Download - Effects of integrated video media on student achievement and attitudes in high school chemistry

Effects of Integrated Video Media on Student Achievement and Attitudesin High School Chemistry

William S. Harwood,1 Maureen M. McMahon2

1Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, 2130 Mitchell Building,University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742-5251

2Division of Education, University of California, Davis, California 95616-8579

Received 22 December 1995; revised 13 December 1996; accepted 22 January 1997

Abstract: This study explored the effects of an integrated video media curriculum enhancement onstudents’ achievement and attitudes in a first-year general high school chemistry course within a multicul-turally diverse metropolitan school district. Through the use of a treatment-control experimental design,approximately 450 students in Grades 9–12 were sampled on measures of chemistry achievement and at-titude over the period of 1 academic year. The results revealed significantly higher achievement scores onstandardized measures of achievement as well as on microunit researcher-designed, criterion-referencedquizzes for the treatment students who experienced a general chemistry course enhanced with an integrateduse of a structured chemistry video series. Correlation of student achievement with logical thinking abili-ty revealed that students with high levels of logical thinking ability benefited most from the video-enhancedcurriculum. Treatment students also scored significantly higher than control students on the chemistry at-titude instrument. These results along with qualitative supportive evidence suggest that this integratedvideo media curriculum intervention can positively affect student chemistry achievement and attitudeacross ability levels and across a diverse multicultural population. Furthermore, the data suggest that ed-ucational science video media in general, and the World of Chemistry video series in particular, are in-structional tools that can be used effectively to bring the often abstract, distant worlds of science into closefocus and within the personal meaningful realm of each individual student. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons,Inc. J Res Sci Teach 34: 617–631, 1997.

Introduction

The focus of education is to provide students with knowledge, training, and learning op-portunities while stimulating their physical and mental growth. According to the National Sci-ence Board Commission on Precollege Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology, inits report entitled Educating Americans for the 21st century (1983), the United States is failing

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING VOL. 34, NO. 6, PP. 617–631 (1997)

© 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0022-4308/97/060617-15

Correspondence to: W.S. HarwoodContract grant sponsor: Annenberg/CPB FoundationContract grant number: 1812-80843

to provide its students with the tools needed to lead and excel in the 21st century. It is neces-sary to arm children with a strong broad background in the areas of math and science. Studentsmust be given more than just a return to the basics; they must be offered the opportunities togrow in their problem-solving abilities, learn thinking and communication skills, and acquirescientific and technological literacy.

In an attempt to offer excellence in teaching to the greatest number of students, many in-novative teaching tools have been developed and used over the past 3 decades, among whichhave been television, videotape, and, most recently, interactive video instructional media. Re-search has shown (Enger, 1976; Savenye, 1989) that video media provides for (a) the captureof uncommon and hard-to-duplicate material and phenomena; (b) the ability to easily presentstatic and moving material; (c) the alteration of visual, auditory, and temporal characteristics ofmaterial and phenomena; and (d) the option to incorporate animation for added clarity. A mul-titude of studies have sought to capture achievement effects following the use of television orvideo instruction with students of all ages (McNeil & Nelson, 1991). However, many of thestudies investigated only the total replacement of live instruction with videotape/videodisk in-struction. Results of these studies did show an initial increase in student motivation among stu-dents within the videotape/videodisk treatment groups, but did not yield a positive effect be-tween the videotape/videodisk treatment and students’ achievement (Reeves, 1986; Levin,1991). In addition, an argument was posed by Clark (1983) that it is not media’s influence onlearning that should be studied. Clark argued that it is not media that caused the proposedchanges in learning; he contended that media are merely vehicles to deliver instruction. Clarkbelieved that media and associated attributes only influence the way learning is delivered. Incontradiction to Clark, Kozma (1991) offered the argument that we must continue to investigateinstructional technology because it is the dynamic union of the learner working with the medi-um that is important. Depending on the learner and the medium, the construction of knowledgewill vary. Kozma’s beliefs are further supported and extrapolated by research work conducted onsituated cognition. Brown, Collins, and Duquid (1989) proposed that knowledge is situated. Thatis, it is bound to any activity, context, or culture in which it is developed. If this is true, then thelearner and the learning are heavily influenced and affected by the instructional use of media.

We feel strongly that using media well can positively affect an individual’s learning. Canan effective methodology for enhancing science instruction with video technology be docu-mented? Can the effects of media in teaching be observed and assessed? Many studies have beenconducted that attempt to show a significant difference in achievement gains between treatmentgroups where media is used as the mode of instruction and those groups where no medium isbeing employed (Enger, 1976; Savenye & Strand, 1989; Levin 1991; McNeil & Nelson, 1991;Cohen, 1992). Most recently, video technology has been called on by Gabel and Bunce (1994)to assist in the chemistry classroom, because many teachers lack the correct conceptual under-standing of a chemistry topic needed to teach it. These researchers assert that quality technolo-gy may play an important role in the teaching–learning process of chemistry to aid teachers infacilitating the construction of sound chemistry conceptual frameworks among their students.Studies to the contrary revealed that when novelty effects, teacher differences, and environmentare controlled, significant differences proposed by the integration of media use into instructionall but disappear (Kulik, Kulik, & Cohen, 1980).

