In the present study, the investigator has attempted to develop Instructional strategies for Teaching English Grammar; it helped the learner to study grammar by self-study & with one’s own pace. In this study there are two Instructional Strategies. The component of one Instructional Strategy is Programmed Learning Material in print form followed by discussion, test and feedback on the test performance of students. The component of other Instructional Strategy is Programmed Learning Material in digital form followed by discussion, test and feedback on the test performance of students.
These two Instructional Strategies are compared with the Lecture Strategies of teaching also. The present study was taken up with the following objectives:
1.To compare adjusted mean scores of Achievement of English Grammar of Students taught through PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre-achievement of English Grammar as covariate.
2.To compare adjusted mean scores of Achievement of English Grammar of Students taught through PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre-achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence as covariate.
3.To compare adjusted mean scores of Achievement of Adjectives and Degrees of the students taught through PLM Print strategy, PLM Digital strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre Achievement of Adjectives and Degrees as covariate.
4.To compare adjusted mean scores of Achievement of Voice of the students taught through PLM Print strategy, PLM Digital strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre Achievement of Voice as covariate.
5.To study the effect of Treatment, Gender and their interaction on Achievement in English Grammar by considering Pre Achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence as covariates.
6.To study the Reaction towards PLM Print Strategy of students.
7.To study the Reaction towards PLM Digital Strategy of students.
CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE
DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES AND GRAPHS
LIST OF APPENDICES
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.0.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM
1.2.0 IMPORTANCE OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR
1.3.0 INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY
1.4.0 CONCEPT OF PROGRAMMED LEARNING:
1.5.0 TYPES OF PROGRAMMED LEARNING
1.6.0 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF PROGRAMMING
1.7.0 INTEGRATING PLM WITH OTHER TECHNIQUES
1.8.0 CONCEPT OF COMPUTER ASSISTED INSTRUCTION
1.9.0 RATIONLE
1.10.0 TITLE
1.11.0 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
1.12.0 OBJECTIVES
1.13.0 HYPOTHESES
1.14.0 ASSUMPTIONS
1.15.0 OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
1.16.0 SCOPE AND LIMITATION
REFERENCES
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.0.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1.0 PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL ON MATHEMATICS
2.2.0 PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL ON SCIENCE
2.3.0 PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL ON HINDI
2.4.0 PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL ON ENGLISH
2.5.0. PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL ON SANSKRIT
2.6.0 PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL ON GEOGRAPHY
2.7.0 PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL ON SOCIAL SCIENCE
2.8.0 PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL ON EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
2.9.0 PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL ON OTHER SUBJECTS
2.10.0 RESEARCH STUDIES RELATED TO COMPARISION OF PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL WITH CONVENTIONAL METHOD
2.11.0 RESEARCH STUDIES RELATED TO COMPUTER ASSISTED INSTRUCTION
REFERENCES
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY
3.0.0 INTRODUCTION
3.1.0 SAMPLE
3.2.0 DESIGN
3.3.0 TOOLS
3.3.1 INTELLIGENCE
3.3.2 ACHIEVEMENT TEST OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR
3.3.3 TEST OF ADJECTIVES AND DEGREES
3.3.4 TEST OF VOICE
3.3.5 TEST OF DIRECT INDIRECT SPEECH
3.3.6 REACTION TOWARDS PROGRAMMING LEARNING MATERIAL
3.4.0 PROCEDURE OF DATA COLLECTION
3.5.0 STATISTICAL ANALYSES
REFERENCES
CHAPTER IV: DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAMMED LEARNING MATERIAL
4.0.0 INTRODUCTION
4.1.0 STEPS OF DEVELOPMENT OF PLM
4.2.0 SELECTION OF CONTENT
4.3.0 CONTENT ANALYSIS
4.3.1 CONTENT ANALYSIS OF ADJECTIVES
4.3.2 CONTENT ANALYSIS OF DEGREES
4.3.3 CONTENT ANALYSIS OF VOICE
4.3.4 CONTENT ANALYSIS OF DIRECT – INDIRECT SPEECH
4.4.0 TERMINAL BEHAVIOUR
4.4.1 TOPIC: ADJECTIVE
4.4.2 TOPIC: DEGREES
4.4.3 TOPIC: VOICE
4.4.4 TOPIC: DIRECT INDIRECT SPEECH
4.5.0 ENTRY BEHAVIOUR
4.6.0 ACHIEVEMENT TEST
4.7 .0 FORMATS AND STYLE
4.8 .0 FRAME COMPONENTS
4.9.0 RESPONSE MODE
4.10.0 FRAME SIZE
4.11.0 TYPES OF FRAMES
4.11.1 INTRODUCTORY FRAMES
4.11.2 TEACHING FRAMES
4.11.3 PRACTICE FRAMES
4.11 .4 TESTING FRAMES
4.12.0 PROMPTS
4.12.1 FORMAL PROMPTS
4.12.2 THEMATIC PROMPTS
4.13.0 FRAME SEQUENCE
4.14.0 INITIAL TRY-OUT
4.14.1 INITIAL TRY OUT AT EXPERT LEVEL
4.14.2 INITIAL TRY OUT AT INDIVIDUAL LEVEL
4.14.3 FINAL DRAFT
REFERENCES
CHAPTER – V RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION
5.0.0 INTRODUCTION
5.1.0 COMPARISION OF ADJUSTED MEAN SCORES OF ACHIEVEMENT IN ENGLISH GRAMMAR OF STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH PLM PRINT STRATEGY, PLM DIGITAL STRATEGY AND LECTURE STRATEGY BY CONSIDERING PRE-ACHIEVEMENT OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR AS COVARIATE.
