AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ...eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/2074/1/HamizerMohdSukorPFP2006.pdf3.14 Example of recoded response for Module 3 to illustrate scoring rubric 99 5.1

AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF INTERACTIVE MULTIMEDIA

TO ENHANCE DIVERGENT ANALYTICAL THINKING SKILLS

HAMIZER BIN MOHD SUKOR

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Faculty of Education

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

JULY 2006

v

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of an

interactive multimedia package, based on students’ design preferences in non-academic

domain content with an aim of enhancing students’ divergent analytical thinking skills in

a collaborative learning environment. This study defines divergent analytical thinking as

consisting of identifying and analyzing statements by considering different viewpoints.

The modus operandi of the package is the sharing of text files in an asynchronous mode

in which students’ responses can be publicly accessed and judged by their peers. It

utilized the IT infrastructure already set up in smart schools. A quasi-experimental

research design of nonrandomized control group, pre-test-post-test design was used. The

research samples consisted of 233 students in experimental and 81 students in control

groups consisting of Form Four students in three fully residential smart schools in

Johore. The students were divided into three groups, each working on one specific

module only. Data were gathered using pre-test and post-test responses, observations

and group interviews. ANOVA testing indicated that the package significantly enhanced

the experimental groups’ performance compared to the control group for all the three

modules (significant level α = 0.05). No correlation with gender was found for all the

three modules. The study indicated a positive correlation between levels of personal

satisfactions on features of the package design to the extent of initial enhancements in

performance score after first exposure to the package with respect to pre-test score. After

a second exposure to the package, the disparity began to disappear for some students.

The study also uncovered positive attitudinal transformation amongst the students in the

experimental group.

vi

ABSTRAK

Kajian ini bertujuan untuk membina dan menilai keberkesanan satu pakej

multimedia interaktif, berasaskan reka bentuk yang dicadangkan pelajar yang

merangkumi bidang di luar domain akademik dalam mempertingkatkan keupayaan

pelajar dalam pemikiran analitikal secara divergen di dalam suasana pembelajaran

kolaboratif. Pemikiran analitikal secara divergen didefinisikan sebagai mengenalpasti

dan menganalisis pernyataan dengan mengambil kira pelbagai perspektif. Modus

operandi pakej ini adalah perkongsian bebas fail teks di dalam mod asynchronous di

mana segala respon pelajar boleh diakses dan dipertimbangkan oleh rakan mereka

dengan memanfaatkan infrastruktur IT yang sedia ada di sekolah-sekolah bestari di

Johor. Kajian bercorak kuasi-eksperimental jenis non randomized control group, pre-

test-post-test design digunakan. Sampel pelajar adalah terdiri daripada 233 orang dalam

kumpulan rawatan dan 81 orang dalam kumpulan kawalan daripada pelajar Tingkatan

Empat daripada sekolah bestari berasrama penuh di negeri Johor. Pelajar-pelajar tersebut

dibahagikan kepada tiga kumpulan mengikut tiga modul yang disediakan. Data kajian

dikumpulkan menerusi ujian pencapaian pra dan pos, pemerhatian dan temu bual

berkumpulan. Analisis ujian ANOVA menunjukkan wujudnya perbezaan yang

signifikan dalam peningkatan skor pencapaian di dalam kumpulan rawatan berbanding

dengan kumpulan kawalan bagi ketiga-tiga modul yang digunakan (aras keertian α =

0.05). Tiada korelasi dengan jantina dapat dikesan, juga terdapatnya korelasi positif di

antara tahap kepuasan pelajar terhadap aspek reka bentuk perisian dengan tahap

peningkatan awal skor pencapaian selepas pendedahan pertama terhadap perisian. Tahap

peningkatan awal skor pencapaian tidak mempengaruhi pencapaian pelajar secara

vii

keseluruhan selepas pendedahan kali kedua. Kajian ini juga mendedahkan perubahan

sikap yang positif di kalangan pelajar yang didedahkan kepada perisian.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

DECLARATION ii

DEDICATION iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

ABSTRACT v

ABSTRAK vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

LIST OF TABLES xvii

LIST OF FIGURES xxvii

LIST OF APPENDICES xxxi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxxiv

ix

1 INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH PROJECT 1

1.1 Introductory Remarks 1

1.2 The Background to the Research Project 2

1.3 The Statement of the Problem 9

1.4 The Objectives of the Research Project 9

1.5 The Specific Questions to be Addressed 10

1.6 Theoretical Framework of the Study 14

1.7 Operational Framework 17

1.8 The Rationale of the Research Project 20

1.9 The Significance of the Research Project 21

1.10 Limitations of the Study 22

1.11 Definition of Some of the Main Terms Used 23

1.12 Summary 27

2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 28

2.1 Introduction 28

x

2.2 Types of Thinking Skills 29

2.3 Conceptions of Divergent Analytical Thinking 31

2.4 Direct Teaching of Thinking Skills 34

2.5 Formation of Thinking Skills within the Zone of

Proximal Development

35

2.6 Teaching Divergent Analytical Thinking Skills in a

Non-academic Context

37

2.7 Using Cognitive Apprenticeship Model to Simulate

Divergent Analytical Thinking Strategies

39

2.8 Use of Collaborative Learning to Enhance

Divergent Analytical Thinking

43

2.9 The Role of Graphic and Verbal Organizers and

CoRT1 Techniques as Cognitive Tools

44

2.10 Divergent Analytical Thinking and Self-Paced

Learning Using an Interactive Multimedia Package

50

2.11 Group Brainstorming in Computer-mediated-

Communication (CMC)

53

2.12 Constructivist Approach to the Design of the

Package

54

xi

2.13 Correlation between Gender and Divergent

Analytical Thinking Performance

56

2.14 Studies on Students’ Level of Contentment towards

Different Aspects of the Design of the Package

57

2.15 Some Issues in Instructional Design Principles 58

2.15.1 Interactivity as an Instructional Strategy 59

2.15.2 Screen Design 59

2.16 Summary 61

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 62

3.1 Introduction 62

3.2 The Research Methodology 63

3.2.1 Phase 1 (The Analysis Phase) 64

3.2.2 Phase 2A (Design Phase-The

Construction of the Treatment

Instrument)

65

3.2.3 Phase 2B (Design Phase-The Construction

of the Research Instruments)

66

xii

3.2.4 Phase 3A (Development Phase-

Storyboarding)

68

3.2.5 Phase 3B (Development Phase-Formative

Evaluation)