Based on the multitude of contradictions in research results in the field of media effects onachievement and attitude, this study was designed to view multiple variables simultaneously, topossibly account for the incongruities. The study attempted to expose an interaction effect be-tween integrated video media use and student logical thinking ability levels with respect toachievement and attitude among secondary general chemistry students. Teacher differences were

618 HARWOOD AND McMAHON

controlled for by randomization and by prescribing a strict set of treatment procedures. Equal-ity of student groups was confirmed by pretest of their prior knowledge of chemistry. If an in-teraction effect occurs between the two independent variables, it may lead to a better under-standing for the dichotomy in many of the previously cited studies’ findings. Because theteacher, classroom instruction, and student ability are influential in student accomplishment anddisposition, these variables must be considered during the research into video media effects. Itis important that this complex interaction be examined. As access to technology becomes morecommonplace in educational settings, and funding continues to diminish, educators will need tounderstand the strength of media as a learning tool as well as know how to implement the useof media most effectively and efficiently in the classroom.

This study was designed to examine both achievement and attitude changes of secondarychemistry students who were exposed to the integrated video-enhanced microunits using theWorld of Chemistry video series. The use of video media in education is not new; however, itsstrengths have yet to be maximized. The quality of the video media, the target audience forwhom video media will be most effective, as well as the most operative methodology with whichto incorporate its use into instructional settings must be sought and discovered.

Methods

Subjects and Setting

Approximately 450 first-year general chemistry students across 18 classrooms in a multi-culturally diverse metropolitan region of the East Coast composed the subject population for thestudy. There were 7 treatment classrooms and 11 control classrooms from which all data werecollected. The participating teachers’ range of experience varied from novice to master; how-ever, an overall matched teaching population was found in the control and treatment subgroups.All the participating teachers were deemed to be successful science teachers in their district andwere selected randomly from a pool of teachers who are active within their professional com-munity. In addition, the student groups were shown to have equal prior knowledge of chemistrythrough their pretest performance on the High School Subjects Test: Chemistry, shown in Table 1.

Treatment

Educational science video media in general, and the World of Chemistry video series in par-ticular, are instructional tools used to bring the often abstract, distant worlds of science into closefocus and within the personal realm of each individual student. The World of Chemistry videoseries, produced at the University of Maryland, College Park, in the late 1980s, is designed toexplore the basic principles of chemistry, understand chemistry’s historical foundations, appre-ciate its present contributions to society, and imagine its future directions in the world of the21st century. Designed initially for the non–science-oriented person, the series strives to presentchemistry enthusiastically, for students to receive more than simply a body of knowledge abouttransformations and processes. It was hoped the students would also develop insights into thenature of matter and problem solving, gain a sense of chemistry’s societal importance, and in-crease in their positive attitudes toward science and scientists (World of Chemistry, 1989, pp.5–6).

In this article, integrated enhanced-video media refers to the integrated use of the World ofChemistry video series within researcher–teacher-designed chemistry microunits. These micro-

EFFECTS OF INTEGRATED VIDEO MEDIA 619

units include teacher lesson guides associated with each 30-min World of Chemistry videotapedesigned to enable the teacher to stop the videotape approximately every 5–7 min for ateacher–student question–answer interaction time. The two treatment levels of this variable werethose teachers/classrooms implementing the integrated video media and those using no video me-dia during the treatment time units. The treatment microunits, designed by the authors and non-participating chemistry teachers, were 1–3 days in length with at least eight mandatory inter-active video-enhanced treatments (approximately 1/month) carried out in the treatment class-rooms over the course of the academic year. The microunits were agreed upon by all teacher participants, treatment and control, prior to the study. Each microunit corresponds to a funda-mental part of the general chemistry curriculum.

The control teachers each received the microunits but no World of Chemistry videotapes.The control teachers taught the same microunit topics for at least the same amount of time astreatment teachers, but without the aid of video enhancement.

Instruments

Four assessment instruments were used in addition to direct classroom observations, stu-dent interviews, and teacher interviews. The instruments were as follows.

The High School Studies Test: Chemistry is a 40-min standardized test that is norm refer-enced. The reliability coefficients are between .79 and .94. Normed tables containing percentiles,standard scores, and standard errors of measurement are provided with this test (Mitchell, 1985).

The High School Chemistry Student Opinion Survey (Heikkinen, 1973) was selected as thequantitative measure of student attitudes toward chemistry. The measure is a 20-question Lik-ert-scaled instrument (1–5) designed to collect high school students’ attitudes toward both thecontent and teaching of chemistry. The reliability reported for this survey is between .93 and .96.