5.2.0 COMPARISION OF ADJUSTED MEAN SCORES OF ACHIEVEMENT OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR OF PLM PRINT STRATEGY, PLM DIGITAL STRATEGY AND LECTURE STRATEGY GROUPS BY CONSIDERING PRE-ACHIEVEMENT OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND INTELLIGENCE AS COVARIATES
5.3.0 COMPARISION OF ADJUSTED MEAN SCORES OF ACHIEVEMENT OF THE CONCEPTS OF ADJECTIVES AND DEGREES OF THE STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH PLM PRINT STRATEGY, PLM DIGITAL STRATEGY AND LECTURE STRATEGY
5.4.0 COMPARISION OF ADJUSTED MEAN SCORES OF ACHIEVEMENT OF VOICE OF THE STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH PLM PRINT STRATEGY, PLM DIGITAL STRATEGY AND LECTURE STRATEGY
5.5.0 COMPARISION OF ADJUSTED MEAN SCORES OF ACHIEVEMENT IN DIRECT INDIRECT SPEECH OF THE STUDENTS TAUGHT THROUGH PLM PRINT STRATEGY, PLM DIGITAL STRATEGY AND LECTURE STRATEGY
5.6.0 EFFECT OF TREATMENT, GENDER AND THEIR INTERACTION ON ACHIEVEMENT OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR
5.6.1 EFFECT OF TREATMENT ON ACHIEVEMENT OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR
5.6.2 EFFECT OF GENDER ON ACHIEVEMENT OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR
5.6.3 EFFECT OF INTERACTION BETWEEN TREATMENT AND GENDER ON ACHIEVEMENT OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR
5.7.0 REACTION TOWARDS PLM PRINT STRATEGY
5.8.0 REACTION TOWARDS PLM DIGITAL STRATEGY REFERENCES
CHAPTER VI: DISCUSSION ON RESULT
6.0.0 INTRODUCTION
6.1.0 FINDINGS
6.2.0 COMPARISON OF PLM PRINT STRATEGY, PLM DIGITAL STRATEGY AND LECTURE STRATEGY IN TEMS OF ACHIEVEMENT OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR
6.3.0 EFFECT OF GENDER ON UNDERSTANDING OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR CONCEPTS
6.4.0 EFFECT OF INTERACTION BETWEEN TREATMENTS AND GENDER ON UNDERSTANDING OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR CONCEPTS
6.5.0 REACTIONS TOWARDS PLM PRINT STRATEGY
6.6.0 REACTIONS TOWARDS PLM DIGITAL STRATEGY
CHAPTER VII: SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS
7.0.0 INTRODUCTION
7.1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM
7.2.0 RATIONLE
7.3.0 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
7.4.0 OBJECTIVES
7.5.0 HYPOTHESES
7.6.0 ASSUMPTIONS
7.7.0 OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
7.8.0 SAMPLE
7.9.0 TOOLS
7.10.0 DESIGN
7.11.0 PROCEDURE OF DATA COLLECTION
7.12.0 DATA ANALYSES
7.13.0 FINDINGS
7.14.0 IMPLICATIONS
7.15.0 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCHES
BIBLOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
LIST OF TABLES
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
LIST OF FIGURES
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
LIST OF GRAPH
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
LIST OF APPENDICES
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that accompanying thesis entitled ‘DEVELOPMENT OF INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR TEACHING ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND STUDY THEIR EFFECTIVENESS IN TERMS OF ACHIEVEMENT IN ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND REACTIONS TOWARDS THE INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES OF
CLASS IX STUDENTS’ being submitted by Mrs. Manisha Indani for the award of Ph.D. degree in Education of NORTH MAHARASHTRA UNIVERSITY, JALGAON, is her original and genuine work. She has worked under my guidance and supervision. I consider that the thesis is fit for the award of the Ph.D. degree in Education.
Dr. (Smt.) Indumati Bharambe
Date: June, 2011 Head,
Department of Education, North Maharashtra University Jalgaon
DECLARATION
I declare that the thesis entitled ‘ DEVELOPMENT OF INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR TEACHING ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND STUDY THEIR EFFECTIVENESS IN TERMS OF ACHIEVEMENT IN ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND REACTIONS TOWARDS THE INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES OF CLASS
IX STUDENTS’ is my own original and genuine work conducted under the Guidance of Dr. (Smt.) Indumati Bharambe, Head, Department of Education, Jalgaon .
I further declare that to the best of my knowledge that the thesis does not contain any part, of any work which has been submitted for the award of any degree, either in this University or any other University \ Deemed University without proper citation.
Mrs. Manisha Vinay Indani
Investigator
Date: June, 2011 Place: Jalgaon
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It gives me genuine pleasure to express my profound gratitude to my esteemed Guide Dr. (Smt.) I. T. Bharambe, Head, department of Education, North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon for her continuous encouragement, enthusiastic support and valuable guidance for completing this unique work.
I express my immense feeling of gratitude and regards to Prof. Dr. D.
N. Sansanwal for his suggestions, motivations and constant encouragement to complete this research work.
I would like to thank Principal Smt. Kiran Dammani, Gujarati Samaj’s College of Education, Indore. Due to her constant inspiration, value able suggestions, qualitative evaluation and guidance; I have completed my research work.
I am thankful to Dr. Mukta Mahajan, Reader, Department of Comparative Languages and Literature and Mr. Rathi, Proprietor of Softad Computers for their valuable suggestions and cooperation.
I am really thankful to. Dr. Sarathy, Principal of St. Lawrence English Medium school, Dr. Anderson, Principal of Orion English Medium School and Dr. sonawane, Principal of Kendriya tfidyalaya who extended their help gladly and open heartedly for data collection in their institutions.
I express my thanks to all faculty members of B.C.U.D. North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon for their timely help.
I express my thanks to all faculty members of Central Library, Norrth Maharashtra University, Jalgaon and Centre of Advanced studies in Education, Baroda who allowed using the Library for references.
I express my deep gratitude to my Parents and In-laws as a source of encouragement, motivation and guidance. I cannot express in words my profound sense of gratitude and indebtedness to my husband-Mr. tfinay Indani, for his moral support, guidance and help to complete this research work. I would not forget the contribution of my five year old girl child –Bhavika in this research study.
Mrs. Manisha Indani
Date: June, 2011 Place: Jalgaon
CHAPTER - I
INTRODUCTION
1.0.0 INTRODUCTION
The present study entitled ‘Development of Instructional Strategies for Teaching English Grammar and Study their Effectiveness in Terms of Achievement in English Grammar and Reaction Towards the Instructional Strategies of Class IX Students’ belongs to the area of Educational Technology. The main aim of the study was to enhance achievement of English Grammar through Programmed Learning Material in Print Strategy (PLM Print Strategy) and Programmed Learning Material in Digital Strategy (PLM Digital Strategy). In the present chapter details in respect of importance of English Grammar, Concept of Programmed Learning, Types of Programmed Learning, Fundamentals Principles of Programmed Learning, Integrating PLM with other Methods, Concept of Computer Assisted Instruction, Rationale of the study, Statement of the problem, Title, Objectives, Hypothesis, Assumptions, Operational Definitions of the terms, Scope and Limitations of the study are given in separate captions.
