Four studies were conducted in order to clarify the importance of student proctors and mastery performance in PSI systems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BornD. G.GledhillS. M.DavisM. L.Examination performance in lecture-discussion and personalized instruction courses, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1972. 5, 33–43.
2.
BostowD. E.BlumenfeldG. J.The effect of two test-retest procedures on the classroom performance of undergraduate college students. In SembG. (Ed). Behavior Analysis and Education - 1972.Lawrence, Kansas: Follow Through Project, 1972.
3.
BostowD. E.O'ConnorR. J.A comparison of two college classroom testing procedures: Required remediation versus no remediation. Journal of Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 599.
4.
CarlsonJ. G.MinkeK. A.The effects of student tutors on learning by unit mastery instructional methods. The Psychological Record1974, 24, 533–543.
5.
FarmerJ.LachterG. D.BlausteinJ. J.ColeB. K.The role of proctoring in personalized instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1972, 5, 401–404.
6.
JohnstonJ. M.PennypackerH. S.A behavioral approach to teaching. American Psychologist, 1971, 26, 219–244.
7.
KellerF. S.“Goodbye teacher…”Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1968, 1, 78–89.
8.
KulikJ. A.KulikC.CarmichaelK.The Keller-plan in science teaching. Science, 1974, 83, 379–383.
9.
MorrisC. J.KimbrellG. McA.Performance and attitudinal effects of the Keller method in an introductory psychology course. The Psychological Record, 1972, 22, 523–530.
10.
NazzaroJ. R.TodorovJ. C.NazzaroJ. N.Student ability and individualized instruction. Journal of College Science Teaching, 1972, 2, 29–30.
11.
PlattJ.Social traps. American Psychologist, 1973, 28, 641–651.
12.
RyanB. A.PSI Keller's personalized system of instruction: An appraisal.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1974.