69

3.2.6 Phase 3C (Modification and Completion of

Package)

75

3.2.7 Phase 4 (Implementation Phase) 76

3.2.8 Phase 5 (Evaluation Phase) 79

3.3 Sampling 88

3.4 Research Instruments 92

3.4.1 The Analytical Thinking Skills Inventory

for Module 1, Module 2 and Module 3 (Pre-

test and First Post-test)

93

3.4.2 The Questionnaire on Students’ Preferences

in an Educational Multimedia Package

93

3.4.3 The Package Evaluation Form (for students) 93

3.4.4 The Package Evaluation Form ( for thinking

skills and instructional design experts)

94

3.4.5 The Observation Checklist 94

xiii

3.4.6 Interview Questions for Respondents 95

3.5 The Analytical Rubric Used to Measure

Performance Scores

96

3.6 Summary 100

4 DESIGN FEATURES OF THE PACKAGE 101

4.1 Introduction 101

4.2 The Authoring Software Used for the Development

of the Package

102

4.3 The Purpose and Content of Package 102

4.4 The General Structure of the Design of the Package 103

4.5 Accommodating Students’ Preferences into the

Design of the Package

106

4.6 Results of Experts’ Formative Evaluation on the


111

4.7 Incorporating the Principles of Cognitive

Apprenticeship Model into the Design

112

4.8 Elements of Instruction Used in the Design 118

4.8.1 Computer Text 119

xiv

4.8.2 Computer Graphics 120

4.8.3 Computer Animation 120

4.8.4 Digital Audio 121

4.8.5 Digital Video 122

4.9 Summary 123

5 RESULTS AND DATA ANALYSIS 124


5.2 Students’ Performances in Divergent Analytical

Thinking in Preliminary Study

125

5.3 Students’ Preference in an Educational Multimedia

Package

126

5.4 Quantitative Analysis of the Impact of CADATS on

Students’ Divergent Analytical Thinking

Performance In Accordance With Modules

130

5.4.1 Module 1 (COMPARE AND

CONTRAST)

130

5.4.2 Module 2 (PARTS OF A

WHOLE)

136

xv

5.4.3 Module 3 (PROPOSAL

PONDER)

141

5.5 Quantitative Analysis of Gender and Initial Gain in

Performance Score on Students’ Level of

Contentment towards Different Aspects of the


147

5.6 Quantitative Analysis of the Effects of Gender and

Initial Gain in Performance Score on the

Enhancements of Divergent Analytical Thinking

151

5.7 Patterns of Students’ Performance for each Module

Based on Categories of Students

153

5.8 The Extent of Success of the Module in the Package

in Enhancing Students’ Divergent Analytical

Thinking Skills

156

5.9 Results from Qualitative Analysis 157

5.10 Summary of Analyses of Results 166

6 DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS 170


6.2 OBJECTIVE 1: The Impact of CADATS on

Students’ Performance in Divergent Analytical

Thinking Skills

170

xvi

6.3 OBJECTIVE 2: Factors and Features of the Design

That Contributed to the Enhancement of Divergent

Analytical Thinking Performance Scores

174

6.3.1 Features of Design Used in the Package

that Stimulated Enhancements in Students’

Performance

178

6.4 OBJECTIVE 3: Correlation between Students’

Level of Contentment on the Design of CADATS

and the Enhancement of their Performance Scores

182

6.5 OBJECTIVE 4: Attitudinal Transformation in

Students’ Outlook on Thinking

184

6.5.1 Students’ Perception on the Effectiveness of

Meta-cognitive Instruction Used in

CADATS via Graphic and Verbal

Organizers

185

6.5.2 Students’ Perception on the Effectiveness of

Group Brainstorming Approach Used in CADATS

188

6.5 Conclusion 191

7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 192


7.2 General Conclusions 192

xvii

7.2.1 Students’ Divergent Analytical Thinking

Performance in Computer-supported

Environment

194

7.2.2 Implications of an Asynchronous Computer

Mediated Communication (CMC)

Environment on Students’ Disposition

195

7.3 Outcomes of the Research Project 197

7.4 Contributions of the Research Study to the

Advancement and Application of Knowledge

200

7.5 Recommendations for Future Research 200

7.6 Final Remarks 201

LIST OF REFERENCES 202

Appendices A – K 221

xviii

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Four levels of questioning to promote analytical thinking skills 32

2.2 The differences between real- life and school-based problems 38

2.3 Oral (verbal) organizers used in ‘Compare and Contrast’

(Module 1)

50

2.4 Oral (verbal) organizers used in ‘Parts of a Whole’ (Module 2) 50

3.1 Pearson’s correlation coefficient for Analytical Thinking

Skills’ Inventory between the first and second pilot study

68

3.2 Category of items in Package Evaluation Form (for students) 72

3.3 Bivariate correlation analysis of items of ‘Ease of Use’ to the

total score in the category in Package Evaluation Form (for

students)

72

3.4 Bivariate correlation analysis of items of ‘Design of Thinking

Activity’ to the total score in the category in Package

Evaluation Form (for students)

73

xix

3.5 Bivariate correlation analysis of items of ‘Design of

Motivational Elements’ to the total score in the category in

Package Evaluation Form (for students)

73

3.6 Bivariate correlation analysis of items of ‘Design of User

Interface’ to the total score in the category in Package


74

3.7 Bivariate correlation analysis of items of ‘Navigational

Design’ to the total score in the category in Package


74

3.8 Bivariate correlation analysis of total score for each category

to overall total score in Package Evaluation Form (for

students)

