PA and PASS systems of quiz management are essentially equal in effectiveness: Non-academic measures need consideration.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HaddadN. F.NationJ. R.WilliamsJ. D.Programmed student achievement: A Hawthorne effect?. Research in Higher Education, 1975, 3, 315–322.
2.
KellerF. S.“Good-bye, teacher…Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1968, 1, 78–89.
3.
KnightJ. M.The effect of programmed achievement on student performance. Journal of Educational Research, 1973, 66, 291–294.
4.
KnightJ. M.WilliamsJ. D.JardonM.The effects of contingency avoidance on programmed student achievement. Research in Higher Education, 1975, 3, 11–17.
5.
LamberthJ.KnightJ. M.An embarrassment of riches: Effectively teaching and motivating large introductory psychology sections. Teaching of Psychology, 1974, 116–20.
6.
LamberthJ.McCullersJ. C.MellgrenR. L.Foundations of psychology.New York: Harper & Row, 1976.
7.
NationJ. R.KnightJ. M.LamberthJ.DyckD. G.Programmed student achievement: A test of the avoidance hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Education, 1974, 42, 57–61.
8.
NationJ. R.MassadP.WilkersonD.Student performance in introductory psychology following termination of the programmed achievement contingency at mid-semester. Teaching of Psychology, 1977, 4, 116–119.
9.
NationJ. R.RoopS. S.A comparison of two mastery approaches to teaching introductory psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 1975, 2, 108–111.
10.
RosenthalR.Experimenter effects in behaviorar research.New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.