1.1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM
English is a widespread and important language in the world today. It is used for everything from international academic conferences to news reports to popular music lyrics. It is used not only for communication between native speakers but also in non-native speakers of English. English is studied as a foreign language in countries where it is not generally used as a medium of communication. English is usually the first or most commonly taught foreign language in many countries and people understand it a little at least. Half of all business deals are conducted in English. Two thirds of all scientific papers are written in English. Over 70% of all mail is written and addressed in English. Today English became a Global Language. To learn a language as a second language or foreign language one should assimilate its Grammar. Every language has its own Grammar. Whether it is one’s own mother tongue or a second language that one is learning, the Grammar of language is important. This is because acceptability and intelligibility, both in speech and in writing within as well as outside one’s own circle or group, depend on the currently followed basic notions and norms of grammaticality. A knowledge of Grammar is perhaps more important to a second language learner than to a native speaker. This is because in the process of acquiring the language the native speaker has intuitively internalized the Grammar of the language. Grammar helps the learner to use correct, standard language in speech, writing and in communication. However, at present times, Grammar is losing its important. The existing system of teaching-learning English Grammar is based on spoon feeding and on rote memorization; more emphasis is given on functional Grammar, though it is important in a communicative approach, but fundamental concepts of English Grammar should be clear enough for it. The need of the day is self learning and meaningful learning. Many language teachers teach Grammar by explaining the forms and rules and then drilling students on them. This results in bored, disaffected students. Students feel English Grammar very difficult and boring subject. Without understanding the importance of Grammar they memorized it or they learn Grammar only for the sake of examination. It was observed fact that many students failed in S.S.C. examination in the English subject due to only poor performance in Grammar. To overcome these difficulties the Programmed Learning is the best solution. PLM derives its roots from the psychological theory of learning; viz. Operant Conditioning Theory propounded by Skinner (1957). In PLM, content is presented in small meaningful bits arranged in a logical and psychological sequence all these make PLM a versatile tool of learning. It enables the learners to monitor, control and evaluate their own learning. PLM can be developed in various styles and formats for various subjects. The present study was an attempt to develop instructional materials for English Grammar. In this study there were two Instructional Strategies namely Programmed Learning Material in Print Form and Programmed Learning material in Digital Form were developed by the Investigator. The components of Print Instructional Strategy were Programmed Learning Material in Print form followed by Discussion, Interactions with the learners, solving exercises containing items on English Grammar tests and Feedback on the tests performance of the learners. The component of Digital Instructional Strategy was Programmed Learning Material in Digital form followed by Discussion, Interactions with the learners, Solving exercises containing items on English Grammar tests and Feedback on the tests performance of learners. These two Instructional Strategies were compared with the Lecture Strategies of teaching also.
1.2.0 IMPORTANCE OF ENGLISH GRAMMAR
Grammar is the systematic study and description of a Language. It is a set of rules and examples dealing with a syntax and word structure. These rules govern the system of language units and structures by which we communicate with each other. It is an analytical and terminological study of sentences and that is thus the study of Grammar can help us in communication.
The study of formal Grammar has no place in the process by which children learn the first language. The native language is learnt largely by absorbing the linguistic tradition and habits of the social environment. A native school boy will know his language, though he may be completely unaware of many of its rules. However, Grammar plays the most crucial role in the teaching of English as a second language. Students for whom English is not a mother tongue gets mastery over its structures by a systematic study of its Grammar. The unguided learner may not know where to begin, how to proceed and how to write effectively. He may construct wrong sentences on the analogy of the constructions in his mother tongue. As stated earlier, every language has an intricate complex patterns and its Grammar provides a key to understanding of these patterns. The teaching of English Grammar helps the learner to avoid errors and form correct speech and writing habits. Even in Communicative Language Teaching it would be improper to consider Grammar to be less important part of a language. While introducing the second edition of their influential book A Communicative Grammar of English, Leech and Svartvik forcefully maintain, “ We take the view that the Grammar of a language is indeed of central concern to students , since it describe what makes language tick - how it can carry the meanings we want to communicate . Grammar in its comprehensive sense is absolutely essential, and any casual approach to it would result in a faulty command over the language.”
It is sometimes argued that Grammar is not important in a communicative approach to language. However, the study of English Grammar will contribute in other two ways. It will inculcate in the students the composing ability. Their strengthen confidence and increased sensitivity to the structural patterns of the language will result in fluent writing. Secondly, a good command over Grammar will also facilitate a better appreciation of literature by enabling the students to resolve grammatical complexities and structural ambiguities of a literary text. In this regard Canale and Swain quoted that, “Communicative competence is composed minimally of grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence and communication strategies, or what will refer to as strategic competence. There is no strong theoretical or empirical motivation for the view that grammatical competence is any more or less crucial to successful communication than is sociolinguistic competence or strategic competence…..”
Grammar plays a prominent role in the intellectual development of man. Intellectual development means development of cognitive domain that consists of six categories, namely; Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis and Evaluation. Grammar is an aid to these six categories.
1.3.0 INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY
The systematic actions which induce learning are known as instruction. ‘Instruction’ is a purposeful, orderly, controlled sequencing of experiences to reach a specified goal. The instructions stand for development of knowledge and beliefs. Strategies are consciously initiated mental activities like inferring, grouping, deduction and elaboration. Instructional Strategy is a systematic way of designing, carrying out and evaluating the total process of learning and teaching in terms of specific objectives based on research on human learning. Instructional Strategy means a net work of techniques or devices employed to accomplish certain defined set of learning objectives. One of the Instructional Strategies is Programmed Instruction or Programmed Learning.
1.4.0 CONCEPT OF PROGRAMMED LEARNING
The theory of Operant Conditioning of B.F. Skinner provides the basis for developing Programmed Instruction Strategy. The theory of Operant Condition represents the process by which human behaviours shaped into certain patterns by external forces. The theory assumes that any process or activity has observable manifestations and can be defined in terms of observable behaviour. Conditioning refers to the process of increasing the probability of occurrence of existing or new behaviour in an individual by means of reinforcement. In operant conditioning, the response operates upon the environment to generate consequences. The consequences are contingent upon the emission of a response and they are reinforcing.
Programmed Learning is one of the important innovations in the teaching – learning process. Programmed Learning is a carefully specified, systematically planned, empirically established, skillfully arranged and effectively controlled self –instructional technique for providing individualized instruction or learning experiences to the learner. The learning experiences are logically sequenced into small segments. The learning experiences are self corrective. It is an application of behavioural sciences and technology in the field of education.
Programmed Learning grows out of experiments in operant conditioning of pigeons in Skinner’s laboratory in Harvard University by Prof. Skinner in 1954. The application of operant conditioning model of teaching is known as ‘Linear Programming’.
The term ‘ Programmed Instruction’ concerns with teacher or programmer’s activities. It can be enumerated in terms of what teachers do in preparing or designing Programmed Material. It is a method of designing a reproducible sequence of instructional events to produce a measurable and consistent effect on behaviour of each and every acceptable student.
The term ‘Programmed Learning’ concerns with the students activities. It can be characterized in terms of what learners do with a teaching machine or Programmed Material. It is a method of giving individualized instructions in which the student is active and proceeds at his own pace and is provided with immediate knowledge of result.
- Definitions of Programmed Learning
Accoding Gulati and Gulati (1966) “Programmed Learning as popularly understood is a method of giving individual instruction in which the student is active and proceeds at his own pace and is provided with immediate knowledge of results. The teacher is not physically present. The Programmer, while developing Programmed Material has to follow the laws of behaviour and validate his strategy in terms of student learning.”