75

3.9 Summary of statistical analysis used in relation to the research

questions in the study

81

3.10 Breakdown of samples in experimental group according to

classes

91

3.11 Distribution of the number of experts used in the study 92

3.12 Example of recoded response for Module 1 to illustrate scoring

rubric

96


rubric

97

xx


rubric

99

5.1 Participants in study of students’ preferences in an educational

multimedia package according to gender

127

5.2 Mean scores recorded for items in study of students’

preferences in an educational multimedia package

127

5.3 Students’ comments attached to questionnaire in the study of

students’ preferences in an educational multimedia package

129

5.4 Independent samples T-Test analysis on pre-test means of

experimental and control group for Module 1

131

5.5 Independent samples T-test analysis on pre-test means of

experimental and control groups with respect to gender for

Module 1

132

5.6 Paired sample T-Test analysis on pre-test and first post-test

means of experimental and control group for Module 1

132

5.7 Independent samples T-Test analysis on first post-test means

of experimental and control group for Module 1

133

5.8 Independent samples T-test analysis on first post-test means of


Module 1

133

xxi

5.9 Independent samples T-test analysis on initial gain in

performance score of experimental and control groups with

respect to gender (pre-test scores as covariate) for Module 1

134

5.10 Independent samples T-test analysis on second post-test means

of experimental group with respect to gender for Module 1

135



137



Module 2

138

5.13 Paired sample T-Test analysis on pre-test and post-test means

for experimental and control group for Module 2

138

5.14 Independent samples T-test analysis on first post-test means of


Module 2

139




140


of experimental group with respect to gender for Module 2

141


experimental and control groups for Module 3

143

xxii


control and experimental groups with respect to gender for

Module 3

143

5.19 Paired sample T-Test analysis on pre-test and post-test means

of experimental and control groups for Module 3

144

5.20 Independent samples T-Test analysis on post-test means of


144

5.21 Independent samples T-test analysis on post-test means of


Module 3

145




146


of Experimental group with respect to gender for Module 3

147

5.24 Analysis of variance of students’ level of contentment towards

different aspects of the design of the package between

categories of students

149

5.25 To probe the effectiveness of each module by comparing

means of difference between second post-test and pre-test

performance scores between categories of students using

analysis of variance

151

xxiii

5.26 Analysis of variance of mean difference of second post-test

scores and pre-test scores of students to reveal the most

effective module in the package

156

5.27 General students’ responses from group interviews related to

the use of collaborative learning techniques in the package

157

5.28 Quantity of collaborative participation amongst student

respondents

159


the effectiveness of thinking tools used in the package

160


the instructional design of the package

162


the elements of motivational aspects incorporated into the

package

164

A1 List of problem scenarios posed to the participants of the

preliminary study

221

A2 Students’ answer sheet for Module 1 (Compare and Contrast) 222

A3 Students’ answer sheet for Module 2 (Parts of a Whole) 222

A4 Students’ responses to inventory used in the preliminary study

for Module 1 (Compare and Contrast)

223

xxiv

A5 Students’ responses from inventory used in the preliminary

study using Module 2 (Parts of a Whole)

229

C1 Students ‘think aloud’ responses for items in Module 1

(Compare and Contrast) in first pilot test

270

C2 Students ‘think aloud’ responses for items in Module 2 (Parts

of a Whole) in first pilot test

273

C3 Students ‘think aloud’ responses for items in Module 3

(Proposal Ponder) in first pilot test

276

C4 Calculation of Index of Difficulty and Index of Discrimination

for items in Analytical Thinking Skills Inventory for Module 1

(Compare and Contrast) after second pilot study

279



(Parts of a Whole) after second pilot study

280



(Proposal Ponder) after second pilot study

281

D1 Package evaluation results by students 282

D2 Comments made by students in formative evaluation of

prototype

283

D3 Results of formative evaluation of prototype by Instruction

Design Expert

285

xxv

D4General comments made by Instructional Design Expert on

prototype.

287

D5 Results of formative evaluation of prototype by content experts 288

D6 General comments made by content experts on prototype 289

D7 Results of formative evaluation of prototype by content expert:

Professor Abdullah b Hassan (Universiti Pendidikan Sultan

Idris)

290

E1 Score distribution of pre-test and post-test of control group for

Module 1

291

E2 Score distribution of pre-test, first post-test and second post-

test for experimental group of Module 1

292

E3 Score distribution of pre-test and post-test for control group of

Module 2

294



295

E5 Score distribution of pre-test and post-test for control group of

Module 3

297



298

xxvi

F1 Summary of students’ responses from interview questions after

exploring Module 1 (Compare and Contrast)

300


exploring Module 2 (Parts of a Whole)

304


exploring Module 3 (Proposal Ponder)

308

G1 Sample of top five recoded students’ responses from pre-test of

Module 1 (Compare and Contrast) in Bahasa Melayu

312


Module 2 (Parts of a Whole) in Bahasa Melayu

314


Module 3 (Proposal Ponder) in Bahasa Melayu

316

G4 Sample of top five recoded students’ responses from post-test

of Module 1 (Compare and Contrast) in Bahasa Melayu

318


of Module 2 (Parts of a Whole) in Bahasa Melayu

320


of Module 3 (Proposal Ponder) in Bahasa Melayu

322

G7 Sample of five problem scenarios created by students and

responses from their peers in second post-test for Module 1

(Compare and Contrast) in Bahasa Melayu

324

xxvii



(Parts of a Whole) in Bahasa Melayu

326



(Proposal Ponder) in Bahasa Melayu

328

xxviii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE

1.1 The structure of the theoretical framework 14

1.2 The structure of the operational framework 17

2.1 Progression through the four phases of the ‘zone of proximal

development’

36

2.2 Graphic and verbal organizers used in ‘Reason!Able’ to

nurture critical thinking skills for its users

47

2.3 An example of a graphic organizer used for ‘Compare and

Contrast’ (Module 1)

48

2.4 An example of a graphic organizer used for ‘Parts of a

Whole’ (Module 2)

49

3.1 A schematic representation of the research design 77

4.1 User interface previewing the screen layout for Module 3 104

xxix

4.2 User interface to viewing montage or direct access to

modules

104

4.3 The ‘User Registration’ interface 105

4.4 An example of a video representation of a problem scenario 113

4.5 An example of an audio representation of a problem scenario 113

4.6a Verbal organizer requiring students to state their perspective

in advance

114

4.6b CADATS acknowledging students’ declared perspective 115

4.7 Browsing other students’ responses for a particular problem

scenario

115

4.8 An example of a graphic organizer in Module 2 (Parts of a

Whole)

116

4.9 An example of a verbal organizer used in Module 3

(Proposal Ponder)

