Effect of Dick and Carey instructional model

Transcription

1 Educational Research (ISSN: ) Vol. 3(3) pp , March 2012 Available Copyright 2012 International Research Journals Full Length Research Paper Effect of Dick and Carey instructional model on the performance of electrical/electronics technology education students in some selected concepts in technical colleges of northern Nigeria Hassan Bello 1 and U. O. Aliyu 2 1 Vocational and Technology Education Programme, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, Nigeria 2 Electrical Engineering Programme, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, Nigeria ABSTRACT This study was conducted to find out the effectiveness of the Dick and Carey Instructional Model that served as a guide to the electrical/electronics technology education teachers in designing their instructions at the Nigeria Certificate of Education (NCE) level. It is an attempt to improve the colleges teachers ability on how to deliver their instruction successfully. All the electricity/electronics teachers that were involved in the study were adequately oriented on how to go about using the model prior to the commencement of the study. The design employed was the Quasi-experimental research, the Non- equivalent Control Group design, the instrument for data collection was Electrical/Electronics Achievement Test (EEAT II), developed by the researcher. Some of the findings due to the four hypotheses tested at 0.05 level of significance indicated that there was Significant differences between the mean achievement scores of the experimental and control groups in the post-test; and this was not attributed to sex of the subjects (Male or Female) unlike in the school proprietorship (Federal or State Colleges of Education) when post-tested. Based on these, it was further recommended that the teachers should embark on using the guidelines proffered in the Dick and Carey Model when designing instructions. In addition, the National Commission for Colleges of Education (NCCE) should subsequently, considers introducing the Model as standard for guiding teachers in planning instructional activities at N.C.E. (Tech.) level. This is to safeguard the teachers against setting complicating instructional objectives, poor use of instructional strategies and biased assessment of students learning outcome, thereby resulting to low academic performance of the students. Keywords: Instructional Model, Theories of Teaching/learning, Gender, Schools Proprietorship. INTRODUCTION In teaching and learning process, the teacher is directly involved in the implementation of the curriculum so planned. It is the teacher who determines how the curriculum reaches the learner and facilitates smooth implementation. Richardson (2001) compared a teacher to an expert in an emergency room: saying that the teacher must react constantly to the immediate events in the classroom despite having a basic plan of instruction that determines the important components of the lesson. The possession of sound knowledge of the relevant psychology of learning in conjunction with that *Corresponding Author hassanbello2005@yahoo.com; Tel: ± , ± of the teaching-learning process in real life situation, induce in the teacher a high capacity to deliver the goods. Bednar et al (1995) advocates an interwoven development of the theories of teaching with that of learning as a necessary tool for good teacher preparation. The desired outcome and more importantly the relationship between the teacher and the learner are measures of effectiveness of any instructional process. Research findings in the area of psychology have helped in solving many problems concerning teaching and learning. Through research in education numerous learning theories and Instructional Design (ID) models have been established. one well-known instructional design model is The Dick and Carey Systems Approach Model. The model was originally published in 1978 by

2 278 Educ. Res. Figure 1. Dick and Carey Model (Source: Sherri Braxton's site on ID Models) Walter Dick and Lou Carey in their book entitled The Systematic Design of Instruction. The model is in the form of ADDIE (the most common model used for creating instructional materials). This acronym stands for the 5 phases contained in the model: Analyzing learner characteristics, Designing and developing learning objectives, Developing instructional materials, Implementing the instruction, and Evaluating the desired goals. Most of the current instructional design models according to (Piskurich, 2006) are variations of the ADDIE process. Dick and Carey made a significant contribution to the instructional design field by addressing instruction as an entire system, focusing on the interrelationship between context, content, learning and instruction. According to Dick, et al (2005) "Components such as the instructor, learners, materials, instructional activities, delivery system, and learning and performance environments interact with each other and work together to bring about the desired student learning outcomes." The Dick and Carey model was based on the idea that there is a predictable and reliable link between a stimulus (instructional materials) and the response that it produces in a learner (learning of the materials). The model also insists that designer needs to identify the sub-skills the student must master to permit the intended behaviour to be learned and then select the stimulus and strategy for its presentation that builds each sub-skill. This is a theory borrowed from behaviourist, cognitivist, and constructivist schools. The work of Dick and Carey were influenced by Robert Gagne s conditions of learning (Gagne, 1977). A system, according to Dick and Carey (2004), is technically a set of interrelated parts, all of which work together toward a defined goal. The model is called systems approach because it contains components that are related to each other. Each component has an input and an output as indicated in figure 1. Dick and Carey (1996) listed the following reasons for advocating a systems approach: 1. The focus is on what the learner is required to know/do by the end of the course. 