Effective Use of Computer Aided Instruction in Secondary Schools: A Causal Model of Institutional Factors and Teachers' Roles

Abstract

The use of Computer-Aided Instruction (CAI) in schools has become an important topic of research among educators with the widespread availability of microcomputers to aid teachers and students in their teaching and learning process. While many past studies have been carried out to gauge the effectiveness of CAI in enhancing students' performance, this research seeks to unravel factors that would contribute to the successful implementation of CAI in classroom. This research study adopts a path modeling approach, whereby the various factors during different stages of the teaching and learning are examined before the final outcome, the student's learning effectiveness. A survey approach was taken and Partial Least Square (PLS) was used in assessing the psychometrics properties of the construct and the testing of the proposed path model. Results showed strong support for our proposed path model. These findings have important implications for introducing educational technologies successfully in schools.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Akker

J. V. D.

Keursten

, & Plomp

(1992). The integration of computer use in education. International Journal of Educational Research, 17(1), 65–75.

American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. (1987). Teaching teachers: Facts and figures. Washington, D.C.

Bagozzi

R. P.

(1980). Causal models in marketing, New York: Wiley and Sons.

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura

, & Jourden

F. J.

(1991). Self-regulatory mechanisms governing the impact of social comparison on complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60: 6, 941–951.

Bandura

, & Schunk

D. H.

(1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3) 586–598.

Baron

L. C.

, & Goldman

E. S.

(1994). Integrating technology with teacher preparation, in Means

(Ed.), Technology and education reform (pp. 81–110). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Barry

, & Wise

B. J.

(1996, April). Fuelling inclusion through technology. School Administrator, 53(4), 24–27.

Becker

H. J.

(1994, Spring). How exemplary computer-using teachers differ from other teachers: Implications for realizing the potential of computers in schools. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26(3), 291–319.

10.

Bialo

, & Sivin

(1990). Report on the effectiveness of microcomputers in schools. Washington, D.C.: Software Publishers Association.

11.

Bliss

Chandra

, & Cox

(1986). The introduction of computers in school. Computer Education, 10(1), 49–54.

12.

Boe

(1989, March). The next step for educators and the technology industry: Investing in teachers. Educational Technology, 29(3), 39–44.

13.

Bollen

K. A.

, & Hoyle

R. H.

(1990). Perceived cohesion: A conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces, 69: (2), 470–504.

14.

Bosch

K. A.

, & Cardinale

(1993). Pre-service teachers' perceptions of computer use during a field experience. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 10(1), 23–27.

15.

Braun

, (1990, October). Final report for vision: TEST (Technologically Enriched Schools of Tomorrow): Recommendations for American educational decision-makers. Eugene, OR: The International Society for Technology in Education.

16.

Bracey

G. W.

(1993). Research: Exemplary computer use. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(3), 270–273.

17.

Brown

Jr. , & Inouyne

D. K.

(1978). Learned helplessness through modeling: The role of perceived similarity in competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(8), 900–908.

18.

Bullough

, & Beatty

(1991). Classroom applications of microcomputers. New York: Macmillan.

19.

Campbell

D. T.

, & Fiske

D. W.

(1959). Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(1), 81–105.

20.

Campoy

(1992). The role of technology in the school reform movement. Educational Technology, 32(8), 17–22.

21.

Chin

W. W.

Marcolin

B. L.

, & Newsted

P. R.

(1996, December). A Partial Least Squares latent variable modelling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and voice mail emotion/adoption study. In DeGross

Jarvenpaa

, & Srinivasan

(Eds.). Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Information Systems, pp. 21–41.

22.

Christmann

E. P.

Badgett

J. L.

, & Lucking

R. A.

(1997). Microcomputer-based computer assisted instruction within differing subject areas: A statistical deduction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16(3), 281–296.

23.

Churchill

G. A.

Jr. , (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64–73.

24.

Compeau

D. R.

, & Higgins

C. A.

(1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189–212.

25.

Cook

, & Campbell

D. T.

(1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

26.

Cox

Rhodes

, and Hall

(1988). The use of computer assisted learning in primary schools: Some factors affecting the uptake. Computer Education, 12(1), 173–178.

27.

Cox

(1993). Technology enriched school project—The impact of information technology on children's learning. Computers Education, 21(1–2), 44–49.

28.

Daniels

(1993). The impact of technology on teaching. Work Study, 42(3), 15–16.

29.

Dugdale

(1994). Integrating curriculum and computers for pre-service teachers: Toward a classroom-based experience. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 2(3), 249–271.

30.

Dupagne

, and Krendl

K. A.

(1992). Teachers' attitude towards computers: A review of the literature. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 24(3), 420–429.

31.

Ely

D. P.

(1990, Winter). Conditions that facilitate the implementation of educational technology innovations. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23(2), 289–304.

32.

Erickson

T. E.

(1987, November). Sex differences in students' attitude towards computers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Portland, Oregon.

33.