116

4.10 ‘Meter prestasi’ (Performance meter) to indicate students’

performance based on current score for the module in

progress

120

5.1 Profile of students’ level of contentment towards different

aspects of the design of the package

148

xxx

5.2 Trends of performance scores for Module 1 according to


153



154



155

6.1 Facility for full collaborative mode used in second posttests 173

6.2 An example of graphic organizer used in Module 3 181

6.3 Set of icons and pull-down menu for modules in CADATS 182

6.4 Meta-cognitive instructions used in Module 1 186



6.7 Example of list of students’ responses which were accessible

to all users

190

H1 Overall structure of CADATS 330

H2 Structure of introductory interface of CADATS 331

H3 General structure of modules in CADATS 332

H4 General structure of ‘Collaborative Learning’ segment 333

xxxi

J1 User interface in ‘Kenal’ segment 334

J2 User interface in ‘Demonstrasi’ segment 334

J3 User interface in ‘Ajar’ segment 335

J4 User interface in ‘Aplikasi’ segment 335

J5 User interface displaying other users’ responses before

embarking on a problem scenario

335

J6 User interface in ‘Refleksi’ segment 336

J7 User interface in online assessment of CADATS using

questionnaire-type document

336

J8 Interactive chart that portray one’s assessment scores of

CADATS against the average scores indicated by their peers

336

J9 User interface of free text-based feedback form on CADATS 337

J10 User interface of interactive quiz in CADATS 337

J11 User interface of ‘Collaborative Learning’ segment 337

xxxii

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A1 Divergent Analytical Thinking Inventory Used

in Preliminary Study

221

A2 A Recoded Representation of Students’

Responses from Divergent Analytical Thinking

Inventory Used in Preliminary Study (Set 1)

223

A3 A Recoded Representation of Students’

Responses from Divergent Analytical Thinking

Inventory Used in Preliminary Study (Set 2)

229

B1 Students’ Preferences in a Multimedia Package 250

B2 Package Evaluation Form (For Students) 252

B3 Package Evaluation Form (For Thinking Skills

Experts)

254

B4 Package Evaluation Form (For Instructional

Design Expert)

256

B5 Observational Checklist 258

xxxiii

B6 Interview Questions for Respondents 260

B7 Analytical Thinking Inventory For Module 1

(Pre-test)

261


(Pre-test)

264


(Pre-test)

267

C Results From Pilot Study 270

D Results of Formative Evaluation of Package 282

E Results of Summative Evaluation of Package 291

F Summary of Students’ Responses From Group

Interviews

300

G Examples of Students’ Responses From Pre-

and Post-Test Sessions

312

H1 Overall Structure of CADATS 330

H2 Structure of Introductory Interface of CADATS 331

H3 General Structure of Modules in CADATS 332

xxxiv

H4 General Structure of “Collaborative Learning’

Segment

333

J User Interfaces Used in CADATS 334

K List of Related Papers Presented by Researcher 338

Confirmation Letters by Experts for Formative

Evaluation of Package

Letters of Consent by Ministry of Education of

Malaysia and Johore Education Department to

Conduct Research

xxxv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CADATS - Collaborative Approach Divergent Analytical Thinking Simulator

CoRT1 - Cognitive Research Trust tools for divergent thinking

PMI - Plus, Minus, Interesting (One of the thinking tools in CoRT1)

CAF - Consider All Factors (One of the thinking tools in CoRT1)

C&S - Consequence and Sequel (One of the thinking tools in CoRT1)

OPV - Other Peoples’ Views (One of the thinking tools in CoRT1)

LAN - Local Area Network

p - Significance level for statistical analyses purposes

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH PROJECT

1.1 Introductory Remarks

This chapter introduces the reader to the research project. It attempts to explain

the background of the research, the statement of the problem, the research questions and

the significance of the study. It then gives a description of the structure of the research,

outlining the research and theoretical framework and finally, it defines some of the main

terms used in the thesis.

In Malaysia, relatively little has been done to investigate divergent analytical

thinking capabilities of its students in a collaborative, multimedia environment. In view

of the objectives of the present educational system to develop the quality of manpower

for it to enter the new knowledge era, a better understanding of the resourcefulness of

Malaysian students and factors which could affect or enhance it becomes more crucial.

The influence of personal variables such as gender, extent of enhancement in

performance as well as students’ level of contentment on the design of the package

provide useful information on the practicability of integrating multimedia technology

into the teaching of thinking skills which would be of concern to the educator and the

policy-makers. The development of the interactive multimedia package was based on

the premise that computer supported systems can support and facilitate group process

2

and group dynamics in ways that are not achievable by face-to-face, although not

designed to replace face-to-face communication. It was typically tailored for use by

multiple learners working at the same workstation or across networked machines in

asynchronous mode to support communicating ideas and information and providing

access to peer group’s responses to a specific problem. Since the package developed

utilized the concept of file sharing in a group brainstorming session, the study would

contribute significantly in the area of direct teaching of thinking skills in a computer-

supported collaborative environment.

1.2 The Background to the Research Project

As, for several reasons, divergent analytical thinking is not successfully

integrated within traditional classroom instruction; it is an interesting question, whether

it can be trained with computer-based instruction. In the era of the Internet and of

information society, “divergent analytical thinking” represents a major qualification.

Gilster (1997) regarded analytical thinking as the most important skill when using the

Internet, because the Internet is full of information gathered from multiple points of

views. Reinmann-Rothmeier (1998) and Mandl (1998), as quoted by Astle iner (2002),

found in a Delphi-study, that experts from economy and education nominated critical

and analytical thinking as the most important skill in knowledge management. Enis

(2002) saw critical and analytical thinking as “an important, perhaps the most important

of all present time educational tasks”. For achieving this complex goal, schools and

teachers have to be assisted from educational theory and research.

Educational research activities showed that analytical thinking is significantly

anchored within curricula and related teaching goal taxonomies, but that it is not

supported and taught systematically in daily instruction. The main reasons for this

shortcoming are that teachers are not educated in analytical thinking, that there are no

textbooks on analytical thinking available and that teachers have no time and other

3

instructional resources to integrate analytical thinking into their daily instruction

(Astleitner, 2002). This shortcoming counts a lot, because analytical thinking is highly

correla ted with students' achievements. Frisby (1992) reported correlation coefficients of

about 0.40 with the US-school achievement test (SAT). Also, Yeh and Wu (1992) found

similar correlation coefficients with other standardized school achievement tests and

grades. Very high correlation coefficients ranging from 0.45 to 0.47, or effect sizes

larger than 1 were reported for mathematics and science instruction. These correlations

have to be considered in educational research, even though they can be explained to

some degree with the moderating effect of student's intelligence.

In the field of education and instruction, this kind of research and related

approaches were used to develop programs for promoting thinking skills in students.

