Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

The Impact of Computer-Based Instruction on Knowledge and Motivation to Learn about the Underground Railroad June 2011.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "The Impact of Computer-Based Instruction on Knowledge and Motivation to Learn about the Underground Railroad June 2011."— Presentation transcript:

1 The Impact of Computer-Based Instruction on Knowledge and Motivation to Learn about the Underground Railroad June 2011

2 Introduction Summary of Chapters 4 & 5 Problem StatementResearch Question 1 Purpose of the Study  RQ 1 Results RQ 1 Results  RQ 1 Interpretation RQ 1 Interpretation Research SampleResearch Question 2 Research Design  RQ 2 Results RQ 2 Results  RQ 2 Interpretation RQ 2 Interpretation Theoretical FrameworkPositive Social Change Research QuestionsReferences

3 Middle School Students Text-based Learning (TBI) Technology Computer- based Learning (CBI) Underground Railroad (UGRR)

4 A problem exists in that African American middle school students need to acquire better knowledge and understanding of political, economic, cultural, and social complexities associated with the UGRR.

5 Textbooks only superficially present information on the UGRR, an essential component in the study of American history, which currently receives limited attention within the context of the Civil War.

6 This study sought to investigate if using CBI enhanced African American students' knowledge of the UGRR and motivated their interest in social studies.

7 The purpose of this quasi-experimental study using a pretest/posttest control group design was to investigate whether using CBI relative to TBI impacted learning and the motivation to learn about the UGRR as part of U.S. history.

8 A nation-wide survey of more than 140,000 students confirmed the importance of students' use and desire for technology in the educational setting to enhance learning.

9 It was expected that the integration of CBI would improve the students' understanding of the impact of the UGRR experiences in U.S. history.

10 The convenience sample was recruited from a population of middle school students, in the 5th to 8th grades, ages 10-14, in an urban district in a Midwestern city. The school district’s student population was N ≈ 13,000.

11 The control groups and experimental groups were assigned by a random coin toss. One social studies class at School A (n = 39) was originally proposed as the control group and one social studies class at School B (n = 44) was proposed as the experimental group, giving a total projected sample size of N = 83.

12 The eventual control and experimental group sizes for the MSSCLI, taking into account mortality, were less than expected, specifically n = 21 at School A and n = 33 at School B. The group sizes for the CAIMI were n = 19 at School A and n = 25 at School B.

13 Quasi-Experimental/Evaluative Research Design  Rationale for choice: Experimental designs are used in social science to draw conclusions about causes and effects which cannot be evaluated using non-experimental designs.

14 Pretest/posttest Control Group Design  Rationale for choice: This design fits the scope, framework, and research questions of the study. Other researchers have used a similar design to evaluate the effectiveness of CBI in the context of American history.

15 Quantitative Data Analysis  Rationale for choice: This research study scientifically and objectively evaluated the effectiveness of CBI.

16 Social Development Anchored Instruction Situated Learning Scaffolding Instruction Complex Learning Interactive Non-linear Learning Depth of Learning Mastery Goals for Learning Bruner; Bransford et al; Lave & Wenger Linnenbrink & Pintrich Spiro & Jehng Constructivism Cognitive Flexibility Theory Goal Orientation (Motivation)

17 Immerses students in an interactive environment In-depth, non-linear learning Complex content and concepts Mastery goals Commonalities

18 Research Question 1 How does the practice of using computer-based instruction in the classroom impact middle school students’ learning of specific, historical events, facts, and people associated with the Underground Railroad as measured by pre- and posttests for students using computer-based instruction and students using text-based instruction?

19 Research Question 2 How does using computer-based instruction or using text-based instruction increase general motivation of middle school students to learn social studies as determined by a pre- and postmotivational survey?

20 Research Question 1 How does the practice of using computer-based instruction in the classroom impact middle school students’ learning of specific, historical events, facts, and people associated with the Underground Railroad as measured by pre- and posttests for students using computer-based instruction and students using text-based instruction?

21 RQ 1: Results At School A (Control) the achievement rates for Part 1 and Part 2 of the Middle School Students Contextual Learning Inventory were 38.1% and 42.9% respectively while at School B (Experimental) the achievement rates were 39.4% and 48.5% respectively. Although the scores became lower, the trend towards agreement implied that the knowledge of the students increased between the pretest and the posttest.

22 RQ 1: Results (con’t) Increased learning levels measured by the MSSCLI posttest exhibited both statistical significance (indicated by p.3). The MSSCLI Part 1 mean scores changed by 7.53 between the pretest and posttest at School A and by 5.58 at School B. The mean Percentage Correct Score for the MSSCLI Part 2 increased by 11.8% between the pretest and posttest at School A and by 10.5% at School B.

