Effects of computer-assisted instruction on performance of senior high school biology students in Ghana
This study investigated the comparative efficiency of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and conventional teaching method in biology on senior high school students. A science class was selected in each of two randomly selected schools. The pretest-posttest non equivalent quasi experimental design w...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Computers and education 2010-09, Vol.55 (2), p.904-910 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 910 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 904 |
| container_title | Computers and education |
| container_volume | 55 |
| creator | Owusu, K.A. Monney, K.A. Appiah, J.Y. Wilmot, E.M. |
| description | This study investigated the comparative efficiency of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and conventional teaching method in biology on senior high school students. A science class was selected in each of two randomly selected schools. The pretest-posttest non equivalent quasi experimental design was used. The students in the experimental group learned science concepts (cell cycle) through the CAI, whereas the students in the control group were taught the same concepts by the conventional approach. The conventional approach consisted of lecture, discussions and question and answer teaching methods. Mann–Whitney
U tests were used to analyze students’ pretest and posttests scores. The results indicated that students that were instructed by the conventional approach performed better on the posttest than those instructed by the CAI. However, the performance of low achievers within the experimental group improved after they were instructed by the CAI. Even though the CAI group did not perform better than the conventional approach group, the students in the CAI group perceived CAI to be interesting when they were interviewed. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.001 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_760210306</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ884467</ericid><els_id>S0360131510001089</els_id><sourcerecordid>760210306</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-2ac936d686c6b2e493ae6a0fcd0bd7fa77627aa39869726c5867ab41f04589163</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEGL2zAQhUVpoem2_6AF3fbkdGTJkn1aliWbtiz00kJvQpFHiYJjZTV2Yf_9yiT0WhgYmHnvDfMx9kXAWoDQX49rn05n7Od1DWUGag0g3rCVaI2sTFv_ectWIDVUQormPftAdAQApVWzYvtNCOgn4inwJWWeMFeOKNKEPY8jTXn2U0wjL3XGHFI-udHjoiccY8r8EPcHTv6Q0sB3MQ1p_8JpmnscS2wc-fbgRveRvQtuIPx07Tfs9-Pm18O36unn9vvD_VPlpa6nqna-k7rXrfZ6V6PqpEPtIPgedr0JzhhdG-dk1-rO1No3rTZup0QA1bSd0PKG3V5yzzk9z0iTPUXyOAxuxDSTNRpqARIWZXNR-pyIMgZ7zvHk8osVYBeu9mivXO3C1YKyhWvxfb74MEf_z7P50bZKaVPWd9d1-fJvxGzJRyzE-pgLaNun-J8Dr6a3jsg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>760210306</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effects of computer-assisted instruction on performance of senior high school biology students in Ghana</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Owusu, K.A. ; Monney, K.A. ; Appiah, J.Y. ; Wilmot, E.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Owusu, K.A. ; Monney, K.A. ; Appiah, J.Y. ; Wilmot, E.M.</creatorcontrib><description>This study investigated the comparative efficiency of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and conventional teaching method in biology on senior high school students. A science class was selected in each of two randomly selected schools. The pretest-posttest non equivalent quasi experimental design was used. The students in the experimental group learned science concepts (cell cycle) through the CAI, whereas the students in the control group were taught the same concepts by the conventional approach. The conventional approach consisted of lecture, discussions and question and answer teaching methods. Mann–Whitney
U tests were used to analyze students’ pretest and posttests scores. The results indicated that students that were instructed by the conventional approach performed better on the posttest than those instructed by the CAI. However, the performance of low achievers within the experimental group improved after they were instructed by the CAI. Even though the CAI group did not perform better than the conventional approach group, the students in the CAI group perceived CAI to be interesting when they were interviewed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0360-1315</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-782X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.001</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Achievement ; Biology ; Cell cycle ; Comparative Analysis ; Computer Assisted Instruction ; Control Groups ; Conventional approach ; Cytology ; Discussion (Teaching Technique) ; Education ; Equivalence ; Experimental Groups ; Foreign Countries ; Ghana ; High School Students ; High Schools ; ICT and senior high school ; Interviews ; Lecture Method ; Lectures ; Low Achievement ; Mann Whitney U Test ; Pretests Posttests ; Quasiexperimental Design ; Science Instruction ; Scientific Concepts ; Scores ; Secondary School Science ; Student Attitudes ; Students ; Teaching ; Teaching Methods ; Uranium</subject><ispartof>Computers and education, 2010-09, Vol.55 (2), p.904-910</ispartof><rights>2010 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-2ac936d686c6b2e493ae6a0fcd0bd7fa77627aa39869726c5867ab41f04589163</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-2ac936d686c6b2e493ae6a0fcd0bd7fa77627aa39869726c5867ab41f04589163</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.001$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ884467$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Owusu, K.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monney, K.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Appiah, J.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilmot, E.M.</creatorcontrib><title>Effects of computer-assisted instruction on performance of senior high school biology students in Ghana</title><title>Computers and education</title><description>This study investigated the comparative efficiency of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and conventional teaching method in biology on senior high school students. A science class was selected in each of two randomly selected schools. The pretest-posttest non equivalent quasi experimental design was used. The students in the experimental group learned science concepts (cell cycle) through the CAI, whereas the students in the control group were taught the same concepts by the conventional approach. The conventional approach consisted of lecture, discussions and question and answer teaching methods. Mann–Whitney
U tests were used to analyze students’ pretest and posttests scores. The results indicated that students that were instructed by the conventional approach performed better on the posttest than those instructed by the CAI. However, the performance of low achievers within the experimental group improved after they were instructed by the CAI. Even though the CAI group did not perform better than the conventional approach group, the students in the CAI group perceived CAI to be interesting when they were interviewed.</description><subject>Achievement</subject><subject>Biology</subject><subject>Cell cycle</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Computer Assisted Instruction</subject><subject>Control Groups</subject><subject>Conventional approach</subject><subject>Cytology</subject><subject>Discussion (Teaching Technique)</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Equivalence</subject><subject>Experimental Groups</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Ghana</subject><subject>High School Students</subject><subject>High Schools</subject><subject>ICT and senior high school</subject><subject>Interviews</subject><subject>Lecture Method</subject><subject>Lectures</subject><subject>Low Achievement</subject><subject>Mann Whitney U Test</subject><subject>Pretests Posttests</subject><subject>Quasiexperimental Design</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>Scientific Concepts</subject><subject>Scores</subject><subject>Secondary School Science</subject><subject>Student Attitudes</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Teaching</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><subject>Uranium</subject><issn>0360-1315</issn><issn>1873-782X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkEGL2zAQhUVpoem2_6AF3fbkdGTJkn1aliWbtiz00kJvQpFHiYJjZTV2Yf_9yiT0WhgYmHnvDfMx9kXAWoDQX49rn05n7Od1DWUGag0g3rCVaI2sTFv_ectWIDVUQormPftAdAQApVWzYvtNCOgn4inwJWWeMFeOKNKEPY8jTXn2U0wjL3XGHFI-udHjoiccY8r8EPcHTv6Q0sB3MQ1p_8JpmnscS2wc-fbgRveRvQtuIPx07Tfs9-Pm18O36unn9vvD_VPlpa6nqna-k7rXrfZ6V6PqpEPtIPgedr0JzhhdG-dk1-rO1No3rTZup0QA1bSd0PKG3V5yzzk9z0iTPUXyOAxuxDSTNRpqARIWZXNR-pyIMgZ7zvHk8osVYBeu9mivXO3C1YKyhWvxfb74MEf_z7P50bZKaVPWd9d1-fJvxGzJRyzE-pgLaNun-J8Dr6a3jsg</recordid><startdate>20100901</startdate><enddate>20100901</enddate><creator>Owusu, K.A.</creator><creator>Monney, K.A.</creator><creator>Appiah, J.Y.</creator><creator>Wilmot, E.M.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100901</creationdate><title>Effects of computer-assisted instruction on performance of senior high school biology students in Ghana</title><author>Owusu, K.A. ; Monney, K.A. ; Appiah, J.Y. ; Wilmot, E.