According to G. O. M. Leith (1966) “Programme is a sequence of small steps of instructional material (called Frames), most of which require a response to be made by completing a blank space in a sentence. To ensure that expected responses are given, a system of clueing is applied and each response is verified by the provision of immediate knowledge of results. Such a sequence is intended to be worked at the learner’s own pace as individual self –instruction.”
According to N.S. Havi ( 1984) “Progrmmed Instruction is a technique of converting the live instructional process into self learning or auto instructional readable material in the form of micro sequences which the learner read , make some right or wrong responses, correct wrong responses or confirm right responses and attain the complete mastery of the concept explained in the micro sequences.”
- Assumptions of Programmed Learning
- The content matter can be divided into its elements and each element can be presented independently.
- The external learning conditions can be created by arranging the elements in a logical sequence.
- The appropriate reinforcement can be provided continuously by the use of instruction.
- The students can learn according to his needs and rate of learning.
- The strategies and tactics of instruction can be used for achieving certain well defined set of instructional objectives.
- The student can learn successfully without the physical presence of a teacher.
1.5.0 TYPES OF PROGRAMMED LEARNING
Today several strategies of Programmed Learning have been developed. However, most popular strategies of programming are Linear Programming, Branching Programming and Mathetics Programming. Details of these three are provided in separate captions below.
- LINEAR PROGRAMMING
Linear Programming was developed by B. F. Skinner, professor of Psychology of Harvard University in 1954. Linear model is the application of Operant Conditioning Model of Teaching to instruction. The Linear Programming is concerned with ‘Connectionist Theories of Learning’. In Linear progrmme, the sequence of Frames and path of learning is a systematic and linear. In Linear Programming the student’s response is considered as an integral part of the learning process, the response is induced in order that it may be rewarded and learning thus occurs. The process of rewarding the correct response to a stimulus increases the general tendency to give a response. The sequence of Frames in Linear Programming is graphically illustrated in figure1.1
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
Figure No. 1.1 Paradigm of Linear Programme
- BRANCHING PROGRAMMING
Branching Programming was developed by Norman A. Crowder in 1954. He was a psychologist in U.S. Air force to train the technicians to repair the fault of bombers. Its origin is from human training technique. Branching is concerned with ‘Configurations Theories’ of learning. This type of Programme employs multiple choice response patterns. The learner is required to select one right answer out of several responses presented to him. This strategy of programming is ‘stimuli’ centered. Branching Programmed Material is presented in terms of a Home Page and Wrong Page.
- MATHETICS PROGRAMMING
Mathetics Programmed was developed by Thomas F. Gilbert in 1962 for mastery of behaviour. Gilbert has defined the term Mathetics: “Mathetics is the systematic application of reinforcement theory to the analysis and reconstruction of learning and these complex behaviour repertories usually known as “subject – matter mastery”, Knowledge and skills.”
1.6.0 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF PROGRAMMED LEARNING
The basic idea of Programmed Learning is that most efficient, pleasant, and permanent learning tack place. The principles on which Programmed Learning is based are as follows:
- Principle of Small Steps
This principle is based on the basic assumption that a person learns better if the content matter is presented to him in suitable small steps. Therefore, a programmer while preparing a programme should try to arrange the subject matter into a properly sequenced and meaningful segment of information, called Frames. These segments should be presented one at a time before the learner for responding.
- Principle of Active Responding
This principle is based on the assumption that a learner learns better by being active. In Programmed Learning, the learner may remain active if he responds actively to every frame presented to him.
- Principle of Immediate Reinforcement
This principle is based on the Psychological phenomenon of reinforcement. In Programmed Learning the learner learns better because he is motivated to learn by receiving information of the result just immediately after responding.
- Principle of self- pacing
Programmed Learning is based on the basic assumption that learning can take place better if an individual is allowed to learn at his own pace. So a good programme should always take care of the principle of self – pacing.
- Principle of self- testing
For better learning, it is always good to seek continuous evaluation of the learning process. In the Programmed Learning, the learner has to write a response of each frame and check it with the right answer.
1.7.0 INTEGRATING PLM WITH OTHER TECHNIQUES
The strongest drawback of PLM is lack of human interactions. It is a fact that lack of human interaction makes learning a rather bore, cumbersome monotonous process. Students miss the reinforcement provided him by the teacher, while learning through PLM. While in this study, learners were motivated to ask quarries, provide suggestions, if any in the mind and feel free while learning through PLM. It means PLM was combined with Discussion, Interaction with the learners, Solving exercises and Feedback.
1.8.0 CONCEPT OF COMPUTER ASSISTED INSTRUCTION
This is the age of INFORMATION dominated by the Digital Technology. The Digital Technology has influenced all aspects of human life. Education is not an exception. At present majority of devices are based on Digital Technology. One such device is Computer. The Computers were never developed for improving quality of teaching – learning process. But researchers started using Computers for teaching purpose. It gave birth to Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI), Computer Managed Instruction (CMI), Computer Based Instruction (CBI), Computer Assisted Learning Material (CALM) etc. Computer Assisted Instruction is totally an individualized Instructional system, it provides maximum amount of flexibility to the learner. The learners can take their own time to learn and according to his own space. Researcher started developing CAI for teaching different subjects at School as well as Higher Education level. In Programmed Learning Computer can be used to display the Frames. In the present study Computer was used to display the Programmed Learning Materials and comparison was made between PLM Print Material and PLM Digital Material.
1.6.0 RATIONLE
Psychologists have discovered much about how learning takes place. They have found that the new behaviour is learned only when the learner positively react. It is not what the teacher does but what the student does that result in learning. Social constructivism also emphasizes the importance of the active involvement of learner in the learning process. However, the chief drawback of the traditional system of classroom teaching is that learners are passive listeners. The existing system of teaching-learning English Grammar is based on rote memorization while the need of the day is meaningful learning. Most of our students are not able to understand the concepts of English Grammar. This might be because majority of teachers teach English Grammar mechanically and do not give opportunity to understand the various Concepts of English Grammar. Teachers do ask questions that may be answered by recalling the information. It is surprising but observed fact that students memorized the Grammar sentences and Grammar rules. They memorized the rules of Grammar but very poor in application of the rules. It shows that the present methods of teaching English Grammar cannot help in the development of understanding of English Grammar concepts and enhancing achievement of learners. Many students failed in their S.S.C. examination due to poor performance in the English Grammar. Population explosion and hence over crowed classes is another challenge which hinders qualitative improvement in teaching-learning process. Today’s society is a Learning Society to cope with this society; self learning is an important device. Knowledge of Grammar is perhaps more important to a second language learner than to a native speaker. This is because in the process of acquiring the language the native speaker has intuitively internalized the Grammar of the language. However, at present times, Grammar is losing its important. The existing system of teaching and learning English Grammar is largely confined to knowledge transmission, while the need of the day is for the students to learn and acquire wisdom to use knowledge for their own requirement. Even in Communicative Language Teaching Grammar is essential. Linguistic competence i.e. grammatical competence is one of the major competences of Communicative approach of teaching English language. Grammar is helpful to those speakers who want to learn standard language. However, at present times, Grammar is losing its importance. In such a situation one finds the need of educational programmes that prove useful for teaching the concepts English Grammar. Programmed Learning is such a device, which allows students to learn the concepts of English Grammar at their own rate.