23 RQ 1: Interpretation It is concluded that the knowledge of the students about the UGRR was not significantly different following text-based instruction at School A or computer-based instruction at School B. There was insufficient statistical evidence to conclude that the experimental group exposed to the prescribed intervention experienced an enhanced acquisition of knowledge relative to the control group.

24 RQ 1: Interpretation (con’t) Anything less than a 5% difference in mean scores between a pretest and posttest is meaningless with respect to providing evidence to support educational policy decisions. The mean differences measured in this study were over 10%, reflecting the practical importance of the results. However, there was no significant difference at the.05 level between the mean change in the MSSCLI pretest and posttest scores at School A and School B.

25 Research Question 2 How does using computer-based instruction or using text-based instruction increase general motivation of middle school students to learn social studies as determined by a pre- and postmotivational survey?

26 RQ 2: Results The medium of instruction at the two schools had no significant effect on the mean scores indicated by F (1, 42) =.163, p >.05. There was no significant increase in the mean scores between the pretest and the posttest using the CAIMI and no significant difference at the.05 level between the motivation levels of middle school students using CBI and those using TBI.

27 RQ 2: Results (con’t) There was insufficient statistical evidence at the.05 level to determine whether the experimental group (CBI) experienced enhanced motivation relative to the control group (TBI). There was no significant difference at the.05 level between the CBI and TBI groups with respect to enhancing motivation to learn about social studies. The CAIMI posttest scores did not significantly increase over time in either the CBI or the TBI group (indicated by p >.05) and the practical significance of these results (indicated by η 2 <.01) was negligible

28 RQ 2: Interpretation It is concluded that the mean CAIMI score for motivation did not change as a result of text-based instruction at School A or computer- based instruction at School B. The results provided evidence consistent with the assumptions of a pretest/posttest control group design. The pretest motivation scores were significantly correlated with the possttest motivation scores.

29 RQ 2: Interpretation (con’t) It was inferred that motivation did not change as a result of text-based instruction at School A nor computer-based instruction at School B. The results of this study were contrary to those expected, since it was assumed implicitly before the research began that the integration of CBI into the middle school curriculum would be more effective than TBI with respect to stimulating the students' interest in social studies, specifically the UGRR in U.S. history.

30 This study contributes to positive social change in providing an understanding of the extent technology integration in the history curricula is effective for middle school students.

31 Since both the CBI and TBI lesson plans that I devised for this study encouraged teaching in accordance with the theories of constructivism, and both produced similar results in terms of learning and motivation, both instructional methods are efficacious for middle school instruction on the UGRR.

32 The implications for social change are that the automatic assumption among educators that CBI is always superior to TBI should be questioned.

33 Summarily, the research results contribute to positive social change by supporting CBI as a tool for learning in well-developed lesson plans by educators of middle school students when teaching about the UGRR.

34 The Impact of Computer-Based Instruction on Knowledge and Motivation to Learn about the Underground Railroad June 2011 Finis

35 Anderson, C. (1997). Dirty little secrets about Black history, its heroes, and other troublemakers. Bethesda, MD: PowerNomics Corporation of America. Alexander, T. (2000). A historical review of fourth grade social studies textbooks. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Texas, Arlington. Babbie, E. (2001). The practice of social research (9th ed., Rev.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

36 Bernard, H. R. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2010). How to design and evaluate research in education. (7 th ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill. Hernandez-Ramos P., & De La Paz, S. (2009). Learning history in middle school by designing multimedia in a project based learning experience. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42,

37 Jacobson, M. J. & Azevedo, R. (2008). Advnaces in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: theoretical, empirical, and design issues. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 56I(1), 1-3. Kingsley, K. V. & Boone, R. (2008/2009). Effects of multimedia software on achievement of middle school students in an American history class [Electronic version]. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(2),

38 Mertens, D. M. (2005). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods (2nd ed., Rev.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Michigan District, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. (2009). Michigan District Convention, workbook 2. Concordia University, Ann Arbor, MI. Retrieved from

39 National Educational Technology Plan 2010-Draft. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. Office of Educational Technology. Retrieved from final-report.pdf/ NetDay Speak Up Day. (March 2004). In voices and views of today's tech-savvy students. Retrieved from

40 Song, H., & Grabowski, B. L. (2006). Stimulating intrinsic motivation for problem solving using goal-oriented contexts and peer group composition [Electronic version]. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 54, Washington, M. C. (2005). The emergence of the Underground Railroad as an organization. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Howard University.

41 Wilson, J. D. (1981). An analysis of the treatment of the Black experience, , in fifth grade social studies textbooks used in Michigan school districts [Abstract]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brown University.


Download ppt "The Impact of Computer-Based Instruction on Knowledge and Motivation to Learn about the Underground Railroad June 2011."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google