But, only very few of these programs realized a comprehensive “analytical thinking

program” in a way that is actually suggested by educational researchers and instructional

designers. According to Halpern (1998), such programs for promoting analytical

thinking should have the following features: 1) they should consider a disposition or an

attitude against analytical thinking; 2) they should regard analytical thinking as a general

skill that must be deepened within different subject matters or contexts; 3) they should

offer a segmented and instructionally fully developed training in specific skills; 4) they

should focus on all (or many) relevant subskills of analytical thinking and integrate

them; 5) they should include parts for stimulating the transfer of knowledge; 6) they

should support meta-cognitive skills for assisting self-regulation activities; 7) they

should not include formal, mathematical, etc. algorithms, but everyday language

problems; 8) they should train students for a several week's or month's period; and 9)

they should consider the organizational context of classroom instruction.

When traditional classroom instruction do not work, then it is obvious to ask for

alternative classroom scenarios. In such scenarios, the teacher should be assisted by

some additional help or the students should be able to work for their own and therefore

release the teacher from some duties. Such assisting and releasing functions can be

realized by computer-based instruction, especially CDROM and networked-based

4

instruction for collaborative learning. CDROM and Internet-based instruction showed to

be successful for learning in general and for lower order thinking skills in a literature

review compiled by Dillon and Gabbard (1998). But, such reviews were not yet made

for higher order thinking skills, like analytical thinking. It is an open question, whether

CDROM and Internet-based instruction can successfully promote analytical thinking in

daily instruction.

Jonassen (1996) postulated that mulimedia can be used as content and as tool (for

problem solving) in order to stimulate and support analytical thinking. Duffelmeyer

(2000) pointed out that relevant everyday problems infused into daily instruction could

be used to teach analytical thinking and to use multimedia to deliver analytical think ing

skills. Reimann and Bosnjak (1998), however, delivered some empirical data about the

efficiency of computer tools for analytical thinking. They used hypertexts as a tool to

stimulate and guide analytical thinking. In their study, students had to critic ize and to

expand an argument structure and had free access to a content-rich hypertext. But, using

the hypertext did unexpectedly not improve analytical thinking. The authors of this study

concluded that it is not sufficient to offer content information, but that analytical

thinking has to be supported by carefully designed instructional activities. This

assumption is also confirmed by a study from Glebas (1997), in which another computer

tool, a spreadsheet, was found to be ineffective for analytical thinking when it is not

integrated within an instructional context. Scarce (1997) found that the use of email —

as communication tool without any further instructional function — did not improve

analytical thinking in comparison with traditional classroom instruction. Santos and

DeOliveira (1999) found similar non-significant results when using the Internet as tool

for content presentation.

Within traditional learning environments, in contrast to many other findings,

positive effects of collaborative learning on analytical thinking were reported (e.g.,

Gokhale, 1995). These results are mainly due to the fact that carefully designed

collaborative learning generally delivers many different point-of-views, and therefore

many different learning experiences and multifaceted learning support. Newman,

5

Johnson, Cochrane, and Webb (1996) compared a traditional course with a course in

which an Internet-based discussion forum for assisting collaborative learning was used.

They found that using the discussion forum resulted in better analytical thinking,

because students had more learning materials available and related more often their

arguments to each other. Overall, students in the discussion forum condition experienced

more learning opportunities than students in the traditional course. Despite this

remarkable result, this study tells nothing about the design of learning environments for

promoting analytical thinking. Bullen (1998) delivered more background knowledge

about the design of learning environments based on students' surveys about using an

Internet-based discussion forum. A content analysis of students' messages showed,

however, that students did not acquire analytical thinking. The author gave several

reasons for this finding, but without testing them in a controlled setting. Also, students

missed specific instructional activities which were related to a certain teaching goal.

Sloffer, Dueber, and Duffy (1999) as quoted by Astleiner (2002) implemented a

synchronous and an asynchronous conferencing tool for promoting analytical thinking

which considered the suggestions given by Bullen (1998). In addition, they stimulated

analytical thinking by visualizing elements of the analytical thinking process. For

example, students had to assign to their messages symbols indicating important elements

of analytical thinking, like “hypotheses” or “evidence”. The authors also implemented a

mechanism that only those students could read other messages which accomplished their

own duties. Finally, a human tutor had to motivate students. Results showed that many

students delivered contributions with high-quality analytical thinking content and that

almost all students read the messages of the other students. However, this positive result

was not confirmed by comparable research stud ies.

To sum up, it can be stated that the effect of collaborative learning with

multimedia on analytical thinking, cannot be evaluated properly. The given results show

some instructional elements that can help to improve the situation, but these elements

have not yet been tested within controlled research. When using this type of new media

for promoting analytical thinking, then everyone has to be aware of the fact that

collaborative learning has to be enhanced by specific analytical thinking tasks and tha t

6

learning in such environments has to be managed comprehensively in respect to time,

group meetings, etc. Overall, the state-of-the-art of research on collaborative learning,

multimedia, and analytical thinking shows no consistent fmdings, but it shows that

preparing and managing this form of learning require significant additional time

resources and advanced technical skills. When having a closer look at the present

situation in daily school, then it is not realistic that analytical thinking can be promoted

by collaborative learning and related media, because the necessary effort in time,

preparation, etc. for teachers significantly exceeds the expectable learning effects for

students.

According to Chan et.al.(2001), divergent analytical thinking is vital in

producing ideational fluency (capability of producing many ideas), resistant to closure

(the ability to keep an ‘open mind’), flexibility (the ability to produce a large variety of

ideas), originality (the ability to produce ideas that are unusual), elaboration (the ability

to develop ideas) and abstractness of titles (the ability to transfer the essence of a figural

into another modality). Preliminary study done by the researcher revealed that students

did not give much importance to this aspect.

According to Astleiner (2002), analytical thinking consists of identifying and analyzing

diverse arguments and of logical reasoning. Paul (1997) defined analytical thinking as

“to break up a whole into its parts, to examine in detail so as to determine the nature of,

to look more deeply into an issue or situation. Students should continually be asked to

analyze their ideas, claims, experiences, interpretations, judgments, and theories and

those they hear and read." Analytical thinking forms the core of analytical thinking

which constitute a higher-order thinking skill mainly consisting of evaluating arguments

(Astleiner, 2002).

Overall, it seems very difficult to successfully implement divergent analytical

thinking skills into traditional classroom instruction. Ediger (1999) saw that problems

faced in engaging students in thinking were that: (1) Students want factual answers

rather than thinking things through when analyzing subject matter (2) Students are in a

7

hurry to discuss alternatives in and during time devoted to thinking (3) Students do not

wish to take time to deliberate on ideas presented (4) Students fail to engage in depth

thinking when coming up with alternative ideas (5) Students lack background

information and mind models to do analytical and analytical thinking. Thus, according

to Gifford (2000), a positive attitude as well as competence to be able to think

enthusiastically, methodically and successfully need to be inculcated amongst students.

