1887

An Evaluation of Computer-Based Instruction in Microbiology

    Authors: SUSAN M. MERKEL1,*, LAURA B. WALMAN1,†, JEREMY S. LEVENTHAL1,††
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Department of Microbiology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Microbiology, 111 Wing Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853. Phone: (607) 254-2767. Fax: (607) 255-3904. E-mail: smm3@cornell.edu.
    • Present address: Washington and Lee University School of Law, Lexington, VA 24450.
      †† Present address: Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY 10029.
    • Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2000 vol. 1 no. 1 14-19. doi:10.1128/154288100X14285805487315
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • PDF
    83.49 Kb
  • HTML
    53.30 Kb
  • XML

    Abstract:

    There has been a tremendous increase in the availability of computer-based instructional (CBI) materials. Some studies have shown an improvement in learning when CBI is used. However, many researchers believe the current studies are inadequate. While CBI software should be thoroughly tested by developers, as educators, we should be concerned about whether or not the CBI materials we use are improving learning in our classrooms with our students. We present an evaluation of a computer-based hypermedia tutorial that was delivered over our General Microbiology website. We found that CBI was at least as effective as text-based material. However, of all students who used CBI, only those who explored most of the site benefited from using the site. Tracking each student’s use of the CBI was critical for understanding who was learning and why.

Key Concept Ranking

Lead
0.625
Respiration
0.5555556
Elements
0.4944847
0.625

References & Citations

1. ASM Biofilm Image Project1998copyright date [Online]. American Society for Microbiology. http://www.asmusa.org/edusrc/edu34.htm. [3 January 2000, last date accessed.]
2. Bio-Films: The Movies1998copyright date [Online] General Microbiology Course Site, Department of Microbiology, Cornell University. http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/biomi290/Horror/Biofilmmenu.html. [3 January 2000, last date accessed.]
3. Bloom BS, Hastings JT, Madaus GF1971Handbook of formative and summative evaluation of student learningMcGraw-HillNew York, N.Y.
4. Clark RE1989Current progress and future directions for research in instructional technologyEduc Technol Res Dev371576610.1007/BF02299046 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02299046
5. Crosby ME, Stelovsky J1995From multimedia instruction to multimedia evaluationJ Educ Multimedia Hypermedia42/3147167
6. Gay G, Mazur J1993The utility of computer tracking tools for user-centered designEduc Technol3344559
7. Gibbs WJ1995copyright date. [Online.] Multi-media and computer-based instructional software: evaluation methods. http://www.gettysburg.edu/ir/ascue/Proceedings/gibbs2.html. [24 February 2000, last date accessed.]
8. Hutchings GA, Hall W, Briggs J, Hammond NV, Kibby MR, McKnight C, Riley D1992Authoring and evaluation of hypermedia for educationComput Educ181–317117710.1016/0360-1315(92)90051-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0360-1315(92)90051-6
9. Jones TH, Paolucci R1999Research framework and dimensions for evaluating the effectiveness of educational technology systems on learning outcomesJ Res Comput Educ3211727
10. Kearsley G1998Educational technology: a critiqueEduc Technol3824751
11. Kulik JA1994Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based instruction, 9–27 Baker EL, O’Neil HFJrTechnology assessment in education and trainingL. Erlbaum AssociatesHillsdale, N.J.
12. Kumar DD, Hegelson SL, White AL1994Computer technology-cognitive psychology interface and science performance assessmentEduc Technol Res Dev42461610.1007/BF02298052 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02298052
13. Nicholls C, Merkel SM, Cordts ML1996The effect of computer animation on students’ understanding of microbiologyJ Res Comput Educ283359371
14. Park O1998Visual displays and contextual presentations in computer-based instructionEduc Technol Res Dev463375010.1007/BF02299760 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02299760
15. Regian JW, Shute VJ1994Evaluating intelligent tutoring systems7994 Baker EL, O’Neil HFJrTechnology assessment in education and trainingL. Erlbaum AssociatesHillsdale, N.J.
16. Reiber LP1990Using computer graphics in science instruction with childrenJ Educ Pyschol82113514010.1037/0022-0663.82.1.135 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.135
17. Reiber LP, Boyce MJ, Assad C1990The effects of computer animation on adult learning and retrieval tasksJ. Computer-Based Instruct.1724652
18. Reigeluth CM, Schwartz E1989An instructional theory for the design of computer-based simulationJ. Computer-Based Instruct.161110
19. Rowland P, Stuessy CL1988Matching mode of CAI to cognitive style: an exploratory studyJ Comput Math Sci Teaching743640
20. Simonson MR, Thompson A1994Educational computing foundations2nd ed.MerrillNew York, N.Y.
21. Steinberg E1991Computer assisted instruction: a synthesis of theory, practice and technologyL. Erlbaum AssociatesHillsdale, N.J.
22. Szabo M, Poohkay B1996An experimental study of animation, mathematics achievement and attitude toward computer-assisted instructionJ Res Comput Educ283390402
23. Teslow JL1995Humor me: a call for researchEduc Technol Res Dev43362810.1007/BF02300453 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02300453
24. Weller HG1996Assessing the impact of computer-based learning in scienceJ Res Comput Educ284461487
154288100X14285805487315.citations
jmbe/1/1
content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/154288100X14285805487315
Loading

Citations loading...

Supplemental Material

No supplementary material available for this content.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/154288100X14285805487315
2000-05-01
2017-11-19

Abstract:

There has been a tremendous increase in the availability of computer-based instructional (CBI) materials. Some studies have shown an improvement in learning when CBI is used. However, many researchers believe the current studies are inadequate. While CBI software should be thoroughly tested by developers, as educators, we should be concerned about whether or not the CBI materials we use are improving learning in our classrooms with our students. We present an evaluation of a computer-based hypermedia tutorial that was delivered over our General Microbiology website. We found that CBI was at least as effective as text-based material. However, of all students who used CBI, only those who explored most of the site benefited from using the site. Tracking each student’s use of the CBI was critical for understanding who was learning and why.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/1/1/jmbe-1-1-14.xml.a.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/154288100X14285805487315&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error