Two lines of empirical evidence have led me to include computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in two of four components in my college classes. The “Question Mark” software program is designed to develop mastery of basic concepts, facts and information in the course while the other software program, called “Think Fast,” is used to develop fluency with basic concepts. This article presents a brief rationale for using these two software programs, outlines the structure of the course, and highlights some of the features of both programs. I close with some personal observations about using computer-assisted instruction.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CarrollJ. B., A Model of School Learning, Teachers College Record, 64, pp. 723–733, 1963.
2.
BeckerW. C., Applied Psychology for Teachers, Macmillan, New York, 1986.
3.
KellerF. S., “Good-Bye, Teacher …”Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1:1, pp. 79–90, 1968.
4.
KulicJ. A.KulicC.-L. C.CohenP. A., A Meta-Analysis of Outcome Studies of Keller's Personalized System of Instruction, American Psychologist, 34, pp. 307–318, 1979.
5.
SlavinR. E., Ability Grouping and Student Achievement in Elementary Schools: A Best-Evidence Synthesis, Review of Educational Research, 57, pp. 175–213, 1987.
6.
TaveggiaT. C., Personalized Instruction: A Summary of Comparative Research, American Journal of Physics, 44, pp. 1028–1033, 1976.
7.
ShermanG. J., Reflections on PSI: Good News and Bad News, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25:1, pp. 59–64, 1992.
8.
BloomB. S. (ed.), Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Handbook I: Cognitive Domain, David McKay, New York, 1956.
9.
AlbertoP. A.TroutmanA. C., Applied Behavior Analysis for Teachers (4th Edition), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1995.
10.
BinderC., Behavioral Fluency: Evolution of a New Paradigm, The Behavior Analyst, 19:2, pp. 163–197, 1996.