Investigator herself worked as Secondary Teacher and having a keen interest in the English Grammar, therefore class IX textbooks of CBSE Board, M.S. Board and M.P. Board had studied and formal discussion was carried out with class IX students in which a question was asked to IX std. students ‘which topic(s) do you feel very difficult in English Grammar?’ Most of the students had given the preference to Direct Indirect speech and Degrees . This discussion was carried out not only with the students but also with teachers, parents, scholars and guide. Finally, it was decided to select Adjectives, Degrees, Change the Voice, and Direct Indirect Speech for the study.
A careful and through review of the research studies revealed that large number of PLMS have been developed in India and abroad on various subjects for different classes such as Mathematics, Sciences, Hindi, Sanskrit, Geography, Social Sciences, Educational Psychology and Educational Research. Bhathaiya (1979), Pandey (1980), Seshandri (1980), Trivedi (1980), Inamdar (1981), Shah (1981), Sutar (1981), Davies (1982) and Mehta (1985) developed PLM on Mathematics and also studied its effectiveness. These studies revealed that Programmed Learning Material was very effective for Mathematics. Kumar (1980), Ravinranath (1982), Deasai (1985), Deasai (1986), Dwivedi (1988), Gautam (1988), Kala Cherry (1987), Trehan Nee (1994) and Bansanta (2007) developed PLM on Science subject and studied its effectiveness. These studies revealed that Programmed Learning Material was very effective for various subjects at school level. Kumar (1978), Pachauri(1979) and Prakash (1987) developed PLM on Hindi Subject and studied its effectiveness. These studies revealed that Programmed Learning Material was very effective for Hindi subject. Joseph (1983), Sharma (1978) and Gautam (2006) developed PLM on English subject and studied its effectiveness. These studies revealed that Programmed Learning Material was very effective for enhancing English Grammar concepts.
The strongest drawback of learning through PLM is lack of human interactions. Therefore, it was thought necessary to overcome this drawback by combining PLM with discussion, interaction with learners and solving exercises containing items on English Grammar. Though it is essential to provide freedom of time, place and pace to the learner, yet it is a fact that lack of human interaction makes learning a rather bore, cumbersome monotonous process. Students miss the reinforcement provided him by the teacher, while learning through PLM. It gives him extrinsic motivation. In this study, learners were motivated to ask quarries, provide suggestions, if any in the mind and feel free while learning through PLM. Some of the investigators has been successfully combined the PLM with other methods, such as Bhushan and Sharma (1971), Yadav and Govinda (1977), Sansanwal (1978), Joshi (1979), Basu (1981), Krishnan (1983), Joseph (1983), Menon ( 1984), Vardhini (1985) and Joshi ( 1987) in which PLM was major component of the Instructional strategy designed by these investigators. In each of these studies, the developed Instructional strategies were found to be significantly more effective in terms of achievement than the PLM used alone. Hence, it was decided not to use PLM alone but to integrate it with other components. Therefore, PLM was combined with discussion, interaction with learners, solving exercises and feedback.
So far, only the print form of Programmed Learning Material has been tried out. This is the age of Information and Communication technology dominated by the Digital Technology. The Digital Technology has influenced all aspects of human life. Education is not an exception. At present, majority of devices are based on Digital Technology. One such device is Computer. Now-a-days Computer is used for teaching purpose. It gave birth to Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI). Researcher started developing CAI for teaching different subjects at School as well as Higher Education level. The developed CAIs were compared with the Lecture Method / Traditional Method and found that the developed CAIs were significantly superior to Lecture Method / Traditional Method in teaching different subjects. Das (1998) explored effectiveness of CAI material on Rhymes; Khirwadkar (1999) developed Computer software for learning Chemistry; Zyoud (1999) developed CAI Programmed for English Language; Sanjana (2001) conducted a comparative study of the effectiveness of CAI and CMI on pupil achievement in Science; Helaiya (2004) developed and implemented CAI for Statistics and Barot (2009) developed CAI programmed for Sanskrit Language. From all these researches on CAI, the researcher could not locate a single research study wherein intentional effort have been made to develop concepts of Adjectives, Degrees, Change the Voice and Direst Indirect Speech of English Language. Keeping in view this lacuna in the teaching-learning process of English Grammar, the present study was an attempt to develop Digital instructional material for English Grammar and try out its efficiency combined this with discussion, interaction with learners, solving exercises containing items on English Grammar and feedback. Along with Digital PLM, investigator developed PLM in Print form. However, a careful and through review of the research studies conducted in the area of Programmed Learning led the investigator to infer that a lot of Programmed Learning Materials were developed in various subjects but a very few Programmed Learning Materials were developed for enhancing understanding of English Grammar concepts. These studies are not enough to arrive at any conclusion. Furthermore, in most of the cases PLMs were developed for particular topics or units, such as Nervous System of Science or Parts of Speech in English Grammar. PLM had been tried out for shorter durations besides this they were not a part of regular instruction work. They were not developed for the complete course. These studies are not enough to arrive at any generalization. Due to less number of researches in this area, investigator felt the need to conduct the present study, in which an attempt has been made to compare the Effectiveness of PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Method in terms of Achievement of English Grammar.It was designed in such way that it became useful for Parents, Teachers, Text-book writers and Students. Thus It was also an attempt to make teaching-learning of English Grammar easy, interesting and effective.
1.10.0 TITLE
DEVELOPMENT OF INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR TEACHING ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND STUDY THEIR EFFECTIVENESS IN TERMS OF ACHIEVEMENT IN ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND REACTIONS TOWARDS THE INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES OF CLASS IX STUDENTS
1.11.0 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The problem was worded as given below:
1. Whether there is any significant difference between the achievement scores of English Grammar of Experimental groups and Control group when Groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of English Grammar?
- Whether there is any significant difference between the achievement scores of PLM Print strategy and Lecture strategy when Groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of English Grammar?
- Whether there is any significant difference between the achievement scores of PLM Digitalized strategy and Lecture strategy when Groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of English Grammar?
- Whether there is any significant difference between the Achievement scores of PLM Print strategy and PLM Digitalized strategy when Groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of English Grammar?
- Which is the most effective strategy of teaching English Grammar when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement in English Grammar?
2. Whether there is any significant difference between the achievement scores of English Grammar of Experimental groups and Control group when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence?
- Whether there is any significant difference between the achievement scores of PLM Print strategy and Lecture strategy when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence?
