Changes in student attitudes during a course in relation to instructional media
- 16 Downloads
Scales measuring attitude toward a course were administered five times at equally spaced intervals throughout the course to college students. The students were in courses taught by one of four methods of instruction; programed, television, small class, and large class. The mean scores on the attitude scales differed significantly among the methods of instruction on each of the five administrations. The means of the methods were consistently ordered as follows: programed instruction television instruction > small class > large class. There was also a consistent decline in the mean scores over the five administrations.
Novelty of the method for the students was offered as the variable differentiating the methods associated with the attitudinal differences. Other hypotheses were also discussed.
KeywordsSmall Class Attitude Scale Student Attitude Television Instruction Instructional Medium
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Berlyne, D. E.Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.Google Scholar
- Day, H. Looking times as a function of stimulus variables and individual differences.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966,22, 423–428.Google Scholar
- Likert, R. A. Technique for measurement of attitudes.Archives of Psychology, 1932, No. 140.Google Scholar
- Macomber, F. G. & Siegel, L.Final report of the experimental study in instructional procedures. Oxford, Ohio: Fund for the Advancement of Education, Miami University, 1960.Google Scholar
- Mayo, E.The human problems of industrial civilization. New York: Macmillan, 1933.Google Scholar
- Neidt, C. O. & Meredith, T. F. Changes in attitudes of learners evaluated behavior characteristics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University Library, 1949.Google Scholar
- Thurstone, L. L. & Chave, E. J.The measurement of attitude. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1929.Google Scholar
- Wittrock, M. C. Paradigms in research on instruction.Educational Psychologist, 1967, 5.Google Scholar