2. Each component in the system is linked carefully to the other. 3. This process is empirical and replicable. Dick and Carey (1996) in their Instructional System Design (ISD) refer to a set of procedures and techniques that an instructional designer should employ to design, develop, evaluate, and revise instruction. The Elements of the model consists of ten major components (nine basic steps in an iterative cycle and a culminating evaluation of the effectiveness of the instruction) as follows: 1. Determine Instructional Goal what do you want learners to be able to do after the instruction is completed? 2. Analyze the Instructional Goal a step-by-step determination of what people are doing when they perform the goal and what entry behaviours are needed 3. Analyze Learners and Contexts context in which the skills will be learned and the context in which the skills will be used 4. Write Performance Objectives specific behaviour skills to be learned, the conditions under which they must be performed and the criteria for successful performance 5. Develop Assessment Instruments based on the stated objectives 6. Develop Instructional Strategy identify strategy to achieve the terminal objective; emphasis on presentation of information, practice and feedback, testing 7. Develop and Select Instruction using the stated strategy produce instructional materials 8. Design and Conduct Formative Evaluation testing of instructional materials in one-to-one, small groups or

3 Bello and Aliyu 279 field evaluations so that the materials can be evaluated with learners and revised prior to distribution 9. Revise Instruction data from the formative evaluation are summarized and interpreted to attempt to identify difficulties experience by learners in achieving the objectives and to relate these difficulties to specific deficiencies in the materials Summative Evaluation independent evaluation to judge the worth of the instruction. The model was mainly designed for a classroom setting in educational institutions. At such, Dick and Carey (1996) pointed out the systematic characteristics of their model as being: Goal-directed, Interdependencies of all the components in the system, Feedback mechanism to determine whether stated goal is met and Self-regulating i.e., modifying goals until the desired goal is reached. Based on these advantages, Gustafson and Branch (1997) recommended Dick and Carey's (1996) Model as The most widely adopted introductory text related to the ID process. Thus, their model is known almost. Similarly, Januszewski (2008) reported that the process is beneficial to any person/group that is responsible for developing some product and/or deliverable for another person/group. The tertiary institutions offering technological courses that are within the scope of this study are the Colleges of Education offering technical courses such as automobile, woodwork, metalwork, building and electrical/electronics technology education within the study area. Some of these technical colleges were established by federal government while some by the states government. The main programme offered by both the male and female students in these institutions is the three year NCE courses for teachers of basic technology at the junior secondary school level. Statement of the problem In the content area of electrical/electronics technology education at colleges of education level, some concepts appear to be difficult for the students to grasp. The problem of grasping sometimes is not limited to the students alone but also to some teachers handling the courses. The resultant effect is continued drop in the percentage of students who pass the examination and or acquiring a certificate in the area (Aina, 1992). This also posed a problem as to whether the initial training of the teachers themselves (in terms of the knowledge of subject matter and pedagogy) is adequate or not. On the other hand, Lecture method has become the traditional method of teaching predominantly used in Nigeria s institutions of higher learning (UNICEF, 2001) without it being associated with other (s) as may be required. In an attempt to reduce teaching difficulty, this study therefore, is intended to adapt the steps proffered in the Dick and Carey instructional model to serve as a guide to teachers when designing instruction. This is with a view to provide them with a framework for thorough planning, developing and adapting instruction based on learners needs and content requirements. Purposes of the study 1. Try out the Dick and Carey model by using it to teach a group of students the difficult concepts in order to determine its effectiveness. 2. Find out whether there is difference in performance between the group of students taught under guidance of the model and those without in the posttest. 3. Compare the performance of the subjects based on gender. 