Learner preferences and prior knowledge in learner-controlled computer-based instruction

RESEARCH ARTICLE
First Online:

Abstract

This study examined the effects of prior knowledge, learner preference for control, and type of control (learner or program) on the achievement of middle-school students in a computer-based instructional program on adding and subtracting integers. Students were blocked by preference-for-control scores and randomly assigned to either a learner-control or program-control version of instruction. A significant three-way interaction (prior knowledge × preference scores × type of control) revealed that students with high prior knowledge achieved better on the posttest when their preference for control was matched with the type of control they received, whereas students with low prior knowledge achieved better when their preference was mismatched. A significant three-way interaction on attitude reflected the same pattern found in the interaction for achievement scores. The overall results indicate that matching learner preference to the type of program they receive is an effective strategy for high-prior-knowledge students but not for those with low prior knowledge.

Keywords

Learner control Learner preferences Prior knowledge Computer-based instruction Mathematics 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alomyan, H. (2004). Individual differences: Implications for web-based learning design. International Education Journal, 4(4), 188–196.Google Scholar
  2. Bannert, M. (2002). Managing cognitive load – recent trends in cognitive load theory. Learning and Instruction, 12, 139–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carrier, C. A. (1984). Do learners make good choices? A review of research on learner control in instruction. Instructional Innovator, 29(2), 15–17.Google Scholar
  4. Carrier, C. A., Davidson, G., Higson, V., & Williams, M. (1984). Selections of options by field independent and dependent children in a computer-based concept lesson. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 11(2), 49–54.Google Scholar
  5. Carrier, C. A., Davidson, G., & Williams, M. (1985). Selection of instructional options in a computer-based coordinate concept lesson. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 33(3), 199–212.Google Scholar
  6. Chen, S. Y., & Macredie, R. D. (2002). Cognitive styles and hypermedia navigation: Development of a learning model. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(1), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Corbalan, G., Kester, L., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2006). Towards a personalized task selection model with shared instructional control. Instructional Science, 34, 399–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eom, W.-Y., & Reiser, R. A. (2000). The effects of self-regulation and instructional control on performance and motivation in computer-based instruction. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(3), 247–260.Google Scholar
  9. El-Tigi, M., & Branch, R. M. (1997). Designing for interaction, learner control, and feedback during web-based learning. Educational Technology, 37(3), 23–29.Google Scholar
  10. Farrell, I. H., & Moore, D. M. (2000–2001). The effect of navigation tools on learners` achievement and attitude in a hypermedia environment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 29(2), 169–181.Google Scholar
  11. Freitag, E. T., & Sullivan, H. J. (1995). Matching learner preference to amount of instruction: An alternative form of learner control. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(2), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gay, G. (1986). Interaction of learner control and prior understanding in computer-assisted video instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 225–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gerjets, P., & Scheiter, K. (2003). Goal configurations and processing strategies as moderators between instructional design and cognitive load: Evidence from hypertext-based instruction. Educational Psychologist, 38, 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gray, S. H. (1987). The effect of sequence control on computer assisted learning. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 14, 54–56.Google Scholar
  15. Hannafin, M. J. (1984). Guidelines for using locus of instructional control in the design of computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Instructional Development, 7(3), 6–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hannafin, R. D., & Sullivan, H. J. (1995). Learner control in full and lean CAI programs. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hannafin, R. D., & Sullivan, H. J. (1996). Learner preferences and learner control over amount of instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 162–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hicken, S., Sullivan, H., & Klein, J. D. (1992). Learner control modes and incentive variations in computer-delivered instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(4), 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kalyuga, S., Ayers, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kinzie, M. B. (1990). Requirements and benefits of effective interactive instruction: Learner control, self-regulation, and continuing motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kinzie, M. B., Sullivan, H. J., & Berdel, R. L. (1988). Learner control and achievement in science computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 299–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Klein, J. D., & Keller, J. M. (1990). Influence of student ability, locus of control, and type of instructional control on performance and confidence. Journal of Educational Research, 83(3), 140–146.Google Scholar