- Whether there is any significant difference between the achievement scores of PLM Digitalized strategy and Lecture strategy when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence?
- Whether there is any significant difference between the achievement scores of PLM Print strategy and PLM Digitalized strategy when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence?
- Which is the most effective strategy of teaching English Grammar when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement in English Grammar and Intelligence?
3. Whether there is any significant difference between the mean scores of Achievement of Adjectives and Degrees of the students taught through PLM Print strategy, PLM Digital strategy and Lecture strategy when groups are matched with respect to Pre - achievement of Adjectives and Degrees ?
- Which is the most effective strategy for teaching Adjectives and Degrees when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of Adjectives and Degrees ?
4. Whether there is any significant difference between the mean scores of Achievement of Voice of the students taught through PLM Print strategy, PLM Digital strategy and Lecture strategy when groups are matched with respect to Pre - Achievement of Voice ?
- Which is the most effective strategy for teaching Voice when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of Voice?
5. Whether there is any significant difference between the mean scores of Achievement in Direct- Indirect Speech of the students taught through PLM Print strategy, PLM Digital strategy and Lecture Strategy when groups are matched with respect to Pre - achievement of Direct -Indirect speech ?
- Which is the most effective strategy for teaching Direct- Indirect Speech when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of Direct- Indirect Speech ?
6. Whether there is any significant difference in the Achievement scores of boys and girls when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement and intelligence?
7. Which is the most effective strategy for learning English Grammar for girls?
8. Which is the most effective strategy for learning English Grammar for boys?
9. Whether there is any significant effect of Treatment, Gender and their Interaction on Achievement of English Grammar when groups are matched with respect to Pre-achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence?
10. What is the reaction of the students towards Print Strategy?
11. What is the reaction of the students towards Digital Strategy?
1.12.0 OBJECTIVES
The present study was taken up with the following objectives:
1. To compare adjusted mean scores of Achievement of English Grammar of the Students taught through PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre-achievement of English Grammar as covariate.
2. To compare adjusted mean scores of Achievement of English Grammar of the Students taught through PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre-achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence as covariates.
3. To compare adjusted mean scores of Achievement of Adjectives and Degrees of the students taught through PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre -achievement of Adjectives and Degrees as covariate.
4. To compare adjusted mean scores of Achievement of Voice of the students taught through PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre -achievement of Voice as covariate.
5. To compare adjusted mean scores of Achievement of Direct- Indirect Speech of the students taught through PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre -achievement of Direct -Indirect speech as covariate.
6. To study the effect of Treatment, Gender and their interaction on Achievement in English Grammar by considering Pre- achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence as covariates.
7. To study the Reaction towards PLM Print Strategy of students.
8. To study the Reaction towards PLM Digital Strategy of students.
1.13.0 HYPOTHESES
The following were the hypotheses:
1. There is no significant difference in adjusted mean scores of Achievement of English Grammar of Students taught through PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre-achievement of English Grammar as covariate.
2. There is no significant difference in adjusted mean scores of Achievement of English Grammar of Students taught through PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre-achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence as covariates.
3. There is no significant difference in adjusted mean scores of Achievement of Adjectives and Degrees of the students taught through PLM Print strategy, PLM Digital strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre achievement of Adjectives and Degrees as covariate.
4. There is no significant difference in adjusted mean scores of Achievement of Voice of the students taught through PLM Print strategy, PLM Digital strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre-achievement of Voice as covariate.
5. There is no significant difference in adjusted mean scores of Achievement of Direct- Indirect Speech of the students taught through PLM Print strategy, PLM Digital strategy and Lecture Strategy by considering Pre-achievement of Direct - Indirect speech as covariate.
6. There is no significant effect of Treatment, Gender and their interaction on achievement in English Grammar by considering Pre-achievement of English Grammar and Intelligence as covariates.
1.14.0 ASSUMPTIONS
Following were the assumptions for the present research study
- Grammar of the Language can be analyzed into small parts and each part can be presented separately.
- Class IX Students have good reading comprehension ability.
- Class IX Students have Computer literacy.
1.15.0 OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
a) Instructional strategies mean method of teaching learning English Grammar. In the present study two Instructional strategies namely; 1) Programmed Learning Material in Print Form (PLM Print Strategy) 2) Programmed Learning Material in Digital Form (PLM Digital Strategy) were developed by the investigator for learning English Grammar. These two Instructional Strategies were compared with the Lecture Strategy of teaching also. The component of one Instructional Strategy was Programmed Learning Material in Print form followed by discussion, Interaction with the learners, test and feedback on the test performance of students. The component of other Instructional Strategy was Programmed Learning Material in Digital form followed by Discussion, Interaction with the learners, Test and Feedback on the test performance of students.
- Programmed Learning Material in Print Form (PLM Print Strategy) Programmed Learning is a carefully specified, systematically planned , empirically established, skillfully arranged and effectively controlled self-instructional technique for providing individualized instruction or learning experiences to the learner. The learning experiences are logically sequenced into small segments. The learning experiences are self corrective. This Programmed Learning Material was developed in the Linear Style in Print Form. PLM Print Strategy means PLM Print material, discussion, interaction with learners and solving exercises containing items on English Grammar and feedback on the test performance of the students.
- Programmed Learning Material in Digital Form (PLM Digital Strategy) In this study Computer was used to present the Programmed Learning Material for English Grammar. For this purpose a programme in the Java language was developed to enter the Frames of Programmed Learning Material of English Grammar. CDs were also developed in Power Point presentation. Thus PLM Digital Strategy means PLMs given through Computer, discussion, interaction with learners and solving exercises containing items on English Grammar and feedback on the test performance of the students.
b) Grammar: In the present study Concepts of - Adjectives, Degrees, Voice and Direct-Indirect speech were Grammar of English Language.
c) Achievement: Achievement was assessed with help of Achievement tests developed by the investigator. It was the effect or result of learning experiences or instructions, provided in the form of PLM in Print, PLM Digital and Lecture Strategy.
1.16.0 SCOPE AND LIMITATION
SCOPE:
- In this study Programmed Learning Material was developed in linear style for enhancing achievement of English Grammar of class IX students in Jalgaon city.
- Programmed Learning Material was developed in Print form and in Digital form.
- Programmed Learning Material was developed on Adjectives, Degrees, Change the voice and Direct Indirect Speech.
- In this study comparison was made in PLM Print Strategy, PLM Digital Strategy and Lecture Strategy.
- Effect of PLM was studied in relation to Intelligence and Gender
- Experiment was conducted in English medium Schools, situated at Jalgaon.
LIMITATION
- The PLMs were developed and tried out only on IX class students.
- The study was conducted in Jalgaon city only.
- Only the students of English Medium Schools were selected for the Sample.
- Only such topics of English Grammar were selected which were appropriate for the linear style of PLM and for two strategies namely Print Strategy and Digital Strategy.