The package is an attempt by the researcher to alleviate these problems amongst

Malaysian Form Four students, particularly in fully residential smart schools in the state

of Johore.

Past researches done in Malaysia seem to point out the lack of success in

propagating analytical and analytical thinking in schools. Asmah (1994) conducted a

survey of teachers’ knowledge, skills and attitudes in secondary schools in Kuching,

Sarawak. Results of the study include: (a) teachers have a minimal knowledge of basic

skills and tasks emphasized in analytical thinking. (b) a course on analytical thinking

had an effects on teachers' skills and attitudes towards analytical thinking. The findings

of this study suggested that analytical thinking instruction is best achieved by

incorporating it into present subjects but the delivery and effectiveness is wanting. This

phenomena was echoed in the research done by Lam (1994) which indicated a general

lack of analytical and analytical thinking skills amongst teachers and students.

Sadhna Nair (1998) conducted a case study on the thinking skills in a Malaysian

ESL (English as Second Language) context. The findings of this study indicated that

although teachers are aware of the importance of integrating thinking skills into the

English Language curriculum, they do not seem to have the appropriate knowledge and

skills needed to assist them in their attempts at integrating these thinking skills into

lessons successfully.

Rajendran (1998) set out to probe the teaching of higher-order thinking skills in

language classrooms in Malaysia. The contributions of the study to knowledge about

teacher learning include (1) Teachers perceived that they are not prepared to make this

8

innovation in their own classrooms. Teachers also lack the attributes to construct the

pedagogical content knowledge. The number of years teachers have been teaching

significantly influenced their perceptions of their knowledge and skills. (2). Many

factors such as teachers' own orientations towards teaching, curricular requirements, and

myths about teaching thinking inhibit the teaching of higher-order thinking skills. (3).

There is a dissonance between what teachers believe and carry out and the kind of

teaching recommended by reformers. Their own orientations towards teaching are often

not changed by their pre-service and in-service training. (4). All the four language

components are underutilized in promoting higher-order thinking skills. There is a

serious need for teachers to understand the importance of active student participation

and encourage it in their own classrooms. Some strategies, such as the problem solving

strategy, have the potential to promote higher-order thinking skills in language

classrooms. Teachers are not adequately prepared to use the infusion approach.

Another aim of the research was to examine degree of satisfaction on the design

aspects of the package and its correlation with performance gain in divergent analytical

thinking exercises. The style of display has a great influence on the learning

performance (Levin, 1997). Weiss (1994) divided multimedia interface into several

units: (1) the display interface (2) the conversation or interactivity interface (3) the

navigation interface and (4) the control interface. This study was based on the premise

developed by Crook (1991) that to extract the maximum educational potential of

computers in education, the interface design must create a positive emotional reaction or

intrinsic satisfaction amongst the users. Passig and Levin (2000) reported the presence

of gender differences in the level of contentment to varying designs of multimedia

interfaces which affect the user in terms of performance and the desire to use the

package. An in-depth study into the influence of these individualistic factors would thus

contribute in revealing their correlation with students’ performance in a Computer-

mediated-Communication (CMC) environment which forms the perimeters of this

project.

9

1.3 The Statement of the Problem

The primary focus of this research was to

1. analyse the difference in levels of proficiency in divergent analytical thinking

skills before and after exposure to an interactive multimedia courseware specially

developed for that purpose with regards to gender and level of contentment towards the

instructional design used in the package

2. examine students’ perception towards the instructional techniques adopted by the

courseware to upgrade divergent analytical thinking.

3. analyse the features in an interactive multimedia courseware that can contribute

to the enhancement of divergent analytical thinking skills of students

1.4 The Objectives of the Research Project

1. To conduct a quasi-experimental study to measure quantitatively any significant

improvement in students’ performance in divergent analytical thinking after exposure to

the developed interactive multimedia package with respect to

(i) control and experimental groups

(ii) gender

2. To investigate features of an interactive multimedia courseware package that

could contribute to the enhancement of divergent analytical thinking skills amongst it s

users

3. To investigate possible correlation between students’ performance scores on

divergent analytical thinking skills and their level of contentment towards the design of

the package.

10

4. To investigate students’ perception on the instructional design adopted by the

package that would contribute to a positive change to divergent analytical thinking.

In order to achieve the objectives stated above, the researcher has to

a. To conduct a preliminary study of the adeptness of students of Form Four in

fully residential smart schools in Johore towards divergent analytical thinking skills

using real- life ill-structured problems.

b. To develop an interactive multimedia package prototype using group brainstorming

technique in a networked environment based on meta-cognitive model through the usage

of graphic and verbal organizer and several CoRT1 tools. Three modules were

developed to represent three different facets of analytical thinking namely: Module 1:

Compare and Contrast; Module 2: Parts of a Whole and Module 3: Proposal Ponder.

This package is entitled ‘Collaborative-Approach Divergent Analytical Thinking

Simulator’ (CADATS).

c. To conduct formative and summative evaluation in order to produce a fully- tested

interactive multimedia package.

d. To conduct quantitative and qualitative analyses on students’ performance scores

and students’ perception of instructional methodologies adopted by the package.

1.5 The Specific Questions to be Addressed

(A) To test whether male and female students were equally competent in control and

experimental group in the pre-test:

Q1. Were there any statistically significant differences in performance in divergent

analytical thinking before exposure to the package between the control and experimental

group for each of the three modules?

11

Q2 Were there any statistically significant differences in performance in divergent

analytical thinking before exposure to the package for each of the three modules in the

package between male and female respondents in the control group?


analytical thinking before exposure to the package for each of the three modules in the

package between male and female respondents in the experimental group?

(B) To ascertain whether the package did significantly affect performance in

analytical thinking skills


analytical thinking scores for each of the three modules in the package between the pre-

test and first post-test scores for the experimental and control groups?


analytical thinking for each of the three modules in the package between male and

female respondents in the first post-test scores for the control group?


analytical thinking after exposure to the package (first post-test) for each of the three

modules in the package between male and female respondents in the experimental

group?