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-2ac936d686c6b2e493ae6a0fcd0bd7fa77627aa39869726c5867ab41f04589163</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Achievement</topic><topic>Biology</topic><topic>Cell cycle</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Computer Assisted Instruction</topic><topic>Control Groups</topic><topic>Conventional approach</topic><topic>Cytology</topic><topic>Discussion (Teaching Technique)</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Equivalence</topic><topic>Experimental Groups</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Ghana</topic><topic>High School Students</topic><topic>High Schools</topic><topic>ICT and senior high school</topic><topic>Interviews</topic><topic>Lecture Method</topic><topic>Lectures</topic><topic>Low Achievement</topic><topic>Mann Whitney U Test</topic><topic>Pretests Posttests</topic><topic>Quasiexperimental Design</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>Scientific Concepts</topic><topic>Scores</topic><topic>Secondary School Science</topic><topic>Student Attitudes</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Teaching</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><topic>Uranium</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Owusu, K.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monney, K.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Appiah, J.Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilmot, E.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Computers and education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Owusu, K.A.</au><au>Monney, K.A.</au><au>Appiah, J.Y.</au><au>Wilmot, E.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ884467</ericid><atitle>Effects of computer-assisted instruction on performance of senior high school biology students in Ghana</atitle><jtitle>Computers and education</jtitle><date>2010-09-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>904</spage><epage>910</epage><pages>904-910</pages><issn>0360-1315</issn><eissn>1873-782X</eissn><abstract>This study investigated the comparative efficiency of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and conventional teaching method in biology on senior high school students. A science class was selected in each of two randomly selected schools. The pretest-posttest non equivalent quasi experimental design was used. The students in the experimental group learned science concepts (cell cycle) through the CAI, whereas the students in the control group were taught the same concepts by the conventional approach. The conventional approach consisted of lecture, discussions and question and answer teaching methods. Mann–Whitney
U tests were used to analyze students’ pretest and posttests scores. The results indicated that students that were instructed by the conventional approach performed better on the posttest than those instructed by the CAI. However, the performance of low achievers within the experimental group improved after they were instructed by the CAI. Even though the CAI group did not perform better than the conventional approach group, the students in the CAI group perceived CAI to be interesting when they were interviewed.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.001</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0360-1315 |
| ispartof | Computers and education, 2010-09, Vol.55 (2), p.904-910 |
| issn | 0360-1315 1873-782X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_760210306 |
| source | ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Achievement Biology Cell cycle Comparative Analysis Computer Assisted Instruction Control Groups Conventional approach Cytology Discussion (Teaching Technique) Education Equivalence Experimental Groups Foreign Countries Ghana High School Students High Schools ICT and senior high school Interviews Lecture Method Lectures Low Achievement Mann Whitney U Test Pretests Posttests Quasiexperimental Design Science Instruction Scientific Concepts Scores Secondary School Science Student Attitudes Students Teaching Teaching Methods Uranium |
| title | Effects of computer-assisted instruction on performance of senior high school biology students in Ghana |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T16%3A01%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effects%20of%20computer-assisted%20instruction%20on%20performance%20of%20senior%20high%20school%20biology%20students%20in%20Ghana&rft.jtitle=Computers%20and%20education&rft.au=Owusu,%20K.A.&rft.date=2010-09-01&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=904&rft.epage=910&rft.pages=904-910&rft.issn=0360-1315&rft.eissn=1873-782X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E760210306%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=760210306&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ884467&rft_els_id=S0360131510001089&rfr_iscdi=true |