4. Compare the performance of the subjects based on school s proprietorship Base on these purposes, four null hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance. METHODOLOGY This study was a Quasi-experimental research, the Non-equivalent Control Group Design, which is diagrammed in Table 1 This type of design has a great deal of currency in researches on teaching. This is because it is natural to use existing classrooms in a given school for a study and a lot simpler than to start creating classrooms groups through random selection and random assignment (Campbell and Julian, 1963; Gibbons and Herman, 1997). The design involves an experimental group (G 1 ) and a control group (G 2 ) both given a pretest (Y 11 and Y 21 ) and a post test (Y 12 and Y 22 ) respectively, in which the control group and experimental group do not have pre-experimental sampling equivalence (Sambo, 2005). Intact classes in all the colleges of education selected for the study were used. The independent variable was the Dick and Carey instructional model, while the dependent variable was the students performance in the post-test. The experimental groups were exposed to the influence of the model (X); the control groups were not. Observations were then made to determine the differences that occur in the experimental as contrasted with the control group. The area for this study was the 19 states of the northern part of Nigeria. The population for the study comprised of the 71 teachers and the 351 students in all the 20 NCE electrical/electronics technology education awarding Colleges of Education duly accredited by NCCE. Northern Nigeria having 19 States was thought of as divided into 19 clusters. The researcher then selected eight (8) clusters at random from the 19 clusters. From each of these eight clusters one College of Education was selected at random. Intact (electrical/electronics) classes were then con-

4 280 Educ. Res. Table1. Quasi-experimental Design Pre-test Treatment post test Experiment G 1 : Y 11 X Y 12 Control G 2 : Y 21 Y 22 Table 2: Reliability Index result Test statistic Possible values Desired values pilot group (N = 60) Item difficulty [0, 1] 0.3 Average 0.47 Index (P) Item Discrimination [-1, 1] 0.3 Average 0.34 Index (D) Reliability [0, 1] & 0.91 Index (r) sidered for the experiment in all the selected colleges. The total number of subjects that constituted the sample for this study was therefore; the 37 electrical/electronics technology education teachers and the 198 final year students from the eight clusters. Simple random sampling technique was also used in placing the Colleges of Education into experimental or control group. After the conduct of the experiment, the pre-test and the post-test scores obtained from the four experimental groups were put together and treated as one group (G 1 ). Also the scores of the four control groups obtained were put together and treated as one group called (G 2 ). The instruments used for this study consisted of the Dick and Carey Instructional Model and a 60-items Electricity/Electronics Achievement Test (EEAT II) developed by the researcher based on the concepts in the content area of the NCE (electricity/electronics technology education) curriculum. The test instrument is an objective test that contained test items like multiple choices, true or false and fill in the blanks spaces. The same test instrument served as pre-test and post-test. Response of students to the Learning Difficulty Opinion Questionnaire (SLDOQ) initially administered by the researcher showed that students experienced some difficulties in understanding many of the concepts in the curriculum. Pilot study was also carried out basically to try-out the test instrument in order to ascertain its reliability. For the purpose of this, intact classes of the electricity/ele ctronics technology education departments were also considered, i.e., 44-students from Hassan Usman Katsina Polytechnic, Katsina, 05- students from College of Education, Azare, Bauchi State and 11-students from Ramat polytechnic maiduguri, Borno State that were at the 300 level of the N.C.E. Programme constituted the pilot group of 60 students. With the cooperation and assistance given by the teachers from the respective departments, EEAT II was administered at different interval of time due to the schools location. Using the data from the group of 60 students, the researcher performed three statistical tests, two of which were focusing on the individual test items (difficulty and discrimination index) and the later (reliability index) focusing on the test as a whole as shown in table 2. Eventually, the Data for this study were collected by administering the EEAT II at the pre-test and the posttest stages. These were however accomplished by the volunteered electricity/electronics technology education teachers from the Colleges of Education involved in the study. In each of these institutions, the teachers were given induction training on how to go about using the Instructional Model in preparing their instructional content, thus: (a) The teachers were requested to read trough the steps and subsequently the task specifications proffered in the model before commencement of the instructional design. (b) The teachers were encouraged to be objective and critical as possible in following all the steps specified in the model. (c) The teachers were asked to complete all the activities prescribed by the model when planning for the instruction. (d) When all teaching had ended, the post-test was then administered to the students. This covered a period of twelve weeks for the group taught under guidance of the Dick and Carey instructional model and the group taught using the traditional lecture method. Each week comprised of two periods of 60 minutes. The same test instrument served as both the pre-test and the post-test to enable the researcher find out the gain in knowledge by the subjects in the groups. For the Data Analysis, the data obtained from the pre-test and post-test administered were used to test the null hypotheses using student t-