(C) To investigate whether any of the gender groups showed significant improvement

in first post-test performance scores with pre-test scores as covariate (initial

performance score gain) in the experimental and control groups:

Q7. Were there any statistically significant differences in initial performance gain in

divergent analytical thinking in first post-test for each of the three modules in the

package shown by the male and female respondents in the control group?

Q8. Were there any statistically significant differences in initial performance gain in

analytical thinking in first post-test for each of the three modules in the package shown

by the male and female respondents in the experimental group?

12

(D) To test whether any significant difference was shown by male and female

students on the second post-test in the experimental group:

Q9. Were there any statistically significant differences in performance on second

post-test scores (full collaborative mode) with respect to gender for experimental group?

For the next batch of research questions, students were categorized into 4 groups based

on gender and initial level of gain in performance score (first post-test minus pre-test

scores)

(1) Male-Low Gain (2) Male-High Gain

(3) Female-Low Gain (4) Female-High Gain

Low and High Gain were determined by the students’ rank in initial gain in performance

score with respect to the overall mean gain in performance score in the experimental

group only.

(E) To depict the level of contentment shown by different categories of students

towards different aspects of the design of the package:

Q10. What were the profiles of the level of contentment indicated by the different

categories of students in the experimental group after exposure to the package in terms

of the factors below:

a. Ease of use

b. Design of thinking activity

c. Design of motivational elements

d. Design of user interface

e. Navigational design of the interactive multimedia package

13

(F) To test whether any statistically significant difference was indicated by different

categories of students on their level of contentment towards different aspects of design of

the package:

Q11. For each category of students, was there any statistically significant difference in

the level of contentment indicated for each module in terms of the factors below:

a. Ease of use

b. Design of thinking activity

c. Design of motivational elements

d. Design of user interface

e. Navigational design of the interactive multimedia package

(G) To compare efficiency of the three modules in enhancing performance of students

in divergent analytical thinking capabilities:

Q12. Which category of students benefited the least and the most from exposure to the

interactive multimedia package based on the second post-test performance score for each

module?

Q13. Which one of the three modules was the most effective in terms of enhancing

students’ performance scores in divergent analytical thinking based on the second post-

test scores?

(H) Qualitative data to probe performance of different categories of students in using

the package:

Q14. How did students with different gender and levels of initial performance gain in

divergent analytical thinking scores view the group brainstorming techniques as well as

the graphical and verbal organizers employed in the interactive multimedia package?

Q15. What were the features of the package that contributed to the enhancement of

divergent analytical thinking skills amongst its users?

14

‘KADAR’METHODOLOGY OF

TEACHINGTHINKING SKILLS

COGNITVEAPPRENTICESHIP

MODEL

1.6 Theoretical Framework of the Study

Developing packageusing the ADDIE Model

Worked examplesInteractivitybetween individualsActivation of students prior knowledge and experienceIll-structuredproblems with many possible answersUse of motivationalelementsUse of graphic and verbal organizers as scaffolds

KENALIntroduce the skillAJARTeach the skillDEMONSTRASIDemonstrate the skillAPLIKASIApply the skillREFLEKSIMake decision using the products

ANALYSES ON THE EFFECTIVENESS

OF THE PACKAGE

Figure 1.1 The structure of the theoretical framework

The methodology adopted in developing the interactive multimedia package was

based on the ADDIE model as shown in Figure 1.2 in the operational framework. The

framework for the development of the multimedia prototype consisted of the five

developmental stages of the ADDIE model, namely:

• Analysis

• Design

15

• Development

• Implementation

• Evaluation

The research project involved the preliminary needs analysis, exploring methods

for direct teaching of thinking skills, constructing instruments to divulge divergent

analytical thinking skills of respondents and checking for validity and reliability, design

and development of prototype, content validation by experts, implementation and

evaluation of an interactive multimedia package in analytical thinking skills using three

techniques; verbal and graphic organisers and several CoRT1 tools. These are strategies

adopted by local experts in thinking skills and are found in numerous documents

published by the Ministry of Education (Som and Mohd Dahlan, 1998 and Poh, 2000).

The underlying concepts that served as underpinnings for this study are namely:

• Cognitive Apprenticeship Model

• KADAR methodology of direct teaching of thinking skills

a. Cognitive Apprenticeship Model

Cognitive apprenticeship is situated within the social constructivist paradigm. It

suggests students to work in teams on projects or problems with close scaffolding of the

instructor. The main characteristics of cognitive apprenticeship have been identified and

elaborated upon by De Corte (1990) in his analysis of powerful learning environments.

De Corte explained how powerful learning environments allow students to move from

apprentices to master or expert status. For example, students need to observe an expert

performing the task (modeling) and to be given hints and feedback on their own

performance (coaching). They need to be given direct support (scaffolding) in the early

stages of learning a task and to move gradually from other-regulation to self-regulation

(fading). Students also need the opportunity to articulate their own cognitive and meta-

cognitive strategies and to make comparisons with other learners; they should explore,

identify and define new problems within a domain and be shown how strategies acquired

16

in one domain can be used to learn and solve problems in another domain (teaching for

transfer).

Cognitive apprenticeship model demand that student tasks to be slightly more

difficult than students can manage independently, requiring the aid of their peers and

instructor to succeed (Collins, Brown and Holum, 1991). Gilliani (2000) outlined the

phases that would lead to a student achieving his full potential, which included ‘reliance

on others’, ‘collaborate with others’, ‘self-reliance’ and lastly ‘internalization’ of

knowledge and skills. These phases formed the basis of the instructional design of the

interactive multimedia package.

Proponents of collaborative learning claim that the active exchange of ideas

within small groups not only increases interest among the participants but also promotes

thinking. According to Gokhale (1995), there was evidence that collaborative teams

achieve at higher levels of thought and retain information longer than students who work

quietly as individuals. The shared learning gives students an opportunity to engage in

discussion, take responsibility for their own learning, and thus become analytical and

analytical thinkers (Gokhale, 1995).

b. KADAR methodology of direct teaching of thinking skills

This strategy was introduced by Phillips (1997) for teaching thinking skills and is

referred to as KADAR. The acronym appropriately stands for KENAL (Introduce),

AJAR (Explain), DEMONSTRASI (Demonstrate), APLIKASI (Apply) and REFLEKSI

(Reflect). A slight modification was made in the developed interactive multimedia

package in that the sequence of instruction was modified to KDAAR based on the

researcher’s own findings conducted in the formative evaluation stage of the

effectiveness in its implementation. The output from the exercise would then be

scrutinized by the respondents in the ‘decision-making’ stage (REFLEKSI). The

respondents would then be assessed by the scores they accumulate during the session.