- PLM Digital Strategy required Microsoft Access 2007 to run the developed Programme.
CHAPTER - II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.0.0 INTRODUCTION
The present chapter is devoted to the Review of Related Literature. Many researches have been carried out on different aspects of Programmed Learning Material and Computer Assisted Instruction. The brief overview of researches conducted on Programmed Learning Material and Computer Assisted Instruction have been described in this chapter under different captions.
A large number of PLMS have been developed in India and Abroad for different classes on various subjects such as Mathematics, Sciences, Hindi, English, Sanskrit, Geography, Social Sciences, Educational Psychology and Educational Research etc. An attempt has been made to classify the developed Programmed Learning Material according to subjects and provided it in the following categories.
- Programmed Learning Material on Mathematics
- Programmed Learning Material on Science
- Programmed Learning Material on Hindi
- Programmed Learning Material on English
- Programmed Learning Material on Sanskrit
- Programmed Learning Material on Social Science
- Programmed Learning Material on Educational Psychology
- Programmed Learning Material on Other Subjects
- Comparision of Programmed Learning Material and Conventional Method
- Computer Assisted Instruction
2.1.0 Programmed Learning Material ON MATHEMATICS
Bhathaiya (1979), Pandey (1980), Seshandri (1980), Trivedi (1980), Inamdar (1981), Shah (1981), Suthar (1981), Davies (1982) and Mehta (1985) developed PLM on Mathematics and studied its effectiveness.
Bhartiya (1979) studied the effectiveness of Mathetics type of PLM in Mathematics in relation to certain students’ characteristics. The cluster and stratified sampling was used for selecting the sample. The sample comprised 196 students of class IX The factorial design was used to study the interaction effects of students’ characteristics on mathetical learning .The tools employed for data collection were Jalota’s General Mental Ability Test, Baquer Mehandi’s Creative Thinking Ability Test and the Aspiration Test of Shah and Bhargava. The study revealed that Intelligence and Creativity were significantly related to their mathetical performance. The performance of high intelligent and high creativity subjects were highest and that of low intelligent low creative subjects were lowest .
Pandey (1980) studied the effectiveness of Programmed Instruction on teaching Mathematics at primary level. The aim of the study was to see the relative effectiveness of the Traditional Method without home assignment and grading, a Programmed text and the traditional method with regular home assignment and grading teaching mathematics at the primary level. The sample consisted of 60 students of class IV studying in the central school of Samchi (Bhutan). The subjects were randomly divided into three groups to whom the three methods were randomly assigned. The three groups were tested for homogeneity with regard to prerequisites and age. The Programmed text prepared for the purpose consisted of 2,557 Frames divided into thirty units to be covered in thirty working periods. The study revealed that, the groups following the programmed text differed significantly from the other two groups both in respect of immediate and delayed achievement. Similarly the group following the programmed text was significantly superior in retention to the subjects following the Traditional Method without home assignment and traditional method with home assignment and grading.
Seshandri (1980) experimentally studied the effectiveness of developed PLM in secondary school students. The syllabus of mathematics for class IX was divided into 13 units and on each unit Programmed Material of the linear style was prepared. In all there were 2075 Frames. The strategy was validated on a sample of 51 students of class IX of a School in Vasco da Gama. The experiment was conducted for complete academic year. The tool of Data collection were Criterion tests, Headmasters’ Associations examinations, semester and comprehensive examinations questionnaire to learners’ parents’ and school authorities reactions . Other tools used were the Raven’s standard Progressive Matrices, Junior Index of Motivation (JIM) scale and Palsane’s Study Habit Inventory. The main outcomes and findings of the investigation were a duly validated instructional strategy having reproducible PLM as the major component and with established long range effectiveness and feasibility for using in class room situation was developed.
Trivedi (1980) studied Branching variety of PLM as Diagnostic and Remedial Tools in Mathematics Subject for classes V, VI and VIII. It was an experiment using experimental control group design. The subjects in two groups were selected on random basis. For each class there were 40 students in the experimental group (20 boys and 20 girls) and an equal number in the control group. The two treatments were the use of PLM of the branching type and conventional method .Two way analysis of variance was used for data analysis. In the design pre-test score and intelligence were used as the covariate. It was reported that for class VI the PLM was more effective than the conventional method of teaching. Whereas, for classes V and VII both the methods were equally effective in terms of pupils achievement .It also revealed that in the case of class VI girls learnt better than boys through the use of PLM , whereas in the case of classes V and VII , there was no significant difference between the mean score of boys and girls learning through PLM.
Inamdar (1981) studied the effectiveness of the Programme Learning strategy in the subject of mathematics in std VII. The topic for study was the unit on Simple Interest.The material was developed and validated on the candidate selected 7 students from 3 schools, of whom three were bright, three average and one dull, according to their achievement in the previous examination. The material was tried on thirty students of std. VII. An entering behavior test was given to the students. The experimental and control groups were formed on the basis of this test. The sample consisted of 108 boys and 100 girls in the experimental groups and same number of boys and girls in the control group. The experiment was conducted in 12 periods. It was found that PLM technique was superior to the conventional technique.
Shah (1981) developed and used Programmed Material in Mathematics for students of class V. The Programmed Material was prepared on Integral numbers, Divisible and Non divisible numbers, Factors H.C.L, L.C.M, Fractions Additions and Subtractions of Fractions, Decimal fractions , Ratios and Proportion, Profit and Loss , average, Line, Segment, Ray ,Angles Types , Area , Square , Rectangle , Parallel Lines. The sample included seven primary schools of Malpur, Bayad and Kapadvanj. The Programmed Material was tried on 250 students where as the control group school had 200 children. The standards of developing linear programmed were followed. For every unit a criterion test was also developed. The other tools included questionnaires for students and teachers to know their reactions towards the Programmed Materials. It was found that the reactions of students and teachers towards developed PLM were favorable.
Suthar (1981) studied performance on Programmed Learning material in relation to some psychological characteristics in Algebra subject for class VIII. The sample consisted of 500 pupils of std. VIII from representative secondary schools. The investigator developed and tried out PLM in Algebra for std. VIII in all the units such as ‘Set Theory, Rational Numbers, Power and Indices, Equations Problems and Graphs on Real Numbers’. The investigator used the Study Habits Inventory scale for Attitude towards Mathematics, Reasoning Ability Test, Motivation Towards School and self prepared Entering Behavior Test in Algebra. The finding of the study was that the PLM was superior to the traditional way of teaching irrespective of different variables.
