, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 26–36 | Cite as

A meta-analysis of outcome studies of visual-based instruction

  • Peter A. Cohen
  • Barbara J. Ebeling
  • James A. Kulik


This article describes a statistical integration of findings from 74 studies of visualbased college teaching. In the typical study, students learned slightly more from visual-based instruction than from conventional teaching. In the typical study, visual-based instruction had no special effect on course completion, student attitudes, or the correlation between aptitude and achievement. Students were equally likely to complete visual-based and conventional classes; their attitudes toward the two kinds of classes were very similar; and aptitude played a strong role in determining student achievement in each kind of class.


Withdrawal Rate Student Attitude Educational Television Instructional Television Achievement Outcome 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Biglan, A. The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas,Journal of Applied Psychology, 1973,58, 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bracht, G. H., & Glass, G. V. The external validity of experiments.American Educational Research Journal, 1968,5, 437–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching. In N. L. Gage (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1963.Google Scholar
  4. Chu, G. C., & Schramm, W.Learning from television: What the research says. Stanford, Calif.: Institute for Communication Research, 1967.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, J.Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (Rev. ed.). New York: Academic Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  6. Dubin, R., & Hedley, R. A.The medium may be related to the message: College instruction by TV. Eugene, Oreg.: University of Oregon Press, 1969.Google Scholar
  7. Glass, G. V. Primary, secondary, and metaanalysis of research.Educational Researcher, 1976,5, 3–8.Google Scholar
  8. Holmes, P. D., Jr.Television research in the teaching-learning process. Detroit, Mich.: Wayne State University, 1959.Google Scholar
  9. Kulik, J. A., Cohen, P. A., & Ebeling, B. J. Effectiveness of programmed instruction in higher education: A meta-analysis of findings.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1980, 2(6), 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C.-L. C., & Cohen, P. A. A meta-analysis of outcome studies of Kelleŕs personalized system of instruction.American Psychologist, 1979,34, 307–318. (a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C.-L. C., & Cohen, P. A. Research on audiotutorial instruction: A meta-analysis of comparative studies.Research in Higher Education, 1979,11, 321–340. (b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C.-L. C., & Cohen, P. A. Effectiveness of computer-based college teaching: A meta-analysis of findings.Review of Educational Research, 1980,50, 525–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kumata, H.An inventory of instructional television research. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Educational Television and Radio Center, 1956.Google Scholar
  14. McGaw, B., & Glass, G. V. Choice of the metric for effect size in meta-analysis.American Educational Research Journal, 1980,17, 325–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Niven, H. F., Jr.Instructional television as a medium of teaching in higher education. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, 1958.Google Scholar
  16. Norberg, K. D. The first of the Title VII reports: A Review.AV Communication Review, 1961,9 (4), 5–13.Google Scholar
  17. Reid, J. C., & MacLennon, D. W.Research in instructional television and film. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967.Google Scholar
  18. Schramm, W. L.The research on programmed instruction. Stanford, Calif.: Institute for Communication Research, Stanford University, 1962.Google Scholar
  19. Stickell, D. W.A critical review of the methodology and results of research comparing televised and face-to-face instruction. Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, 1963. (University Microfilms No. 64-1419)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter A. Cohen
    • 1
  • Barbara J. Ebeling
    • 2
  • James A. Kulik
    • 2
  1. 1.Dartmouth CollegeHanover
  2. 2.The Center for Research on Learning and TeachingThe University of MichiganAnn Arbor

Personalised recommendations