5 Bello and Aliyu 281 Table 3. Comparison of the Mean Scores of the Experimental and Control Group in the Pre-test Group Mean S.D N df S.E t-cal * t-crit ** Decision Exp accepted Control Table 4. Comparison of the Mean Scores of Experimental and Control Group in the Post-test Group Mean S. D N df S.E t-cal * t-crit ** Decision Exp rejected Control Table 5. Comparison of the Mean Scores of Male and Female Subjects in Experimental Group in the Post-test Subject Mean S.D N df S.E t-cal * t-crit ** Decision Male accepted Female test, based on the decision that If the calculated t-ratio is greater than the critical or table value, null (H o ) hypothesis is rejected in favour of the alternative (H a ). RESULTS Hypothesis 1 achievement scores of both the experimental and control group in the pre-test. From Table 3, the t-calculated value (1.78) is less than the t-critical value (1.97); the null hypothesis is therefore accepted that there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups on the pre-test. Hypothesis 2 achievement scores of both experimental and control groups in the post-test. Referring to Table 4, the calculated t-value is (11.96) while the critical or table t- value is (1.97).The calculated t-ratio exceeds the critical t-ratio; the null hypothesis was therefore rejected in favour of the alternative hypothesis. Significant difference was found in favour of those thought using the Instructional Model. In other words, the use of the Dick and Carey Model has proved to be more effective in facilitating the acquisition of knowledge among the subjects than the use of the Conventional Lecture Method. Hypothesis 3 achievement scores of male and female subjects in experimental group in post-test. From Table 5, the calculated t-value (1.46) is less than the critical t-value (2.0086). The null hypothesis was accepted at 0.05 levels of significance. That there was no significant difference between the mean scores of male and female subjects in the experimental group when post-tested. Any differences observed are such that they could have arisen from sampling errors. Hypothesis 4 achievement scores of subjects in Federal and State Colleges of Education in experimental group in post-test. Table 6 indicated the Comparison of the mean scores of subjects in Federal and State Colleges of Education in the experimental group on the post-test. The t- calculated (6.08) is higher than the t-critical (1.99). The null hypothesis was therefore rejected at 0.05 levels of significance in favour of the alternative hypothesis. Hence, we concluded that subjects from Federal Colleges of Education performed better than those in

6 282 Educ. Res. Table 6. Comparison of the Mean Scores of Subjects in Federal and State Colleges of Education in the Experimental Group in the Post-test Colleges Mean S.D N df S.E t-cal * t-crit ** Decision Federal rejected State the State Colleges of Education in experimental group in the post-test. Findings of the Study Based on the data analysis presented, the followings are the principal Findings of the study: 1. There was no significant difference in the mean achievement scores of both the experimental and control groups in the pre-test. 2. Significant difference in the mean achievement score was found in favour of the experimental group (i.e. those taught using the instructional model). 3. There was no significant difference in the mean achievement scores attributed to gender in the experimental group when post-tested. 4. There was significant difference in the mean achievement scores of subjects from Federal Colleges of Education compared to subjects from State Colleges of Education in the experimental group when posttested. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS The result of the analysis of the null hypothesis which stated that There would be no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of experimental and control groups on the post-test' revealed that the experimental group performed significantly better than the control group. This significant difference in the mean achievement scores between the experimental and control groups may be attributable to the treatment that exists between the two different groups leading to better retention of facts among the subjects in the experimental group. This may well be an indication that the sequential stages of proper instructional designing and presentation provided in the Dick and Carey model have offered a better understanding of the difficult concepts by the learners. The better performance of the experimental group over the control group also enjoyed the effort of the teachers through judicious utilization of the model in designing lessons. The finding that the Dick and Carey instructional model assists retention of knowledge, as a possible outcome of better initial learning among the experimental group, derives support from the works of: Bruner (Undated) who stated that concepts are better learnt through learners participations in problem solving, and also that of Seels and Glasgow (1990), Anglin (1991), Smith and Ragam (1993), Genry (1994) and Kemp et al (1996) among others. At the end of the treatment, transition in average scores between the experimental and the control groups in the pre-test and post-test were found to be from 37.15% to 64.73% (experimental groups) and from 37.32% to 49.25% (control groups) respectively. This however, signified that the traditional classroom instructional strategies readily practiced by teachers in the control groups did not offer significant change in the mean performance of the subjects when compared to the experimental groups. This could be as a result of setting complicating instructional objectives, poor use of instructional strategies and biased assessment of students learning outcome, thereby resulting to low academic performance of the students. Proper use of all these stages were clearly suggested by Gagne (1977), and Kemp, et al (1996) and were adequately emphasized in the Dick and Carey model. The result of the analysis of the third hypothesis showed that there was no significant difference in the mean achievement scores attributable to gender/sex (Male or Female) in the experimental and control groups. This implies that when appropriate stages of delivering instruction are employed and relevant instructional materials were used, the learners could actually acquire the best in whatever lesson or course of study irrespective of sex difference. The finding of this study regarding academic performance base