results from the Mickey Mouse program, covaried by pre‐test score, showed that the Individuals scored significantly higher than the Pairs ( F 1,61 = 4.45, p < 0.039).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 84%

Principles and practical grouping for the use of drill and practice programs

Jackson

Kutnick

Kington

2001

Computer Assisted Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A previous paper showed that young children performed better when working as individuals rather than in pairs on a drill and practice program. This paper reports an analysis of behaviour and talk for individuals and single sex pairs using a computer‐based drill and practice activity to explain differences in performance. Results indicated that individuals were more likely to be task‐focused and to complete tasks successfully than children working in pairs. Differences were found in off‐task activity, behaviours and type of talk. Grouping and verbal interaction are discussed in relation to the type of task/program that children are asked to undertake, and how both task and peer presence may constrain the child's task focus and performance when reinforcing pre‐existing knowledge.

show abstract

“…there is a substantial amount of literature in the area of developmental psychology and social-cognitive theory that justifies the use of groups as a teaching strategy (Baron & Abrami, 1992;Bearison, 1982;Noddings, 1989;Vygotsky, 1962;Vygotsky, 1978); it is common practice for teachers to group children to undertake computer-based learning activities, often leaving those children to complete a task without immediate supervision; and, there is a widely held assumption that the nature of computer-based group work is largely defined by the software being used-without regard, for example, to group environmental or contextual factors (e.g. group composition; task type; amount of learner control; amount and nature of teacher intervention), (Mercer, 1994).…”

Section: Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating verbal interactions when primary chidren use computers

Wild¹

1996

Computer Assisted Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is based upon some early results of a research project currently underway at Edith Cowan University to investigate the nature of young children's interactions centred on and around the use of new technologies for learning. The research focused on children working in dyads on a single computer‐based language task; the software used was chosen to facilitate children's talk. This paper reports a number of findings, including the difficulties of predicting the quality of children's interactions at the computer; the likely significance of a wide range of factors that influence children's interactions; and, the lack of patterns in children's interactions over time. From the analysis of the data, two categorisations are given which might be useful to guide further research into the nature of children's interactions using the computer. The first categorisation is a checklist of verbal interaction types, and the second, a checklist for metacognitive components in children's interactions.

show abstract

The effects of group size and exposure time on microcomputer learning

Cited by 12 publications

References 19 publications

Small Group and Individual Learning with Technology: A Meta-Analysis

Small Group and Individual Learning with Technology: A Meta-Analysis

Principles and practical grouping for the use of drill and practice programs

Investigating verbal interactions when primary chidren use computers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About