Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
M. Detambel, L. Stolurow (1956)
Stimulus sequence and concept learning.Journal of experimental psychology, 51 1
(1959)
Some Effects of Year Long Teaching Machine Instruction
J. Holland, D. Porter (1961)
The influence of repetition of incorrectly answered items in a teching-machine program.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 4
(1960)
A Preliminary Investigation of Variation in the Properties of Verbal Learning Sequences of the Teaching Machine' Type
Galanter, Eugène (1959)
Automatic Teaching The State Of The Art
(1961)
Teaching by Machine. Cooperative Research Monograph No. 6. Washington: Government Printing Office
宮脇 一男 (1962)
教育する機械"Teaching machine", 49
(1960)
A Preliminary Investigation of Variation in the Properties of Verbal Learning Sequences of the Teaching Machine' Type." Teaching Machines and Programmed Learning
J. Krumboltz, R. Weisman (1962)
The effect of overt versus covert responding to programed instruction on immediate and delayed retention.Journal of Educational Psychology, 53
Joanna Williams (1963)
Comparison of several response modes in a review program.Journal of Educational Psychology, 54
E. Keislar, J. Mcneil (1962)
A comparison of two response modes in an auto-instructional program with children in the primary grades.Journal of Educational Psychology, 53
A. Lumsdaine, R. Glaser (1960)
Teaching machines and programmed learning
R. Goldbeck, V. Campbell (1962)
The effects of response mode and response difficulty on programed learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 53
RETENTION OF INTRODUCTORY AND REVIEW PROGRAMS AS A FUNCTION OF RESPONSE MODE* JOANNA P. WILLIAMS and ELLEN I. LEVY University of Pennsylvania INTRODUCTION While there have been many studies of the effectiveness of active participation in programed instruction, most have presented data only from tests administered soon after the completion of the program (Evans, Glaser, and Homme, 1960; Keislar and McNeil, 1962; Williams, 1963). In general, performance is better when there is active participation, al though often the comparisons between response modes have not reached conventional levels of significance. The little data available from tests given after some time has elapsed since training suggest that delayed testing may be more sensitive to training differences. For example, Krumboltz and Weisman (1962) found that subjects who had to con struct their own responses performed significantly better on a test given two weeks after completion of the program than those who made covert responses and those who simply read the program; these differences had not appeared on the immediate test. Goldbeck and Campbell (1962) also found differences only on a delayed test; in this case, however, subjects in the group that had read through the program performed significantly better 10 weeks after
American Educational Research Journal – SAGE
Published: Jun 23, 2016
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.