Abstract
THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT funds the Committee for the Advancement of University Teaching (CAUT) to enhance the quality of teaching and learning in Australian universities. One function of CAUT is to administer Teaching Development Grants to individuals in higher education. In 1993–94, $A 8.23 million dollars were allotted to 224 projects, the majority of which involved computer-based learning (CBL). CAUT project proposals required: (1) an explanation of the potential impact of the project on student learning and (2) evaluation procedures specifications. Many proposals submitted to CAUT failed to adequately address a method for evaluating project outcomes. In discussing project evaluation with project writers, the most frequently raised question was “How can we prove that students will learn more effectively with CBL than with a more traditional approach?”. In this paper, the authors present an overview of CBL evaluation and discuss the complexities of evaluating CBL projects.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bigum, C., Bonser, S., Evans, P., Groundswater-Smith, S., Grundy, S., Kemmis, S., McKenzie, D., McKinnon, D., O’Connor, M., Straton, R., & Willis, S. (1987).Coming to terms with computers in schools. Geelong: Deakin Institute for Studies in Education.
Bloom, B.S. (Ed.). (1956).Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook 1. The cognitive domain. London: Longman.
Brown, M. (1991, December). An investigation of the development process and costs of CBT in Australia.Proceedings of ASCILITE 91.Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Conference (pp. 43–54). Launceston, Tasmania.
Canale, R., & Wills, S. (1993). Producing professional interactive multimedia: Project management issues. In B. Lo (Ed.),Reaching out with I.T. Proceedings of ASCILITE 93,Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Conference (pp. 101–110). Lismore.
Clark, R.E. (1984). Reconsidering research on learning from media,Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.
Clarke, J. (1990). Designing CAL programs to cater for different learning styles.Computers in Education. Proceedings of Fifth World Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 351–358). Sydney. Amsterdam, North Holland.
Cochrane, T., Ellis, H.D., & Johnston, S.L. (1993).Computer based education in Australian higher education. Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service.
Collis, B. (1992). Anticipating the impact of multimedia in Education: Lessons from the literature,Computers in Adult Education and Training, 2(2), 136–149.
Cope, B., & Wills, S. (1993, December). Teaching TQM with CBT: Determining student needs. In B. Lo (Ed.),Reaching out with I.T. Proceedings of ASCILITE 93,Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Conference (145–156). Lismore.
Cox, R., & Cumming, G. (1990). The role of exploration-based learning in the development of expertise in computers in education.Computers in Education. Proceedings of Fifth World Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 359–364). Sydney. Amsterdam, North Holland.
Crock, M., & Carss, B. (1992). Critical success factors for computer based training.ITTE 92. Proceedings, Information Technology in Training & Education Conference (pp. 1–11). The University of Queensland.
Cronin, P., & Williams, G. (1993). Development of a hypertext computer program to enhance the scientific literacy of upper secondary physics students,Research in Science Education, 23, 42–50.
Darby, J., & Gardner, N. (1989, 1990, 1991).CTI annual reports. Oxford, Computers in Teaching Initiative Support Service.
Day, R., McNaught, C., Tonkin, J., & Sluczanowski, P. (1992). Teaching population dynamics at tertiary level. In B. Chia, R. Pennell, & R. Sims (Eds.),ASCILITE 92. A promised. future.Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Conference, (pp. 53–63). Sydney.
Driver, R., & Bell, B.J. (1986). Students’ thinking and the learning of science: A constructivist view,School Science Review, 64, 240, 443–456.
Elton, L. (1988). Managing change in the institution. In D. Miall (Ed.), Evaluating information technology in the arts and humanities.Proceedings, Computers in Teaching Initiative Support Service (pp. 39–45). Birmingham.
Gassin, J., & Smith, M. (1994, July).Setting up a multimedia CALL facility.Paper presented to the 1993 Applied Linguistics Association of Australia Conference, Adelaide. Published as a Horwood Language Centre Occasional Paper, The University of Melbourne.
Gleadow, R., Ladiges, P., Dodds, A., Handasyde, K., Burgman, M., & Lawrence, J. (1993). Innovative teaching methods in biology incorporating self-study and multimedia programs. In J. Bain, E. Lietzow & B. Ross (Eds.),Promoting teaching in higher education (pp. 305–318). Reports from the National Teaching Workshop. Griffith University.
Hooper, R. (1977).National development programme in computer assisted learning. Final report of the director. London: Council for Educational Technology.
Jadav, A., Rani, S., & Kishore, S. (1990). Comparison of conventional and computer based. memorization strategies in computers in education.Computers in Education. Proceedings of Fifth World Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 391–396). Sydney. Amsterdam, North Holland.
Keeves, J.P. (Ed.). (1988).Educational research, methodology and measurement: An international handbook. London: Pergamon Press.
Laurillard, D. (1988). Evaluating the contribution of information technology to students’ learning. In D. Miall (Ed.), Evaluating information technology in the arts and humanities.Proceedings Computers in Teaching Initiative Support Service (pp. 39–45). Birmingham.