Microunit quizzes were designed by the authors and nonparticipating chemistry teachersbased on state science outcomes, district chemistry curriculum, and teacher expert opinion. Af-ter construction was complete, the quizzes were sent out for expert review and modified ac-cordingly. Each quiz reflects material deemed important to be taught to high school generalchemistry students. The quizzes do not mirror specific examples or exact content covered by thevideotapes, and so do not discriminate against the control students for whom no video inter-vention was conducted.

The Test of Logical Thinking (TOLT) is a 20-min paper and pencil assessment that was ad-ministered to all students as a way to measure logical thinking ability, a trait which correlatespositively with problem-solving ability and achievement (Nagy & Griffiths, 1982). Both its pre-dicted validity and internal consistency are high (a 5 .85).

Results and Discussion

Student Achievement

Statistics on comprehensive chemistry achievement for the treatment and control groups aredisplayed in Table 1. The treatment and control groups had similar numbers of subjects and stu-dents in both groups scored similarly on the standardized pretest measure of chemistry achieve-ment. The posttest results indicated that the treatment and control groups’ gain varied widelyfrom one another. The treatment students’ average gain of approximately eight points was a fac-


tor of three increase from their mean pretest score, while the control students’ increase was ap-proximately a factor of two above their initial average achievement scores.

The results of the repeated measures analysis of variance show via the differences in gainscores of the two groups that the groups are significantly different, F 5 24.04, p , .01, fromeach other on the measure of comprehensive achievement at the end of the school year. Thetreatment group subjects for whom the video integration occurred scored significantly higherthan the control subjects on the High School Subjects Test: Chemistry posttest measure ofachievement administered at the end of the academic year. The treatment group students gainedsignificantly more chemistry content knowledge than the control group students during the aca-demic year, as measured by this standardized instrument. The national mean on this standard-ized normed test is a score of 14 (Mitchell, 1985). This assessment tool was last normed in 1988.There are two important considerations to note while interpreting the posttest results. In 1988,the population of students who were taking chemistry in this country was different than the cur-rent population. As more and more states have increased graduation requirements, any additionalscience requirements usually move the average and below-average students from ending theirhigh school science careers in biology to ending with a chemistry course. Hence, a high schoolchemistry population that was predominantly college prepatory in 1988 would now include agreater diversity in both student ability and motivation. This fact and the fact that this study’spopulation reflects a district with a 67% minority population lead the authors to point to themeaningfulness and significance of a mean score of 12.9 for the treatment group. Although the score is approximately one unit lower than the 1988 national norm, it is most probably sim-ilar to, if not higher than, what the current national mean would be if the instrument werenormed now.

The posttest chemistry standardized achievement data (High School Subjects Test: Chem-istry) was analyzed using a repeated measures analysis of variance. The Pillai’s, Hotelling’s, andWilks’ statistics displayed in Table 2 further highlight the magnitude of the results. Each of thesestatistics is a more conservative measure of significance. The fact that each of these results pre-sents an F probability value or a , .05 gives more credence to the weight with which we viewthe achievement data.

It was decided that after each video-enhanced integrated lesson there should be a criterion-referenced assessment relative to only the chemistry topic content from which the theme of thevideo was centered. No such normed quizzes exist. Therefore, as described above, the authorsdesigned appropriate quizzes for each microunit. The results of each of the researcher–teacher-designed, criterion-referenced, posttest-only microunit quizzes follow the same statistical pat-tern as surfaced for the standardized achievement instrument data. Table 3 shows a summary ofthe microquiz statistical results. The treatment group consistently scored significantly higher, p, 0.05, than the control group on each microunit quiz. Across the 10 microquizzes, the treat-ment students scored an average of 35.3% higher than their peers in the control group. Although


Table 1Comprehensive achievement as measured by the High School Subjects Test: Chemistry

Group Subjects Mean Pretest SD Mean Posttest SD

Treatment 182 4.7 4.1 12.9 5.2Control 191 4.4 4.5 9.3 4.0

control group teachers were given a detailed outline of the material to be covered in each mi-crounit and were also provided with copies of the microunit quizzes prior to the teaching of theunit, control students still scored significantly lower than students in the treatment video-en-hanced group on each of the researcher–teacher-designed, criterion-referenced microunitquizzes.

These achievement results represent some of the first data to indicate consistent achieve-ment gains over a lengthy time while viewing the effects of an educational technology inter-


Table 2Repeated measures analysis of variance (Chemistry Achievement Posttest)

Source df Sum of Squares Mean Squares F Ratio F Prob.

Between groups 1 485.17 485.17 24.04 .0001Error 293 5912.75 20.18Total 294 6397.92

Test Name Value F Ratio df F Prob.

Pillai’s .061 19.08 1 .0001Hotelling’s .065 19.08 1 .0001Wilks’ .939 19.08 1 .0001

Table 3Descriptive data and analysis of variance group results of researcher–teacher-designed, criterion-referenced microunit quizzes

World of Chemistry Total No.Microunit Group Mean* SD Subjects F prob.

