1 / 10

Self-paced multimedia modules in a General Education course

Self-paced multimedia modules in a General Education course. Patricia Ryaby Backer, Department of Technology, SJSU, 4-3214, pabacker@email.sjsu.edu. The Course – Tech 198.

brody-sanchez
Download Presentation

Self-paced multimedia modules in a General Education course

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Self-paced multimedia modules in a General Education course Patricia Ryaby Backer, Department of Technology, SJSU, 4-3214,pabacker@email.sjsu.edu

  2. The Course – Tech 198 • Tech 198 has been offered for over fifteen years in the general education program and has been taken by thousands of students at San Jose State. • Since 1992, this course has been housed in the Earth and the Environment section of advanced general education. • Effective Fall 2000, the course moves to Area V, Culture, Civilization & Global Understanding

  3. Multimedia Development • Development work on multimedia modules began in 1994 • Two units (out of seven) developed • Unit 1 The nature of science and technology (CD multimedia) • Unit 2 The history of technology (WWW tutorial) • Unit 3 Technology and work (CD multimedia)

  4. Structure of Multimedia • CD-Unit 1 divided into seven sections • WWW-Unit 2 divided into 3 sections • CD-Unit 2 divided into eight sections • Each section has a cumulating activity

  5. Evaluation • During 1999, the revised modules (Ver 2) were field-tested in one section of the class with 14 students. • The students were randomly assigned to two groups: group 1 completed the multimedia module on Unit 1 (The Nature of Science and Technology) and group 2 completed the multimedia module on Unit 2 (Technology and Work).

  6. Instruments • A demographic student profile (age, experience and time spent daily on a computer, and major). • Two computer attitude questionnaires: an open-ended survey and Oetting's Computer Anxiety Scale (COMPAS). • Pretests for both Units 1 and 2

  7. Demographics • Two treatment groups had an equivalent mean age (27 years) and similar amounts of time reported as spent on computers each day (3.09 hours/day for Group 1 versus 2.95 hours/day for Group 2) • Both groups showed a wide range of computer anxiety on the COMPAS; however, the mean computer anxiety score for each group was equivalent (mean score of 108 for Group 1 versus a mean score of 107 for Group 2).

  8. Results • In performance, the two treatment groups appeared to be distinctly different. • An ANOVA, comparing the results from the pretests and posttests for both Unit 1 and 2, indicated that there was a significant difference in performance between the two treatment groups. • On both posttests, the students in Group 1 scored lower, on average, then students in Group 2.

  9. Conclusions • The results indicate that the multimedia for Unit 3 (technology and work) is effective—that is, the students learned the material. • However, the multimedia for Unit 1 was not proven to be effective. • Student complaints about technological problems. • General student approval of multimedia modules.

  10. Questions • Is the nature of the content for Unit 1 (what is science and technology) appropriate for self-paced multimedia? • Are the revised multimedia modules more effective? • Were the post-test and final exam questions accurate measures of achievement?

More Related