Falk

R. F.

, & Miller

N. B.

(1992). A primer for soft modeling, Akron, OH: The University of Akron Press.

34.

Flinn

C. M.

, & Gravatt

(1995). The efficacy of Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI): A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12(3), 219–241.

35.

Foley

(1993). Restructuring with technology. Principal, 72(3), 22–25.

36.

Fornell

, (ed.) (1982). A second generation of multivariate analysis, methods: Volume 1. New York: Praeger Publishers.

37.

Fornell

, & Bookstein

F. L.

(1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(3), 440–452.

38.

Fornell

, & Larcker

D. F.

(1982). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(3), 440–452.

39.

Fullan

M. G.

(1990). Staff development, innovation, and institutional development, in Joyce

(Ed.), Changing school culture through staff development: The 1990 ASCD Yearbook, Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 3–25.

40.

Fullan

M. G.

(1992). Visions that blind. Educational Leadership, 49(5), 19–22.

41.

Hair

J. F.

Anderson

R. E.

Tatham

R. L.

, & Black

W. C.

(1998). Multivariate data analysis with readings (Fifth Edition). New York: Macmillan.

42.

Howell

J. M.

, & Higgins

C. A.

(1990). Champions of Technological Innovations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(2), 317–341.

43.

Igbaria

(1993). User Acceptance of Microcomputer Technology: An empirical test. Omega, 21(1), 73–90.

44.

Johnson

R. A.

, & Wichern

D. W.

(1992). Applied multivariate statistical analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

45.

Kearsley

, & Lynch

(1994). Educational technology: Leadership perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

46.

Khalili

, & Shashaani

(1994, Fall). The effectiveness of computer application: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27(1), 48–61.

47.

Kluever

R. C.

Lam

T. M.

Hoffman

E. R.

Green

K. E.

, & Swearingen

D. L.

(1992, April). The Computer Attitude Scale: Assessing changes in teachers' attitudes toward computers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, CA.

48.

Koppi

Lublin

J. R.

, & Chaloupka

M. J.

(1997). Effective teaching and learning in a high tech environment. Innovation in Education and Training Instruction, 34(4), 245–251.

49.

Kosakowski

(1998, June). The benefits of information technology, ERIC Digest, ERIC Identifier ED420302, ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology. Syracuse, NY.

50.

Kraut

R. E.

, (1989, Summer). Telecommuting: The trade-offs of home work. Journal of Communication, 39(3), 19–47.

51.

Kulik

J. A.

(1994). Meta-analytic studies of finding on computer-based instruction, in Technology Assessment in Education and Training, Baker

& O'Neill

(Eds.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

52.

Knupfer

N. N.

(1986). Implementation of microcomputers into the current K-12 curriculum: A critical discussion of issues, working paper. University of Wisconsin–Madison.

53.

Leidner

D. E.

, & Jarvenpaa

(1993). The information age confronts education: Case studies on electronic classrooms. Information System Research, 4(1), 24–54.

54.

Levinson

Doyle

, & Benjamin

(1993). Technology and change. The Executive Educator, 15(10), 20–24.

55.

Liao

Y. K. C.

(1998, Summer). Effects of hypermedia versus traditional instruction on students' achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30(4), 341–359.

56.

Loyd

B. H.

, & Gressard

(1984). Reliability and factorial validity of computer attitude scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44(2), 501–505.

57.

Madsen

J. M.

, & Sebastiani

L. A.

(1987). The effect of computer literacy instruction on teachers' knowledge of and attitudes toward microcomputers. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 14(2), 68–72.

58.

Mahmood

M. A.

, & Hirt

S. A.

(1995, Summer). Reasons schools are not efficiently using information technology: A case study. Journal of End User Computing, 7: 3, 22–27.

59.

Marcinkiewicz

H. R.

(1991). Levels of use of the innovation: A framework for analyzing innovation adoption. The Journal of Teacher Education, 26(1), 52–56.

60.

Marcinkiewicz

H. R.

(1994). Computers and teachers: Factors influencing computer use in the classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26(2), 220–237.

61.

Ministry of Education. (1997). IT Masterplan for Education, http://www.moe.edu.sg/iteducation.

62.

Mitra

, & Hullet

C. R.

(1997, November). Toward evaluating computer aided instruction: Attitudes, demographics, context. Evaluation and Program Planning, 20(4), 379–391.

63.

Moore

G. C.

, & Benbasat

(1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192–222.

64.

Mokros

J. R.

, & Tinker

R. F.

(1987). The impact of microcomputer-based labs on children's ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(4), 369–383.

65.

Nunnally

J. C.

(1978). Psychometric theory (Second Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.

66.

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). (1989). Power on! New tools for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

67.

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

68.

Olson

, & Eaton

(1996). Case studies of microcomputers in the classroom. Toronto: Ministry of Education.

69.

Ouyang

, & Shirley

(1994). Resources of CAI software packages for geography education in elementary schools. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 5(3–4), 371–394.