Measurement Treatment 6.4 2.3 179 .001Control 3.4 2.0 182

Matter of state Treatment 7.1 1.7 172 .001Control 3.6 2.1 127

The atom Treatment 6.9 1.9 163 .001Control 3.4 1.7 203

The periodic table Treatment 7.7 1.9 166 .001Control 4.3 1.9 204

Chemical bonds Treatment 5.5 1.7 138 .001Control 3.2 1.6 211

The mole Treatment 5.1 2.0 171 .001Control 2.6 1.6 183

Water Treatment 6.7 2.0 151 .001Control 3.1 1.7 94

Precious envelope Treatment 6.4 1.9 141 .001Control 2.5 1.5 101

Metals Treatment 7.9 1.6 119 .001Control 2.3 1.3 57

Carbon Treatment 7.3 2.0 105 .001Control 3.3 1.7 95

*Each quiz has a total possible point value of 10.

vention—in this case, a set of videotapes. The achievement data are also unique because theyfactor in the teacher as an important facilitator and knowledgeable user of the technology. Thesignificant achievement gains of the treatment students reflect a successful teacher–technologyintegrated treatment. The teacher was an intricate and meaningful entity in the teaching–learn-ing partnership. The acknowledgment and interest in the importance of the teacher’s role in us-ing technology as an instructional tool are fundamental to this study. In many of the prior edu-cational technology studies, the teacher in the treatment classroom was replaced by one of manytechnological tools such as a computer software program, videodisk, or videotape. Those stud-ies examined student achievement based on total replacement of the teacher with a multimediaor computer-based program. This study explored an intervention where video was used as anintegrated instructional tool to offer students a visual and auditory conceptual enhancement tolearning chemistry that could not be duplicated equally in any other fashion. Guided by theirteacher, students were welcomed into a world where they could see atoms, walk through a steelmanufacturing plant, experience exciting chemical demonstrations, and explore career optionsin which chemistry played an important role, all without leaving the classroom.

Student Attitudes

Data were collected on student attitude changes that occurred over the yearlong course inchemistry using the High School Chemistry Student Opinion Survey (Heikkinen, 1973). The re-sults showed that all students entered chemistry with a basically neutral attitude toward the sub-ject. It was hypothesized that students who experienced the video-enhanced treatment wouldshow a significantly higher positive attitude change than their peers in the control classroomsbased on the research purporting that video media is influential in raising students’ motivationlevels (McNeil & Nelson, 1991). Table 4 conveys the descriptive attitude pre- and posttest re-sults as measured by the High School Chemistry Student Opinion Survey.

Although pretests showed the treatment and control groups to be significantly different fromeach other at the beginning of the study on their attitude scores, the repeated measures analysisof variance controls for this initial difference by addressing only the net change in student atti-tude. The statistically significant posttest results are displayed in Table 5. Once again, the Pil-lai’s, Hotelling’s, and Wilks’ statistics were calculated to provide a more appropriate conserva-tive arrival at an F value. Each of these statistics is , .05; hence, the attitude results certainlyshow the treatment students’ net attitude change to be significantly more positive than the con-trol students’ attitude changes.


Table 4Chemistry attitude results based on High School ChemistryStudent Opinion Survey

Attitude Test Group Subjects Mean* SD

Pretest (September 1993) Treatment 168 69.0 13.2Control 137 64.0 13.8

Posttest (May 1994) Treatment 150 69.7 15.3Control 187 63.0 17.0

*The possible range of attitude data is 20–100 points. A score of 60 on the 20-questionLikert scale (1–5) is considered a neutral attitude toward chemistry.

Although a statistical significance does exist, we caution the reader to ask whether this dif-ference is a meaningful. Both the treatment and control students’ posttest mean scores of 69.7and 63.0, respectively, as well as their pretest mean scores remained in the neutral attitude rangefor the instrument used. Although treatment students’ overall net gain was significantly greaterthan control students’ net gain, both group’s pre- and posttest scores reflect neutral attitudes to-ward the subject and teaching of chemistry.

This finding does not support the hypothesis that the treatment students would exit with asignificantly more positive attitude than the control students. This was perplexing because themajority of earlier studies showed a significant motivational or attitudinal positive effect withthe use of media in an instructional setting. Upon careful reflection, two ideas surfaced. Initial-ly, it is important to note that the students did not exit with negative attitudes; they simply didnot show a meaningful increase toward the positive. This finding is interesting in its own right. Ina time when the nation is afraid that students are being turned away from science, this large, mul-ticulturally diverse population of students clearly told us they have enjoyed science through theiryears in school and continue to have a neutral attitude even after taking high school chemistry.

