Study of Training Equipment and Individual Differences. The Effects of Subject Matter Variables. Final Technical Report.

Abstract : Two separate subject matter areas were selected for investigation which were felt to represent two distinct types of learning situations. The first subject was a kind of logico-mathematical procedure -- the Transportation Technique. The second subject was a visual form discrimination task -- Aircraft Recognition. Two separate courses were developed for each subject matter area. One reflected an inductive instructional approach and the other a deductive method. Each of the four courses was administered to between 55 and 60 Navy enlisted men. Twenty-eight measures of aptitudes, interests, and personality variables were obtained on each subject. Based on correlation coefficients computed between individual difference measures and examination scores, an unweighted means analysis of variance model was employed to assess the effects of instructional methods, subject matter areas, and interest levels. The most important finding produced by this analysis was the significant (p<.001) second order interaction among all three independent variables. The results of this study strongly supported the existence of learning styles and suggest that multi-track instruction based on learning styles might be a cost-effective way of enhancing learning. Those individual difference measures which interacted with instructional methods and subject matters were all non-cognitive in nature. It would be expected, therefore, that learning styles too might be independent of specific aptitude or ability traits. (Author)

[1]  L. Twyford.  The relation of some measures of ability to measures of learning from sound motion pictures , 1956 .

[3]  J. Krumboltz,et al.  The Comparative Effects of Inductive and Deductive Sequences in Programed Instruction* , 1965 .

[4]  J. Hayman,et al.  An Experiment Involving Use of English 2600, An Automated Instruction Text , 1962 .

[5]  Bert Y. Kersh.  The adequacy of "meaning" as an explanation for the superiority of learning by independent discovery. , 1958 .

[6]  L. J. Meconi.  CONCEPT LEARNING AND RETENTION IN MATHEMATICS , 1967 .

[7]  R. Craig.  Directed versus independent discovery of established relations. , 1956 .

[8]  O. K. Buros.  The ... mental measurements yearbook , 1941 .

[9]  L. A. Doty,et al.  Programed instructional effectiveness in relation to certain student characteristics. , 1964 .

[10]  Carleton B. Shap.  Relationship of intelligence to step size on a teaching machine program. , 1961 .

[11]  W. F. White,et al.  Generalized effects of praise and reproof. , 1966, Journal of educational psychology.

[12]  LEARNING BY PROGRAMED AND TEXT FORMAT AT THREE LEVELS OF DIFFICULTY. , 1965, Journal of educational psychology.

[13]  L. Twyford,et al.  Report of three experiments in the use of television in instruction, 1958–59 , 1960 .

[14]  C. H. Lawshe,et al.  The Relative Efficiency of four Test Weighting Methods in Multiple Prediction , 1959 .

[15]  George L. Gropper,et al.  INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING FROM SELF-PACED PROGRAMED INSTRUCTION, REPORT 1--STUDIES IN TELEVISED INSTRUCTION, INDIVIDUALIZING GROUP INSTRUCTION. , 1964 .

[16]  Donald M. Miller,et al.  Experimental Folklore and Experimentation: The Study of Programmed Learning in the Wauwatosa Public Schools* , 1962 .

[17]  Willis E. Ray.  Pupil Discovery vs. Direct Instruction , 1961 .

[18]  R. Forgus,et al.  Efficient Retention and Transfer as Affected By Learning Method , 1957 .

[19]  Harold A. Edgerton.  THE RELATIONSHIP OF METHOD OF INSTRUCTION TO TRAINEE APTITUDE PATTERN , 1958 .

[20]  Bert Y. Kersh.  The motivating effect of learning by directed discovery. , 1962 .

[21]  Leslie J. Briggs,et al.  STUDIES OF BYPASSING AS A WAY OF ADAPTING SELF-INSTRUCTION PROGRAMS TO INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES. FINAL REPORT. , 1962 .

[22]  W. Buckler.  A College English Teacher Looks at Television: Composition , 1958 .

[23]  A. Steinberg.  The Relation of Vocational Preference to Emotional Adjustment , 1952 .

[24]  K. Orton,et al.  The Effect of Method of Instruction on Retention and Transfer for Different Levels of Ability , 1964, The School Review.

[25]  M. Wittrock.  Response mode in the programing of kinetic molecular theory concepts. , 1963 .

[26]  A. B. Woodruff,et al.  Effects of learner characteristics on programed learning performance , 1966 .

[27]  Robert Frank Mager,et al.  Preparing objectives for programmed instruction , 1962 .

[28]  S. F. Klugman.  Differential preference patterns between sexes for schizophrenic patients. , 1966, Journal of clinical psychology.

[29]  Leslie J. Briggs.  Instructional media : a procedure for the design of multi-media instruction, a critical review of research, and suggestions for future research , 1967 .

[30]  Robert C. Craig,et al.  The transfer value of guided learning , 1953 .

[31]  John E. Taylor,et al.  DIFFERENTIAL APPROACHES TO TRAINING. , 1967 .

[32]  G. Salomon,et al.  Aptitudes and instructional media , 1968 .

[33]  W. Kennedy,et al.  Effectiveness of Praise and Blame as a Function of Intelligence , 1962, Perceptual and motor skills.

[34]  G. Hendrix.  A New Clue to Transfer of Training , 1947, The Elementary School Journal.

[35]  G. M. Haslerud,et al.  The transfer value of given and individually derived principles. , 1958 .

[36]  L. Cronbach.  The two disciplines of scientific psychology. , 1957 .

[37]  W F Seibert,et al.  Individual differences and instructional film effects. , 1965, Journal of Educational Psychology.

[38]  L. M. Colyer.  A comparison of two methods of teaching biology at the college level , 1960 .

[39]  A. A. Lumsdaine,et al.  MASS COMMUNICATION AND EDUCATIONAL MEDIA. , 1965, Annual review of psychology.

[40]  J. A. Becker.  An Exploratory Factor Analytic Study of Interests, Intelligence, and Personality , 1963 .