70.

Postman

(1979). Teaching as a conserving activity. New York: Delacorte Press.

71.

Preece

, & Jones

(1985). Training teachers to select educational computer software: Results of a formative evaluation of an Open University pack. British Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 9–20.

72.

Rieber

, & Welliver

(1989). Infusing educational technology into mainstream educational computing. International Journal of Instructional Media, 16(1), 21–31.

73.

Reiser

R. A.

, & Dick

(1990). Evaluating instructional software. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 38(3), 43–50.

74.

Ring

(1994). Student and teacher perceptions of courseware. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27(1), 62–71.

75.

Roblyer

(1983). How to evaluate software reviews. Executive Educator, 5(9), 34–39.

76.

Roblyer

Edwards

, & Havriluk

(1997). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

77.

Ryan

A. W.

(1991, May). Meta-analysis of achievement effects of microcomputer applications in elementary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(2), 161–184.

78.

Salerno

C. A.

(1995). The effect of time on computer-assisted instruction for at-risk students. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(1), 85–97.

79.

Salzano

(1992). The key to successful computerization is through good trainers, Paper presented at the International Conference on Technology and Education. Paris, France.

80.

Shaw, D., and others (Panel on Educational Technology). (1997, March) Report to the President on the use of technology to strengthen K-12 Education in the United States.

81.

Sheingold

(1991). Restructuring for learning with technology. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(1), 17–27.

82.

Sheingold

, & Hadley

(1990). Accomplished teachers: Integrating computers into classroom practice. New York: Bank Street College, Centre for Technology in Education.

83.

Siegel

(1995). The state of teacher training. Electronic Learning, 14(8), 43–53.

84.

Sikes

A. C.

, & Verveer

P. L.

(1992). The communications competitiveness and infrastructure modernization act of 1991 (S1200), Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, 18(5), 18–23.

85.

Sisodia

R. S.

(1992, May-June). Singapore invests in the nation-corporation. Harvard Business Review, 70(3), 40–50.

86.

Soloway

(1996). Teachers are the key. Communications of the ACM, 39(6), 11–14.

87.

Stoddart

, & Niederhauser

(1993). Technology and educational change. Computers in the Schools, 9(2–3), 5–21.

88.

Swan

, & Mitrani

(1993). The changing nature of teaching and learning in computer-based classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26(1), 40–54.

89.

Taylor

(1987). Selecting effective courseware: Three fundamental instructional factors. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12, 231–243.

90.

Thomas

, & Knezk

(1991). Providing technology leadership for restructured schools. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 24(2), 265–279.

91.

Thornburg

D. D.

(1992). Learning alternatives: Technology in support of lifelong education, in Council of Chief State School Officers: Learning technologies essential for educational change. Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers, 3–28.

92.

Topp

N. W.

Mortensen

, & Grandgenett

(1995). Building a technology-using faculty to facilitate technology-using teachers. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 11(3), 11–14.

93.

Trollip

S. R.

, & Alessi

S. M.

(1988). Incorporating computers effectively into classrooms. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 21(1), 70–81.

94.

Veen

(1995). Integrating information technology into education. IFIP Chapman and Hall, 20–31

95.

Vockell

E. L.

Jancich

, & Sweeney

(1994). What makes teachers use computers? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 2(2), 143–154.

96.

Walters

J. T.

(1992, June). Technology in the curriculum: The inclusion solution. Paper presented at The National Forum of the Association of Independent Liberal Arts Colleges for Teacher Education. Louisville, KY.

97.

Wenglinsky

(1998, September). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and students achievement in mathematics. Policy Information Report for Educational Testing Service.

98.

Wiener

More technology training for teachers, New York Times (2000, November 22).

99.

Wilson

B. E.

(1988). Making sense of the future. A position paper on the role of technology in science. Mathematics and Computing Education, ERIC Document 289743.

100.

Winnas

, & Brown

D. S.

(1992). Some factors affecting elementary teachers' use of the computer. Computer Education, 18(4), 301–309.

101.

Wilburg

(1991). Cognitive apprenticeships: An instructional design review of successful systems. In Carey

Carey

Willis

D. A.

, & Willis

(Eds.), Technology and Teacher Education 1991 Annual. Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computers in Education, 238–243.

102.

Wold

(1982). Systems under indirect observation using PLS. In Fornell

(Ed.), A second generation of multivariate analysis methods—Volume 1. New York: Praeger Publishers, Chapter 15.

103.

Woodrow

J. E. J.

(1991). Determinants of student-teacher computer literacy achievement. Computer Education, 16(3), 247–256.

104.

Yalcinalp

Geban

, & Ozkan

Effectiveness of using computer-assisted supplementary instruction for teaching the mole concept. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(10), 1083–1095.

105.

Zimmerman

B. J.

, & Smith

C. P.

(1988). Studies of micro-computer instruction at three selected high schools in New York City. New York: City University of New York, Center for Advanced Study in Education.