You are here

FAU Collections » FAU Research Repository » FAU Theses and Dissertations

comparative analysis of the success of students placed in the lowest level of remedial coursework taken through CAI versus a traditional remedial education mode of instruction

Download pdf | Full Screen View

Date Issued:
2011
Summary:
The purpose of this study was to examine the Computer-Assisted Instructional (CAI) method as an alternative to the Traditional method of instruction for the lowest level of remediation in the content areas of mathematics, reading, and sentence skills, and to specifically determine the comparative effectiveness of these two delivery modes in terms of student success, retention, and costs. The researcher aimed to (a) determine the extent to which ACCUPLACERª mean scores for CAI participants increase based on pre and post measures, (b) investigate the pros and cons fiscally of each method of delivery (CAI vs. Traditional), respectively, (c) examine whether CAI participants are more likely to enroll during the immediately following semester compared to students enrolled in a Traditional course, and (d) investigate the extent to which CAI participants are equally or more likely to complete successfully the course taken during the immediately following semester compared to students enroll ed in a Traditional course. The study consisted of a two-group design (CAI and Traditional), and four dependent variables. All CAI participants (N = 129) were self-selected to participate in the study. A dependent t-test found that CAI participants increased their ACCUPLACER mean scores significantly over time by 22.74 points or 72.6%. A frequency count found that retention rates were slightly higher for the Traditional group (82.3%) in comparison to the CAI group (76.6%), however, chi-square tests did not reveal a statistical significance. Chi-squares found significant increase in success rates for the CAI group as 86% passed their initial course, in comparison to 59.8% of students taught in the Traditional format. CAI participants were found to have greater success (74.1%) in subsequent classes than students taught via the Traditional instructional method (51.9%).
Title: A comparative analysis of the success of students placed in the lowest level of remedial coursework taken through CAI versus a traditional remedial education mode of instruction: implications for success, retention and costs.
149 views
54 downloads
Name(s): Vassiliou, John.
College of Education
Department of Educational Leadership and Research Methodology
Type of Resource: text
Genre: Electronic Thesis Or Dissertation
Date Issued: 2011
Publisher: Florida Atlantic University
Physical Form: electronic
Extent: ix, 101 p. : ill. (some col.)
Language(s): English
Summary: The purpose of this study was to examine the Computer-Assisted Instructional (CAI) method as an alternative to the Traditional method of instruction for the lowest level of remediation in the content areas of mathematics, reading, and sentence skills, and to specifically determine the comparative effectiveness of these two delivery modes in terms of student success, retention, and costs. The researcher aimed to (a) determine the extent to which ACCUPLACERª mean scores for CAI participants increase based on pre and post measures, (b) investigate the pros and cons fiscally of each method of delivery (CAI vs. Traditional), respectively, (c) examine whether CAI participants are more likely to enroll during the immediately following semester compared to students enrolled in a Traditional course, and (d) investigate the extent to which CAI participants are equally or more likely to complete successfully the course taken during the immediately following semester compared to students enroll ed in a Traditional course. The study consisted of a two-group design (CAI and Traditional), and four dependent variables. All CAI participants (N = 129) were self-selected to participate in the study. A dependent t-test found that CAI participants increased their ACCUPLACER mean scores significantly over time by 22.74 points or 72.6%. A frequency count found that retention rates were slightly higher for the Traditional group (82.3%) in comparison to the CAI group (76.6%), however, chi-square tests did not reveal a statistical significance. Chi-squares found significant increase in success rates for the CAI group as 86% passed their initial course, in comparison to 59.8% of students taught in the Traditional format. CAI participants were found to have greater success (74.1%) in subsequent classes than students taught via the Traditional instructional method (51.9%).
Summary: In addition, a straightforward comparison of expense totals between the two groups was conducted to estimate the differences in cost between the groups. The Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) model used, indicated that CAI is less expensive and more effective than Traditional instruction. The cost per credit analysis projected 54.6% savings if CAI is used as the alternative instructional modality.
Identifier: 761011029 (oclc), 3322520 (digitool), FADT3322520 (IID), fau:3748 (fedora)
Note(s): by John Vassiliou.
Thesis (Ph.D.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2011.
Includes bibliography.
Electronic reproduction. Boca Raton, Fla., 2011. Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Subject(s): Computer-assisted instruction -- Evaluation
Academic achievement
Educational tests and measurements
School improvement programs
Student assistance programs
Educational accountability
Persistent Link to This Record: http://purl.flvc.org/FAU/3322520
Use and Reproduction: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
Host Institution: FAU