Guidelines for using locus of instructional control in the design of computer-assisted instruction

  • Michael J. Hannafin


Computers offer a variety of instructional control options to designers of computer-assisted instruction. However, the amount and type of instructional control is affected by both the nature of the learning task and learner characteristics. The purposes of this paper are to present empirical evidence on locus of instructional control, and to present guidelines for determining learner versus lesson control in computer-assisted instruction.


Learner Control Instructional Development Control Option Mastery Criterion American Educational Research Journal 
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.


  1. Burke, R.L. (1982).CAI sourcebook. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Bunderson, C.V. (1974). The design and production of learner controlled courseware for the TICCIT system: A progress paper.Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 6, 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Caffarella, E.P., Cavert, C.E., Legum, S.E., Shtogren, J.A., & Wager, W.W. (1980). Factors affecting instructor/student ration for self-paced instruction.Technology, 20(12), 5–9.Google Scholar
  4. Carrier, C., Davi G., Higson, V., & Williams, M. (1984). Selection of options by field independent and field dependent children in a computer concept lesson.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 11, 49–54.Google Scholar
  5. Clark, R.E. (1982). Antagonism between achievement and enjoyment in ATI studies.The Educational Psychologist, 17(2), 92–101.Google Scholar
  6. Dalton, D.W., & Hannafin, M.J. (in press). Examining the effects of varied computer-based reinforcement on self-esteem and achievement: An exploratory study.Association for Educational Data Systems Journal.Google Scholar
  7. Edwards, J., Norton, S., Taylor, S., Weiss M., & Dusseldorp, R. (1975). How effective is CAI? A review of the research.Educational Leadership, 33, 147–153.Google Scholar
  8. Fischer, M.D., Blackwell, L.R., Garcia, A.B., & Greene, J.C. (1975). Effects of student control and choice on engagement in a CAI arithmetic task in a low-income school.Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 776–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fowler, J.F. (1983). Use of computer-assisted instruction in introductory management science.Journal of Experimental Education, 52, 22–26.Google Scholar
  10. Gagne, R.M., & Briggs, L.J. (1979).Principles of Instructional Design (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
  11. Gagne, R.M., Wager, W.W., & Rojas, A. (1981). Planning and authoring computer-assisted instruction lessons.Educational Technology, 21, 17–26.Google Scholar
  12. Goetzfried, L., & Hannafin, M.J. (in press). The effects of the locus of CAI control strategies on the learning of mathematics rules.American Educational Research Journal.Google Scholar
  13. Hannafin, M.J. (1981). Effects of teacher and student goal setting and work evaluations on mathematics achievement and student attitudes.Journal of Educational Research, 74, 321–326.Google Scholar
  14. Hannafin, M.J. (1982, May).Student attitude and instructional locus of control. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology, Dallas, TX.Google Scholar
  15. Hannafin, M.J., & Peck, K.L. (in press).The design, development, and evaluation of computer-assisted instruction. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  16. Heines, J. (1984).Screen design strategies for computer-assisted instruction. Bedford, MA: DIGITAL press.Google Scholar
  17. Holloway, R.L. (1978). Task selection and locus of control in two ability groups’ recall.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 3, 118–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kulik, J.A. (1983). Synthesis of research on computer-based education.Educational Leadership, 41, 19–21.Google Scholar
  19. Kulik, J.A., Bangert, R.L., & Williams, G.W. (1983). Effects of computer based teaching on secondary school students.Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kulik, J.A., Kulik, C.-L.C., & Cohen, P.A. (1980). Effectiveness of computer-based college teaching.Review of Educational Research, 50, 525–544.Google Scholar
  21. Lawton, J., & Gerschner, V. (1982). A review of the literature on attitudes towards computers and computerized instruction.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 16(1), 50–55.Google Scholar
  22. Merrill, P.F., & Salisbury, D. (1984). Research on drill and practice strategies.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 11, 19–21.Google Scholar
  23. Park, O., & Tennyson, R.D. (1983). Adaptive computer-based instructional models: A review.Contemporary Education Review, 2, 121–135.Google Scholar
  24. Ross, S.M. (1984). Matching the lesson to the student: Alternative adaptive designs for individualized learning systems.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 11, 42–48.Google Scholar
  25. Ross, S. M., & Rakow, E. A. (1980). Adaptive design strategies for the teacher-managed course.Journal of Instructional Psychology, 7, 13–19.Google Scholar
  26. Ross, S. M., & Rakow, E. A. (1982). Adaptive instructional strategies for teaching rules in mathematics.educational Communications and Technology Journal, 30, 67–74.Google Scholar
  27. Ross, S. M., & Rakow, E. A. (1981). Learner control versus program control as adaptive strategies for selection of instructional support on math rules.Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 745–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ross, S. M., Rakow, E. A., & Bush, A. J. (1980) Instructional adaptation for self-managed learning systems.Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 312–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rothen, W., & Tennyson, R. D. (1978) Instructional adaptation for self-managed learning systems.Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 312–320.Google Scholar
  30. Saracho, O. N. (1982) The effects of a computer-assisted instruction program on basic skills achievement and attitudes toward instruction of Spanish-speaking migrant children.American Educational Research Journal, 19, 201–219.Google Scholar
  31. Snow, R. E. (1980). Aptitude, learner control, and adaptive instruction.Educational Psychologist, 15, 151–158.Google Scholar
  32. Steinberg, E. R. (1977). Review of student control in computer-assisted instruction.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 3, 84–90.Google Scholar
  33. Tennyson, R. D. (1981). Use of adaptive information for advisement in learning concepts and rules using computer-assisted instruction.American Educational Research Journal, 18, 425–438.Google Scholar
  34. Tennyson, R. D., & Buttrey, T. (1980). Advisement and management strategies as design variables in computer-assisted instruction.Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 28, 169–176.Google Scholar
  35. Tennyson, R. D., Christenson, D. L., & Park, O. (1984). The Minnesota Adaptive Instruction System: An intelligent CBI system.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 11, 2–13.Google Scholar
  36. Tennyson, R. D., & Rothen, W. (1979). Management of computerbased instruction.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 5, 126–134.Google Scholar
  37. Tobias, S. (1981). Adapting instruction to individual differences among students.Educational Psychologist, 16, 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© the Association for Educational Communications and Technology 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael J. Hannafin
    • 1
  1. 1.Instructional Systems Program College of EducationThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity Park

Personalised recommendations