Abstract
Recent literature indicates that computer-assisted instruction simulations may enhance motivation, support the transfer of knowledge and skills, and increase instructional efficiency. The present study was conducted to evaluate these assumptions using special education administration simulations with high- and low-achieving college students. Significant differences were not obtained in a contrast between the standard objective question module and the simulation module. This finding held true for items taken directly from the modules and generalization items. In addition, use of a student opinion survey indicated that participants favored the standard objective question module. Finally, students required substantially more time to complete the simulation module. As in previous investigations, high-achieving students learned more than low-achieving students, regardless of the nature of the module. The results are discussed with reference to alternative CAI simulation designs that may support the original assumptions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.