Laurillard, D. (1993).Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Routlege.
Lee, H., & Allison, G. (1992, January). A comparative study of anatomy by lectures versus ICAL packages to physiotherapy students.Proceedings of the International Interactive Multimedia Symposium (pp. 235–246). Perth.
MacDonald, B. (1992, November). Microworlds and real world—An agenda for evaluation. Invited address,The European conference about information technology in Education: A critical insight.Barcelona.
McNaught, C. (1992).Evaluation of veterinary science computer-based Case Study Learning System.Report to Veterinary Science Faculty. The University of Melbourne.
McNaught, C., Grant, H., Fritze, P., McTigue, P., Barton, J., & Prosser, B. (1993). Improving quantitative volumetric analysis skills in first year university chemistry courses,Research in Science Education, 23, 189–198.
NCET (1994).Information technology works—Stimulate to educate.Report by the National Council for Educational Technology, UK.
Niemiec, R.P., & Walburg, H.J. (1992). The effects of computers on learning,International Journal of Educational Research, 17, 99–108.
Nott, M., Thaina, P., Riddle, M., & Swart, R. (1992). Interactive teaching of science practical work using recall of digitally recorded data and Quicktime video.ASCILITE 92. A promised future.Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Conference (pp. 168–172). Sydney.
OECD (1984).Research and development relating to the educational applications of new information technologies: A survey of institutions and their work.Paris.
Reeves, T. (1991). Ten commandments for the evaluation of interactive multimedia in higher education,Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 2(2), 84–113.
Reeves, T. (1992). Effective dimensions of interactive learning systems.ITTE 92. Proceedings, (pp. 99–115).Information Technology in Training and Education Conference, The University of Queensland.
Reeves, T. (1993). Pseudoscience in computer based instruction: The case of learner control research,Journal of Computer Based Instruction, 20(2), 39–46.
Sherwood, C., & Buchanan, P. (1993).A national survey on the integration of computers into schools: Teachers’ current practices and experiences (Years 1–12). Brisbane: Griffith University.
Tinkler, D., Cohen, D., Smith, T., & Ellyard, P. (in press).Consultancy to investigate the effectiveness and potential of state-of-the-art technologies in the delivery of higher education, both on campus and off campus.Clever Country Co-operative Ltd. Consultancy Report to the Commonwealth Ministerial Review of Alternative Modes of Delivery in Higher Education.
Try, K. (1992). Can we afford NOT to use technology for training.ITTE 92. Proceedings, Information Technology in Training and Education Conference (pp. 127–133).University of Queensland.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. (1988).Power on! New tools for teaching and learning.OTA-SET-379. Washington, DC, U.S. Government Printing Office.
Universities Funding Council Information Systems Committee (1993).Beyond lectures.University of Oxford, CTISS Publications.
Vernon, R.F. (1993). What REALLY happens to complimentary textbook software? A case study in software utilization,Journal for Computer Based Instruction, 20(2), 35–38.
Vincent, A., Shepherd, J., & D’Cruz, J. (1992).Political science simulations via computer networks.Final report to the Interactive Multimedia Learning Unit. The University of Melbourne.
Watson, D. (Ed.). (1993).ImpacT (the summary): an evaluation of the impact of Information Technology on children’s achievements in primary and secondary schools. London, Kings College.
West, H.T., & Pines, A.L. (1983). How ‘rational’ is rationality?Science Education, 67(1), 37–39.
Wills, S. (1992).1991/2 Interactive Multimedia Developers’ Programme.Report to Information Technology Policy Advisory Committee, The University of Melbourne.
Wills, S. (1994). Beyond browsing: Making interactive multimedia interactive.Information Technology and Education, IIR, Sydney.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Carmel McNaught has had 22 years experience in teaching and research in higher education—four years in Chemistry, 15 years in teacher education, and three years in higher education. She has worked at the Centre for the Study of Higher Education at The University of Melbourne from 1991–1994 where she was involved in evaluating CBL projects in the Faculties of Science, Engineering, Agriculture, Veterinary Science, and Medicine. These projects covered a wide variety of styles—including case studies, laboratory support and simulations, problem solving exercises, and basic tutorials. She joined the Academic Development Unit at La Trobe University in May 1994.
Sandra Wills has 20 years experience in the field of computers and education from the primary level through university, including teacher training and software development. She is currently Director of Educational Media Services (EMS) at the University of Wollongong. EMS provides a team of experienced educators to advise and manage courseware development for on- and off-campus university education and covers all technologies used in the support of educational delivery: Print Production, Interactive Multimedia Production, Television Production, and Audio Visual Services. She has been a board member of the Australian Council for Computers in Education since its inception in 1983 and is a Fellow of the Australian Computer Society. She is Vice Chairman (Asia Pacific) of IFIP TC3, the international technical committee on computers in education for the International Federation of Information Processing.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wills, S., McNaught, C. Evaluation of computer-based learning in higher education. J. Comput. High. Educ. 7, 106–128 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02948597
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02948597