Davies (1982) tested the differential effects of the three pairing modes in Programmed Learning namely, mixed ability pairing, pairing based on teacher choice and pairing based on student choice, on the achievement of underachievers in mathematics. The sample consisted of 1092 students of std IX drawn from ten randomly selected schools, nine if the city of Madres (Urban) and one from Arkmonam Town (semi Urban).Data were collected using an achievement test in mathematics, Questionnaire on Interest in mathematics, participation in Extracurricular activities and Self Concept developed by investigator and a general Intelligence Test, Study Habit Inventory, Personality Test, Socio Economic Status Scale and Adjustment Inventory. A Programmed Learning booklet in the linear style on the unit statistics in Tamil was prepared and validated. The underachievers in mathematics were identified by using the predicted scores in mathematics based on the intelligence test scores and the actual scores on the achievement test in mathematics. 242 underachievers were identified from the 1092 students of these 105 underachievers were grouped with able achievers in three ways, mixed ability, teachers choice and students choice pairings. The underachievers and their partners learnt the programmed in it in the ‘dyads’ formed. The able peers whenever necessary helped the underachievers. The experiment went on for two weeks in each school. A posttest was administered after the paired Programmed Learning of the unit was over and again after a lapse of three weeks without prior intimation, to test their retention. It was found that Underachievers had 78% individual gains. 20 underachievers in teacher choice and mixed ability pairs gained significantly in the post test and had significant residual gains (favorable shift) over the predicted level of performance in mathematics. It was also revealed that developed PLM were equally effective for all types of under achievers.
Mehta (1985) Constructed different Types of programmes on the unit of ‘Interest’ in Mathematics of std IX and studied its relative efficiency of these. The sample consisted of 104 students of std. IX of a secondary school divided into four groups. The groups were made almost identical on the basis of I.Q., Numerical ability and Achievement in mathematics. Three groups were considered as experimental groups and one was considered as the control group. Linear, Branched and Baboon types of programmes were prepared on the unit of ‘Interest’ for the experimental groups, while the controlled group was instructed in a normal way. Simple Interest, Compound Interest, Purchase through installment and Savings Bank Interest were considered as topics for instruction. It was found that the different types of learning programmes on Interest were equally efficient compared to the ordinary method. It also revealed that the linear programme on simple interest was found efficient. And the effect of learning through different programmes upon high achievers and low achievers was equal.
2.2.0 Programmed Learning Material ON SCIENCE
Kumar(1980),Basu (1981), Ravindranath (1982), Bhadwal (1984), Deasai (1985), Deasai( 1986), Dwivedi (1988) Gautam( 1988), Kala Cherry (1987) Trehan Nee (1994) and Bansanta (2007)developed PLM on Science and also studied its effectiveness.
Kumar, A. (1980) found out the relative Effectiveness of three method of Instruction: Exposition Method, Programmed Learning Method and Multimedia Method in Science Education and studied the relative retention in learning through these three methods. In order to experimentally study the relative effectiveness and the interaction between the three methods and the two level of intelligence, a 3×2 factorial design was employed, the Biology students of classes IX and X of two inter colleges formed the sample of the study. In all 180 students were divided into 3 groups of sixty students each. One group was given instruction through the PLM, the other through the Expository Method and the third group through the Multimedia Method. All the students of the three groups were administered the criterion test as pre test, and then only completion of the respective treatment these three groups were again administered the criterion test. After 15 days, the same criterion test was re administered. It was found that the Multimedia Method was more effective than either the PLM or Expository method. Similarly it was found that retention in learning by the Multimedia Method was higher than by the other two methods. There was no interaction between the three methods of instruction of the levels of intelligence.
Basu, M. (1981) studied effectiveness of Multimedia Programmed Materials in the teaching of Physics. The main purpose of the study was to make an appraisal of the relative effectiveness of Multimedia Programmed Instruction and Programmed Class Teaching on the criteria of immediate achievement and retention of a group of subjects at three levels of ability. The sample consisted of 400 learners of standard IX which comprised an equal number of boys and girls. The tools used were Group Test of Intelligence B.E.P.R.T. in Bengali, the Entry Level Tests, and Criterion Reference Test I, II, and III. Five treatment groups were T-I having programmed lessons, teachers’ resource book and guide, students’ study guide for class room demonstration; T-2 having semi Programmed text, tape ,slide ,work book, tape ,transparency, auto elucidation test, tape- filmstrip, tape- film, physics-kit, manual for performing experiments; T-3 with a Linear Programmed text, tape, slide, work book, tape, transparency, auto elucidation test, tape film strip, tape film, physics kit, manual; T-4 having a Branching programmed text, tape- slide work-book, tape- transparency, auto- elucidation test, tape filmstrip, tape film, physics- kit, manual; T-5 having a Hybrid Programmed text, tape slide , work book, tape, transparency, auto- elucidation test, tape- filmstrip, tape- film, physics- kit, manual. The experiment was performed in schools for a pretty long time in three phases, from March 1979 to December 1979. The experimental data were analyzed by analysis of covariance and by 5×3×3 factorial experiment with nesting and crossing. It was found that on the criterion of overall achievement the Multimedia Semi- Programmed Instruction was better than the strategy of Programmed Teaching. The Multimedia Linear Programmed Instruction was better than the Multimedia Semi Programmed Instruction; The Multimedia Branching Programmed Instruction was better than the Multimedia Linear Programmed Instruction; and The Multimedia Hybrid Programmed Instruction was better than The Multimedia Branching Programmed Instruction.
Ravindranath (1982) developed Multimedia Instructional strategy for teaching Biology at secondary School level. The strategy developed by the investigator covered the prescribed content in Biology in std. VIII through different units. The multimedia strategy arrived at comprised 12 instructional components, namely: Introduction by the teacher, Progrmmed learning material, Lecture, Team teaching, Inquiry technique, Pupil activities with teacher, Demonstrations, Discussions, Audio – visual presentation, Narration of Biographical sketches of scientist, Summary, Criterion test and feedback, and Exercises and Assignments. Final validation of the multimedia strategy was done through an experiment conducted on ninety students studying in class VIII of a school in Baroda city. Students were divided into 2 method groups and pre test – post test design was adopted for analyzing the comparative effectiveness of the Multimedia Strategy and Traditional Method of teaching. Effectiveness was assessed in terms of achievement on unit Criterions tests and a compressive test. Students’ reactions were also obtained as a measure of effectiveness. Data regarding the intelligence of students were obtained by using Madukar Patel’s intelligence test. Correlation between Intelligence scores and achievement scores on the comprehensive test for the experimental group was computed using product moment coefficient. Relative effectiveness of two types of PLM namely, Inductive PLM and Deductive PLM was studied in respect of few selected units. The study found that the Instructional strategy was effective to the extent that 70% of the experimental group students obtained 60% of and above on all unit tests, comprehensive test and also on the annual examination conducted by the School authorities.
[...]
- Citar trabajo
- Manisha Indani (Autor), 2011, Development of Instructional Strategies for Teaching English Grammar and Study their Effectiveness in terms of Achievement in English Grammar. Reactions Towards the Instructional Strategies of class IX students, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1010922
-
-
-
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X.