Programmed Instruction: Construction Responding, Discrimination Responding, and Highlighted Keywords

Skinner (1958) expressed the need for an increase in the effectiveness and efficiency of education. In particular, he suggested that programmed instruction could provide such efficiency. The present study used a within-subject design to compare the effects of four types of instructional materials; t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of behavioral education 2006-06, Vol.15 (2), p.109-117
Main Authors: Miller, Matthew L, Malott, Richard W
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Cognitive Style
Comparative Analysis
Instructional Effectiveness
Instructional Materials
Learning Strategies
Programmed instruction
Reading
Reading Instruction
Reading Materials
Responses
Teaching Methods
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Skinner (1958) expressed the need for an increase in the effectiveness and efficiency of education. In particular, he suggested that programmed instruction could provide such efficiency. The present study used a within-subject design to compare the effects of four types of instructional materials; those requiring overt construction responses, overt discrimination responses, covert reading of text with highlighted key words, and covert reading of standard text. The materials requiring overt responding produced greater learning than did the covert reading materials, with or without highlighting. There was no difference found between the two types of overt responding; nor were there differences between the two types of covert reading materials. Thus, this study supports the assumption that overt responding is more effective. However, the overt response materials also required proportionately more time. Therefore, this showed no benefit of overt responding in terms of efficiency.
ISSN:1053-0819
1573-3513
DOI:10.1007/s10864-006-9010-1