  23. Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (1997). Multimedia learning environments: Issues of learner control and navigation. Instructional Science, 25(2), 117–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (1993). Bivariate median splits and spurious statistical significance. Psychological Bulletin, 113(1), 181–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Maxwell, S. E., Delaney, H. D., & Dill, C. A. (1984). Another look at ANCOVA versus blocking. Psychological Bulletin, 95(1), 136–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Merrill, M. D. (1975). Learner control: Beyond aptitude–treatment interactions. AV Communications Review, 23, 217–226.Google Scholar
  27. Merrill, M. D. (1980). Learner control in computer based learning. Computers and Education, 4, 77–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Merrill, M. D. (1984). What is learner control? In R. K. Bass & C. D. Dills (Eds.), Instructional development: The state of the art II. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED298 905).Google Scholar
  29. Merrill, M. D. (2002). Instructional strategies and learning styles: Which takes precedence? In R. A. Reiser, & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional technology. Upper Saddle River NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  30. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Baldwin, W. (1992). Learner control of context and instructional support in learning elementary school mathematics. Educational Technology Research & Development, 40(1), 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Reisslein, J., Atkinson, R. K., Seeling, P., & Reisslein, M. (2006). Encountering the expertise reversal effect with computer-based learning environment in electrical circuit analysis. Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 92–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Reisslein, J., Sullivan, H., & Reisslein, M. (2007). Learner achievement and attitudes under different paces of transitioning to independent problem solving. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(1), 45–55.Google Scholar
  34. Salden, R. J. C. M., Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2006). Personalised adaptive task selection in air traffic control: Effects on training efficiency and transfer. Learning and Instruction, 16, 350–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schmidt, A. M., & Ford, J. K. (2003). Learning within a learner control training environment: The interactive effects of goal orientation and metacognitive instruction on learning outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 56, 405–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schnackenberg, H., & Sullivan, H. J. (2000). Learner control over full and lean computer-based instruction under differing ability levels. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schnackenberg, H., Sullivan, H. J., Leader, L. F., & Jones, E. E. K. (1998). Learner preference and achievement under differing amounts of learner practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(2), 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  39. Shin, E. J., Schallert, D., & Savenye, W. C. (1994). Effects of learner control, advisement & prior knowledge on young students’ learning in a hypertext environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(1), 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shyu, H.-Y., & Brown, S. W. (1992). Learner control versus program control in interactive videodisc instruction: What are the effects in procedural learning? International Journal of Instructional Media, 19(2), 85–96.Google Scholar
  41. Swaak, J., & de Jong, T. (2001). Learner vs. system control in using online support for simulation-based discovery learning. Learning Environments Research, 4, 217–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Triantafillou, E., Pomportsis, A., & Demetriadis, S. (2003). The design and the formative evaluation of an adaptive educational system based on cognitive styles. Computers and Education, 41, 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. van Gog, T., Ericsson, K. A., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2005). Instructional design for advanced learners: Establishing connections between the theoretical frameworks of cognitive load and deliberate practice. Educational Technology Research and Design, 53(3), 73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Schuurman, J. G., de Croock, M. B. M., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (2002). Redirecting learners’ attention during training: Effects on cognitive load, transfer test performance and training efficiency. Learning and Instruction, 12, 11–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wang, L.-C. C., & Sutton, R. E. (2002). Effects of learner control with advisement on English-as-a-Second-Language students in a web-based learning environment. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(3), 317–324.Google Scholar
  46. Williams, M. D. (1996). Learner-control and instructional technologies. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  47. Yang, Y.-C., & Chin, W.-K. (1996). Motivational analyses on the effects of type of instructional control on learning from computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 25(1), 25–35.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational TechnologySan Diego State UniversitySan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Division of Psychology in EducationArizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Personalised recommendations