Second, the issue of why this study’s data do not reflect that of earlier studies is more com-plex. After extensive review of many of the designs of the earlier multimedia educational re-search studies, a major point of interest became clear. Most of the earlier studies assessed stu-dent attitude changes over a 3-week to 3-month period (McNeil & Nelson, 1991). It can beconjectured that under short periods of time, the multimedia treatment remains new and novelfor the students and brings with it the many strong feelings that researchers have come to ac-cept as novelty effects. The posttest attitudinal data in this study were collected after 1 year. Thevideo-enhanced treatment had ceased being a novelty in the treatment classrooms. The posttestattitude results reflected a stable treatment and control population experiencing no novelty ef-fects, who simply replied to the attitude survey with reference to their overall experience in first-year high school general chemistry. Although some students’ attitudes changed drastically, theoverall mean of both groups remained in the neutral range, suggesting that their chemistry ex-perience at least had no significant negative attitudinal effects on them.

Interaction Effect

The TOLT was administered as a measure of logical thinking ability (Tobin & Capie, 1981).An initial question in formulating this study was whether children of differing logical reason-


Table 5Repeated measures analysis of variance (Chemistry Attitude Posttest)

Source df Sum of Squares Mean Squares F Ratio F Prob.

Between groups 1 9181.84 9181.84 26.96 .0001Error 222 75603.10 340.55Total 223 84784.94

Test Name Value F Ratio df F Prob.

Pillai’s .038 8.77 1 .0034Hotelling’s .040 8.77 1 .0034Wilks’ .962 8.77 1 .0034

ing abilities would be differentially affected by the video integration. We wondered whether thevideo images, audio, animation, and chemistry relevance to the real world, all provided throughthe World of Chemistry video series, would affect any one student ability group preferentially.The statistics show an interaction effect between the treatment and logical thinking ability, sig-naling that children are not all equally effected by media. Figure 1 displays the standardizedachievement data by treatment group, taking individual student TOLT scores into account.Clearly, the treatment group students scored higher than did the control students at all levels oflogical thinking as measured by the TOLT. Note, however, that the slopes of the two lines aremarkedly different. This difference in slope reveals that children of higher logical thinking abil-ity are preferentially effected by the video media intervention. This finding suggests to us thatstudents who are of a higher logical thinking ability may have the strategies and cognitive toolsto more effectively benefit from the visual and auditory images and concepts video media haveto offer.

If integrated video-enhanced instruction can aid students in learning chemistry, is it moreeffective for any one group of students? This question was posed with the prediction that aver-age and below-average logical thinking ability students would be greater recipients of thestrengths integrated video media have to offer. The rationale for this thought was based on theresults of past studies which have shown lower-ability students to rely more heavily on picturesand manipulatives while learning (Pressley, 1977). The visual media would provide for theseimages which theoretically would assist in the learning process of lower logical ability thinkers.Results showed that all students who received the integrated video media scored significantlyhigher than those students who received no video intervention. However, when logical abilitywas entered as a variable, it was the higher logical thinkers who showed even greater gains. Af-ter contemplation, the following plausible explanation was generated. First, we recognize that


Figure 1. Achievement–treatment–logical thinking ability interaction.

the lower logical thinkers do benefit from the video media because they scored higher than theirpeers in the control classrooms. In addition, the higher logical thinkers in the treatment groupalso scored significantly higher than their peers in the control group. Perhaps because the high-er logical thinkers have more strategies for learning, they benefit even more from the visual andauditory stimuli provided by the video media. Higher logical thinkers can capitalize on thestrengths of the video media because they have strategies and scaffolding techniques with whichto construct more meaning and knowledge (Schuell, 1986). This is a significant and practicalfinding for educators, especially educators of gifted students. All too often, gifted students areexpected to learn in the world of the abstract, without visual or auditory aids. Clearly, these find-ings suggest that in this study, the higher logical thinkers were able to make even greater gainswhen provided with video media enhancements.

It is interesting to note that generally students did not score high on the TOLT. An averagemean of approximately 2 of a possible score of 10 was found for the total population of stu-dents. It is an accepted fact that logical thinking ability and the ability to solve problems arepositively correlated. If one were to make a conjecture, it would be reasonable to assume thatsuccess in chemistry and logical thinking ability would also be positively correlated, as prob-lem solving is fundamental to a traditional chemistry curriculum. As more and more averageand below-average ability students come to chemistry to fulfill state mandates, it will be neces-sary for teachers to realize a possible need for remediation in the area of logical thinking. Inte-grated video-enhanced instruction could provide for quality remediated instruction while sup-porting the individual learners’ needs for visual and audio scaffolding tools.

Student Opinions

Surveys, interviews, and classroom observations were conducted throughout the study togather and document the opinions and attitudes of the treatment students regarding the pre-scribed integrated video-enhanced intervention. A pool of treatment students was randomly chosen from the large sample for surveying and interviewing purposes. Their reactions weresought in the form of personal interest and motivation spawned by the use of the World of Chem-istry videotape series as well as detailed commentary on the perceived strengths and weakness-es of the series. Finally, researcher observations in the treatment classrooms were conducted toverify adherence to the treatment intervention and gather details on student involvement andteacher–student interaction during the integrated video-enhanced treatment lessons.