on gender is in agreement with that of Zoango (1971), Brown (1978), Watercraft (1984), Okeke (1986) and Inomesia (1987) in Uzoagulu (1997) who found that there were no significant difference between the achievement of male and female subjects in science. Therefore, the finding that both male and female subjects in this study performed evenly is not misleading. Sex appears to be no determinant of achievement in the technical colleges. It was clear from the result that most of the females were as competent as most males. Therefore, it would be unnecessary to provide a different teaching strategy for any of the sexes. One factor which is said to distinguish males from females in their achievement is the presence of mathematics. Even then, Maccoby in Uzoagulu (1997) has noted that between the ages of 7, 11, and 12, males and females perform about equally in skills connected with computation. The result of hypothesis 4 of the study indicated that there was significant difference in the mean achievement scores between subjects from Federal

7 Bello and Aliyu 283 Colleges of Education compared to those from State s owned Colleges of Education in the experimental groups when post-tested. There was a variation of performance observed between the scores obtained from the Federal Colleges of Education compared to the scores obtained from the State colleges of Education (µ FM = and µ SM = 36.47) respectively. This could be attributed to lack of adequate provision of instructional facilities in most state s own schools as clearly pointed out in Aina (1992) and Makoju (1998) who reported that there is acute shortage of infrastructures and physical facilities in most technical teacher training institutions in the country, coupled with the inability of some teachers to improvise as at when due. This also is an indication of the fact that teaching and learning could be more result oriented if adequate instructional materials are put in place, proper instructional strategies are followed and the learners are adequately participating in the processing of the knowledge. CONCLUSION The poor performance of the students in the Colleges of Education examinations was an indication of the fact that they were poorly taught, and also that difficulty exists in learning the subjects among the students. The Dick and Carey Model proved more efficient than the traditional lecture method readily adopted by most teachers at the higher institutions of learning. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations were proffered based on the findings of this study:- 1. While designing instruction using the Dick and Carey Model, care should be taken by teachers to select a type of multimedia that is relevant to the learning objectives, otherwise, the technology - not the pedagogy - would drive the course delivery. 2. Electricity/Electronics technology education teachers should subject the Dick and Carey Model into use by further trying it out at various institutions of learning, as this will ascertain its usefulness in developing instructions based on content and learners requirement. 3. NCCE should consider the adoption of the Dick and Carey model as the proper means of designing instructions across all the N.C.E. awarding Institutions in the Country. REFERENCES Aina O (1992). Vocational and Technical Teacher Training in Nigeria.Centre for International Technical Education: Huddershield, U.K. Anglin G (1991). Instructional technology: Past, present and future. Englewood, Colorado: Libraries Unlimited. Bednar AK, Cunningham D, Duffy TM, Perry JP (1995). Theory into practice: How do we link? In G.J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present and future. (2nd Ed., pp ). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc. Campbell DT, Julian CS (1963). Experimental and Quasi- Experimental Designs for Research: Houghton Mifflin Company Boston, USA Dick W, Carey L (1996). The systematic design of instruction. (4 th ed.). New York: Harper Collins College Publishers. Dick W, Carey L, James O (2005) [1978]. The Systematic Design of Instruction (6th ed.). Allyn Bacon. pp Carey WO, Carey L (2004)Systematic Design of Instruction. Boston,MA:Allyn and Bacon. Gagne RM (1977). The conditions of learning. (4 nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc. Genry C (1994). Introduction to instructional development. Belmont, California: Wad publishing Co. Gibbons B, Herman J (1997). True and quasi-experimental designs. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation 5 (14). Gustafson KL, Branch RM (1997). Survey of IDM, (3 rd. Ed). Syracuse, NY:Information Resources Publications, Syracuce University. Januszewski A, Molenda M (2008). Educational Technology: A definition with commentary. New York, NY: Routledge. Kemp J, Morrison G, Ross S (1996). Designing effective instruction. Upper Saddle New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Makoju EJ (1998). Strategies for improving practical content of technology subjects: Albany Delna, press. Piskurich GM (2006). Rapid Instructional Design: Learning ID fast and right. Richardson V (2001). Handbook of Research on Teaching (4 th Ed.): American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C. Sambo AA (2005). Research Methods in Education. Stirling-Horden Publishers (Nig.) Ltd. Lagos, Ibadan, Bennin City, Jattu-Uzairue. Seels B, Glasgow Z (1998). Making instructional design decisions. Columbus, Ohio: Publishing Company. Smith P, Ragan T (1993). Instructional design. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pren Hall, Inc. United Nation International Children Education Fund (UNICEF), Children and Women s Rights in Nigeria: A Wake-up Call. Situation Assessment and Analysis. National Planning Commission, Abuja and UNICEF Nigeria Uzoagulu AE (1997). Interpretation of Research Results. In A.E. Eze et al (eds) Foundations of Research in Education. Enugu: Rejoint Communication Ltd.