Effects of a Computer-Augmented Learning Environment on Math Achievement for Students with Differing Cognitive Style

The relationship between cognitive style and success in a computer-augmented learning environment was investigated. Fifty-nine students enrolled in a developmental education course in algebra were assigned to one of two instructors and one of two treatment conditions (computer-augmented instruction or traditional instruction). Student cognitive style (field-independence-dependence) was determined by performance on the Group Embedded Figures Test. Significant variables identified from a stepwise regression included main effects for prior achievement, cognitive style, and instructor. In addition, a significant treatment by cognitive style interaction was found. Field-dependent students exhibited greater math achievement in a computer-augmented environment, whereas students with indiscriminate cognitive style demonstrated greater achievement in a traditional learning environment. The results supported the hypothesis that learning environments differentially effect students with dissimilar cognitive style characteristics.

[1]  V. Shipman,et al.  Chapter 7: Cognitive Styles: Some Conceptual, Methodological, and Applied Issues , 1985 .

[2]  Greg P. Kearsley,et al.  The Cost of CAI: A Matter of Assumptions. , 1977 .

[3]  James A. Kulik,et al.  Integrating Findings from Different Levels of Instruction. , 1981 .

[4]  Linda H. Fleit.  Computerizing America's Campuses: How Technology Is Changing Higher Education. , 1987 .

[5]  Tim A. M. van Dijk,et al.  Motives for CAI in Post-Secondary Education. , 1985 .

[6]  Thomas M. Schwen.  Cognitive Styles: Boon or Bane?. , 1979 .

[7]  Chen-Lin C. Kulik,et al.  Effectiveness of Computer-based College Teaching: A Meta-analysis of Findings , 1980 .

[8]  Marie Dence.  Toward Defining the Role of CAI: A Review. , 1980 .

[9]  H. A. Witkin.  A Manual for the embedded figures tests , 1971 .

[10]  S. Messick.  The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practice , 1984 .

[11]  Max E. Jerman,et al.  Computer-Assisted Instruction , 1969, Science.

[12]  R. Clark.  Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media , 1983 .

[13]  Jack A. Chambers,et al.  Computer assisted instruction: current trends and critical issues , 1980, CACM.

[14]  Robert M. Aiken,et al.  Into the 80's with Microcomputer-Based Learning , 1980, Computer.

[15]  Bruce R. Dalgaard,et al.  A Decade of Computer-Assisted Instruction , 1977 .

[16]  P. R. Smith,et al.  Microcomputers in Education , 1983 .

[17]  Chen-Lin C. Kulik,et al.  Effectiveness of computer-based education in colleges , 1986 .

[18]  U. S. Chaudhari,et al.  Educational Technology Research: Whole Versus Part Presentation of Advance Organizers in Text in Relation to Intelligence. , 1981 .

[19]  Rob Kling,et al.  The new wave of computing in colleges and universities: a social analysis , 1986, SCOU.

[20]  Glenn Fisher,et al.  Where CAI Is Effective: A Summary of the Research. , 1983 .

[21]  H. A. Witkin,et al.  The nature and importance of individual differences in perception. , 1949, Journal of personality.

[22]  Michael E. Skinner.  Attitudes of College Students toward Computer-Assisted Instruction: An Essential Variable for Successful Implementation. , 1988 .

[23]  C. A. Moore,et al.  Field-Dependent and Field-Independent Cognitive Styles and Their Educational Implications , 1977 .

[24]  Richard T. Murphy,et al.  Evaluation of the PLATO IV computer-based education system in the community college , 1978, SCOU.

[25]  M. Lepper.  Microcomputers in education: Motivational and social issues. , 1985 .