Each of the participating teachers’ classrooms was visited biweekly over the yearlong study.These visits were designed for maintenance and teacher support. The visits provided a timewhen deliveries of study materials were made, and questions and concerns of the teachers werehandled on a personal basis by the authors. Often, informal classroom observations were con-ducted during these brief visits. The adherence to the prescribed treatment was near perfect.Each of the treatment teachers used the supplied integrated lessons for each observed microunit.Each treatment teacher asked many, if not all, of the recommended questions and stopped thevideotapes in the prescribed places for student questions and interaction. However, use of thestrict intervention style did not appear to be comfortable for the teachers until the second se-mester of the study. As strong as the negative treatment teacher reaction was to the format ofthe intervention, so, too, was that of the treatment students during the initial observations. Ear-ly in the study, several students were observed to voice frustration and finally put their headsdown on their desks in disgust at the interruption format of the videotape viewing. During oneobservation, a student clearly stated, “We don’t watch TV like this at home. Why are we doingit this way here? I hate it!” Another student’s comment in a highly academic classroom was, “Idon’t understand why we’re doing all this stopping and starting. I’m just getting comfortable


and into it, and we have to stop and talk about it.” Although much frustration was observedamong many of the students in the early months of the school year, positive responses were alsonoted. Students were observed answering the questions posed by the teacher during the plannedpauses in the viewing of the videotapes. They were asking to watch sections of the videotapeagain to answer questions which they could not clearly explain after only a single viewing.Moreover, they adjusted quite quickly to the new pause-oriented integrated style of using thevideo technology. Researcher observations showed that the majority of students were untrou-bled by the new technique as early as November of the first semester.

Other treatment student reactions of interest include a growth in their discussion of chem-istry topics related to the world around them. Students began to ask more application and con-ceptual questions during the video-enhanced microunits. Questions referring to the “how do youdo . . .” of a problem or exercise were replaced by the “what if we were to . . .” proposals of ascenario. It was not uncommon to hear students voice that they did not realize chemistry wasinvolved in so many different subject areas or jobs or careers. Students began using the imagesseen on the videotape to answer questions, defend their thoughts, and propose new questionsinvolving the chemistry shown on each videotape.

Treatment student responses were gathered in two separate ways: student surveys and in-dividual student interviews. Four classrooms were randomly selected to be surveyed from all ofthe possible treatment classrooms. The four teachers’ classrooms yielded approximately 150 stu-dent responses to the student survey which was administered at the close of the study. Table 6displays student descriptive data from the population of students who completed the student survey.

The students were then queried as to their feelings about the World of Chemistry videotapesand the use of interactive video in the classroom. The parts of the videotapes given the highestrankings by the students were “Visual information instead of reading,” “Demonstrator and thedemonstrations,” “Chemistry shown in careers,” and “Real world chemistry issues.” Each ofthese characteristics of the videotapes was ranked positively (1–4 on a 1–8 scale) by over 60%of the students responding. The lowest ratings were bestowed upon the “Narrator (Nobel laure-ate) discussing chemistry” and “Scientists discussing issues.” Over 70% of the students rankedthese characteristics as the least appealing (5–8 on the same 1–8 scale) parts of each of thevideotapes. Finally, the student survey provided the students the opportunity to respond to thefollowing question: If you were told that your entire chemistry class would be taught over tele-vision, what would your reaction be, and why? This question addresses our concern with thedesire expressed by some to replace teachers entirely by media presentations. Most students re-


Table 6Student descriptors based on the student survey (self-reported)

Grade in School

9th 0.0% 10th 70.5% 11th 28.1% 12th 1.4%

This is My [ ] Time Taking Chemistry

1st 99.3% 2nd 0.7%

Top Reasons for Selecting Chemistry

Required course 75.3% I’ll need it for my career 14.0%

sponded favorably to the inclusion of television and its uniqueness. However, almost every stu-dent commented strongly on the need for the teacher to remain in the classroom. Less than onepercent of the students wished for the television chemistry course to become a substitute for theteacher. Comments such as, “I need my teacher so I can ask questions,” and “When I don’t un-derstand I need my teacher to explain . . . the TV can’t do that” were common themes throughmost of the student responses.

Informal student interviews supported the findings of the student survey. Approximately 50students were informally interviewed at random during the course of the yearlong study. Inter-viewed students generally felt that they learned from the videotapes and that the tapes showedchemistry in a way their teacher could not within the constraints of the classroom. Students ver-bally noted their interest in seeing the explosions, seeing the demonstrations, visiting industrialsites, watching the animated molecules, and seeing how chemistry is used in the real world aspositive characteristics of the video series. The narrator’s lengthy talks and the long interviewswith scientists were consistently labeled as the series’ weakest attributes. Students displayedstrong feelings when queried as to the merits of the technique of stopping and starting the video-tape as the instructional method employed by their teacher. Students explained how no otherteachers in their schools used the videotapes in this way. They uniformly felt that they learnedmore when the tape was stopped often and questions were asked. One student’s commentsummed up many students’ feelings well as she stated, “When I know she [the teacher] is go-ing to stop the tape, then I know I am supposed to be listening for stuff and that she will askquestions. It’s not like I have to watch this tape for the whole period and then I find out that Ididn’t even get the point. When my teacher stops the video she asks questions, and if no oneknows the answer, she rewinds the tape and we listen again. It takes some getting used to, butat least you learn that way.”

