The implementation of a commercial computer managed instruction (CMI) system in support of the elementary reading curriculum in an Indiana school system was examined through surveys of school principals, teachers, and parents in addition to the collection of standardized test scores. The surveys revealed satisfaction with aspects of the CMI system such as the type and amount of student information generated and the improvement of home-school communication. However, school principals and teachers often differed in their views of the CMI system's ease of use and effectiveness. The results suggest the need for improvement in some areas of CMI implementation in schools.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
A Nation at Risk, The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. 1–10, May 4, 1983.
GagneR. M., The Conditions of Learning, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York, 1965.
4.
GlaserR., Adapting the Elementary School Curriculum to Individual Performance, Proceedings of the 1967 Invitational Conference on Testing Problems, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 3–36, 1967.
5.
PophamW. J., Objectives and Instruction, American Educational Research Association monograph on Curriculum and Evaluation, Rand-McNally, Chicago, 1969.
6.
BakerF. B., Computer Managed Instruction: Theory and Practice, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1978.
7.
CharpS., Feasibility Study on the Use of Computer Managed Learning in Secondary Schools in the U.S.A., United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization research report, Paris, 1984. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 280 448).
8.
KulikC. C.KulikJ. A.ShwalbB. J., The Effectiveness of Computer-Based Adult Education: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2:2, pp. 235–252, 1986.
9.
KulikJ. A.BangertR. L.WilliamsG. W., Effects of Computer-Based Teaching on Secondary School Students, Journal of Educational Psychology, 75:1, pp. 19–26, 1983.
10.
KulikJ. A.KulikC. C.Bangert-DrownsR., Effectiveness of Computer-Based Education in Elementary Schools, Computers in Human Behavior, 1:1, pp. 59–74, 1985.
11.
BortonW. M., The Effects of Computer Managed Mastery Learning on Mathematics Test Scores in the Elementary School, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 15:3, pp. 95–98, 1988.
12.
BrebnerA.HallworthH. J.McIntoshE.WontnerC., Teaching Elementary Reading by CMI and CAI, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1980. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 198 793).
13.
HofmeisterA., Microcomputer Applications in the Classroom, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York, 1984.
14.
HowlandR., Teacher Reaction to the Use of a Diagnostic-Prescriptive Approach to Classroom Instruction Employing a Data Automated Achievement Support System, paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles, 1981. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 205 209).
15.
TerryP. D.Crist-WhitzelJ. L.EdelsteinR.RowanB., Implementation of a District Computerized Instructional Management System: Barriers and Facilitators, paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, 1986. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 277 366).
16.
Crist-WhitzelJ. L.TerryP. D.EdelsteinR.RowanB., Patterns of Implementing a District Computerized Instructional Management System, paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, 1986. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 277 367).