The student surveys and interviews added some color to the neutral attitude picture paint-ed by the quantitative data as well. Although treatment student attitudes did not show a mean-ingful change as measured by the High School Chemistry Opinion Survey, many of their ver-bal and written comments suggested their perception of the positive effect the integratedvideo-enhancement had on their chemistry experience. Many students spoke of the importanceof seeing chemistry in the real world. Others commented on the worth of seeing the many ca-reers in which chemistry plays an integral part. Still others documented the ability to see mi-croscopic and even smaller particles as “something we just can’t do in class” and as very “cooland important.” In tandem with this were the positive comments made about the animations.One student’s comment summed up many students’ feelings when he suggested, “I try to imag-ine in my mind what the molecules and atoms must be doing, but seeing the cartoon particlesmove around on the screen really helps me a lot.” Demonstrations were another area in whichthe video scored high in the eyes of the students. Many students recognized that because of safe-ty, money, or space, their teachers could not perform most of the chemical reactions they wit-nessed on the videotapes. Some of these student comments reference the area of understandingand achievement; however, it is important to note that all comments surfaced while studentswere writing or speaking about what they found positive, interesting, or powerful about thevideo series. Their chosen adjectives of “cool,” “neat,” “excellent,” “necessary,” “interesting,”“decent,” and “wild” were survey reflections of their attitudes regarding the content and quali-ty of the videotapes as well as how these tapes were integrated into their chemistry course.

Implications and Conclusions

As Kozma (1991) suggested, there is much more to be explored in the area of technology’sintegration into the instructional arena of schools. The results of this study are meaningful in


that they support the importance and effectiveness of appropriate media instructional use with-in the general high school chemistry classroom. It is important to note that unlike earlier stud-ies conducted over a shorter time frame, our results found a significant achievement change overthe course of an entire academic year. Through quantitative student achievement and attitude in-struments, classroom observations, teacher and student interviews, and participant surveys, a de-tailed dynamic picture developed. The data show how treatment teachers successfully integrat-ed video into their instruction in a fashion which produced significant achievement gains inchemistry content knowledge during individual microunits as well as across the span of the aca-demic year. The statistical results of the quantitative data revealed that students who receivedthe video-enhanced instruction scored significantly higher than those in the control classroomsacross all measures of achievement and attitude. The qualitative data composed of the inter-views, surveys, and observations provided depth to the picture (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992). Stu-dent feedback revealed a positive acceptance of the video as an instructional technique and asuccessful learning tool. Student interviews suggested the video enhancement was able to pro-vide for visual and verbal information that was novel, meaningful, and relevant to students’ livesoutside of school.

Attitudinal data showed that video was something the students said they enjoyed, learnedfrom, and wished they could see more of in the chemistry classroom. We were enabled by thequalitative information to better report personal attitudes and opinions of the student partici-pants. It is not enough to know there is a statistical advantage in using the video media provid-ed for by the World of Chemistry video series. The understanding of how and why there is a sta-tistical advantage provides meaning for chemistry teachers and multimedia researchers alike. Itis important to note that while student attitudes toward the videos and their use in class werepositive, their measured attitude toward chemistry was essentially unchanged. That is, studentsgenerally had a slightly positive attitude toward the subject at both the beginning and end of theyear. This result differs from other studies, but the positive results reported by earlier studiesmay be an artifact caused by a novelty effect. Earlier studies were short in duration and the useof video was a novelty in those classrooms. In our study, the video use became a regular andstandard teaching technique.

There is a strong national focus on increasing science achievement among the nation’syouth as well as a strong national commitment to the support of technology use through the ad-vent of the information superhighway. Attempting to effectively and efficiently interweave thetools of technology into the teaching of science in our schools thus seems to be a natural reac-tion to such national goals. Many studies to date have shown nominal achievement effects andmarginal to strong motivational effects among students who received a technological interven-tion within a classroom learning setting. Few of these studies have included the teachers in thedecision-making processes, inserviced the teachers sufficiently, or committed to a long-termtreatment and data collection experimental design; all of these were accomplished in this study.Moreover, few of the studies have addressed the important questions of why and how to infusetechnology into the teaching of science. This study addressed formative and summative mea-sures of student chemistry achievement, student attitudes toward chemistry, and the personalopinions and attitudes of the students regarding the infusion of video-enhanced integratedlessons into the teaching and learning of high school chemistry.

This study supports the caution expressed by Berger, Lu, Belzer, and Voss (1994) that it isnot enough simply to have multimedia and computers in the schools. Berger et al. stated thatsimply accepting technologies’ merits as a given will lead to wasted monies and time and poorinstruction, and produce detrimental effects on the learners. Baird (1988) suggested that re-quirements should be met if schools are to seriously consider the instructional uses of technol-ogy. These requirements include involving practicing teachers in the design and implementation


of the instructional technology program; contracting trainers, programmers, and cognitive sci-entists to support such a program; acquiring major funding to include design and implementa-tion of the technology program; continuing interaction between the teacher participants and theinstructional technology design team; and making available low-cost products for teacher pur-chase. This video-enhanced instructional integration study fulfilled these tenets. The data showthat video-enhanced instruction can be effective, but only when these requirements are met.Teachers need to be involved in the decision-making process, sufficiently inserviced in the useof technology, extensively supported for a long time after initial integration of the technology,and offered technologies easily available within their schools.

Historically, educational technology research has centered on the question, “Will the use oftechnology increase student learning over and above that of students not receiving instructionenhanced with technology?” Perhaps, as was suggested by Berger et al. (1994), the more ap-propriate question should be, “What are the most effective ways educators can use technologyto positively effect student learning?” This study provides a case in which technology was usedas a successful instructional tool within a traditional classroom setting, and challenges us to con-tinue to investigate settings in which technology’s attributes are being maximized for studentlearning.

The authors thank the Annenberg/CPB Foundation for their support of this work through Grant 1812-80843. They also thank the Prince George’s County Public Schools for their support and cooperation. Theadministration and especially the teachers were extremely helpful in, patient with, and understanding ofthe research process. Finally, they acknowledge the assistance of two undergraduate students, SamanthaDix and David Wren. Their help made many tasks much simpler for everyone.

References

Annenberg/CPB Collection. (1989). The world of chemistry. (Available from Saunders Col-lege Publishing, Philadelphia)

Baird, W.E. (1988). Status of use: Microcomputers and science teaching. In J. D. Ellis (Ed.),1988 AETS yearbook (pp. 85–104). Columbus: Ohio State University.

Berger, C.F., Lu, C.R., Belzer, S.J., & Voss, B.E. (1994). Research on the uses of technol-ogy in science education. In D.L. Gabel (Ed.) Handbook of research on science teaching andlearning (pp. 466–488). New York: Macmillan.

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (1992). Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duquid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learn-ing. Educational Researcher, 18, 32–42.

Clark, R.E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review Of Education-al Research, 53, 445–459.

Cohen, H.G. (1992). Two teaching strategies: Their effectiveness with students of varyingcognitive abilities. School Science and Mathematics, 92, 126–132.

Enger, J. (1976). Teaching introductory chemistry with videocassette presentations (ReportNo. 362). Urbana, IL: Illinois University, Office of Instructional Resources. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 135 362)

Gabel, D.L., & Bunce, D.M. (1994). Research on problem solving: Chemistry. In D.L.Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 301–326). New York:Macmillan.

Heikkinen, H.W. (1973). A study of factors influencing student attitudes toward the study


of high school chemistry. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland. Dissertation AbstractsInternational, DAI-A 34/11, May 1974, 7067.

Kozma, R.B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61, 179–211.Kulik, J.A., Kulik, C.L., & Cohen, P.A. (1980). Effectiveness of computer-based college

teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 50, 525–544.Levin, S.R. (1991). The effects of interactive video enhanced earthquake lessons on

achievement of seventh-grade earth science students. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction,18, 125–129.

McNeil, B.J., & Nelson, K.R. (1991). Meta-analysis of interactive video instruction: A 10year review of achievement effects. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18, 1–6.

Mitchell, J.V. (1985). The High School Subjects Tests. In J.V. Mitchell (Ed.), The ninth men-tal measurements yearbook (pp. 656–658). Lincoln: Nebraska Press.

Nagy, P., & Griffiths, A.K. (1982). Limitation of recent research relating Piaget’s theory toadolescent thought. Review of Educational Research, 52, 513–556.

National Science Board Commission on Precollege Education in Mathematics, Science andTechnology. (1983). Educating Americans for the 21st century: A plan of action for improvingmathematics, science and technology education for all American elementary and secondary stu-dents so that their achievement is the best in the world by 1995. Washington, DC: National Sci-ence Foundation.

Pressley, M. (1977). Imagery and children’s learning: Putting the pictures in developmen-tal perspective. Review of Educational Research, 47, 585–622.

Reeves, T.C. (1986). Research and evaluation models for the study of interactive video.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 13, 102–106.

Savenye, W.C., & Strand, E. (1989). Teaching science using interactive videodisk: Resultsof the pilot year evaluation of the Texas Learning Technology Group project. Paper presentedat the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dal-las, TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 308 838)

Schuell, T.J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational Research,56, 411–436.

Tobin, K., & Capie, W. (1981). Development and validation of a group test of logical think-ing. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 413–424.


Download - Effects of integrated video media on student achievement and attitudes in high school chemistry

Top Related