17

1.7

Ope

rati

onal

Fra

mew

ork

Ana

lysi

s P

hase

P

erfo

rmed

test

s to

inve

stig

ate

dive

rgen

t ana

lytic

al th

inki

ng p

atte

rn a

nd

p

erfo

rman

ce le

vel o

f For

m F

our

stud

ents

(34

stu

dent

s)

Res

ults

obt

aine

d fr

om te

sts

and

inte

rvie

ws

tabu

late

d an

d co

nclu

sion

sdr

awn

Stu

dent

s’ p

refe

renc

es in

an

educ

atio

nal m

ultim

edia

cou

rsew

are

pack

age

expl

ored

D

esig

n P

hase

Pre

pare

d st

oryb

oard

Inte

grat

ed

rele

vant

theo

ries

and

stra

tegi

es a

s de

sign

pla

tform

Use

of t

ools

for d

eliv

erin

g co

nten

t: G

raph

ic a

nd V

erba

lOrg

aniz

ers,

CoR

T1

Pre

parin

g m

edia

ele

men

ts s

uch

as a

udio

and

anim

atio

nsD

esig

n of

ana

lytic

al r

ubric

to m

easu

re p

erfo

rman

ce s

core

s of

pre

and

pos

t-te

sts

Pre

pare

d A

naly

tical

Thi

nkin

g S

kills

Inve

ntor

y an

d te

st fo

r re

liabi

lity

and

valid

ity

18

D

evel

opm

ent P

hase

Use

d of

Aut

horw

are

6 as

pla

tform

for

impl

emen

ting

stor

yboa

rd a

nd

com

pilin

gpa

ckag

e

Con

tent

val

idat

ion

by e

xper

ts o

n th

ree

sepa

rate

mod

ules

of a

naly

tical

th

inki

ng

For

mat

ive

eval

uatio

n by

res

pond

ents

; im

plem

ent r

esul

ts o

f eva

luat

ion

onpa

ckag

e de

velo

pmen

t

Impl

emen

tatio

nP

re-t

est,

Pos

t-te

st a

nd S

econ

d P

ost-

test

on

And

Eva

luat

ion

Pha

sedi

verg

ent a

naly

tical

thin

king

ski

ll le

vels

of r

espo

nden

tson

thre

e se

para

tem

odul

es

Qua

ntita

tive

eval

uatio

n of

pac

kage

by

resp

onde

nts

Qua

litat

ive

case

stu

dies

(st

ruct

ured

gro

up in

terv

iew

s, in

-dep

th in

terv

iew

san

d ob

serv

atio

n ch

eckl

ist)

to p

robe

atti

tudi

nal t

rans

form

atio

n af

ter

expo

sure

to p

acka

ge

Fig

ure

1.2

The

str

uctu

re o

f th

e op

erat

iona

l fra

mew

ork

19

The structural content underlying the development of the package was based on

the cognitive apprenticeship model using a modified approach of teaching thinking skills

namely KADAR, proposed by Phillips (1997). Three modules representing three

different facets of analytical thinking were constructed using graphic and verbal

organizers as tools of thinking. The modules were Compare and Contrast (Module 1),

Parts of a Whole (Module 2) and Proposal Ponder (Module 3). Graphic and verbal

organizers as laid out by Poh (2000) and Som and Mohd Dahlan (1998) formed the

backbone for Module 1 and Module 2, whilst the researcher constructed the graphic and

verbal organizers for Module 3. Several CoRT1 tools were implanted into the package

to facilitate divergent thinking. Elements of multimedia, interactivity and collaborative

learning were then installed and undergone formative evaluation. The computer

laboratories in three fully residential smart schools in Johore were chosen for the venue

of the study to simulate collaborative learning in a intranetworked environment, where

sharing of text files within a group of work stations were possible. Results of the

formative evaluation by students and expert teachers were used to rectify weaknesses in

the design. The interactive multimedia package developed as a vehicle for divergent

analytical thinking skills enhancement then underwent summative evaluation to

determine its effectiveness. The respondents from the randomly assigned control and

experimental groups were administered pre-testing to determine levels of divergent

analytical thinking performance using the ‘pencil and paper’ technique. Each student

was tested using only one module. Their performance was evaluated based on ideational

fluency and flexibility using an analytical rubric devised by the researcher and validated

by expert teachers in the field of ‘Analytical and Creative Thinking’. After a time lapse

of two to three weeks, the control groups underwent post-tests whilst the experimental

groups were then given the opportunity to explore the package based on the same

module that they were initially tested in the pre-test. Respondents’ behavioural

dispositions were documented using an observational checklist. A second post-test were

administered the next day where the respondents participated in a fully collaborative

session. In this session, respondents create their own problems or scenarios and their

peers would then have a go at them. Responses were recoded and scrutinized by the

analytical rubric to calculate the performance score. Structured group interviews were

20

conducted in which the members were picked based on types of modules exposed. The

transcripts were then recoded and summarize to include all the respondents’ experiences

and perceptions towards the package based on their responses from the pre-determined

interview questions. Another session of a smaller scale in-depth group interviews was

conducted in which the members were picked from different groups of respondents

based on gender and level of gain in performance scores after the first post-tests were

conducted. The transcripts were then analyzed qualitatively by cross-checking responses

from different categories of students with the previous larger-scale group interviews’

feedbacks to explore in-depth their personal experiences and any contrasting outlook on

the effectiveness of the package.

1.8 The Rationale of the Research Project

Many important aspects of school life and home learning climate were

predominantly motivated by the need to do well in examinations which curtailed

students’ mental process to conforming to ideas presented to them from the textbooks

and other main stream resources (Nickerson, 1988). In addition, Kartini (1998)

deliberated on the lack of emphasis given by trainee teachers on thinking skills’

instructions in teaching colleges in the country. Results from other studies done locally

exposed a low command of analytical thinking skills amongst Malaysian students

(Safiah, 1996; Ravi, 1999; Razali, 1999).

One of the primary considerations in the Integrated Curriculum for

Secondary School (KBSM) is ‘to develop and enhance (students’) intellectual

capacity with respect to rational, analytical and creative thinking’ (Ministry of

Education, 1989). This is in line with the National Education Philosophy. The need to

develop and enhance thinking skills amongst students is important and pressing

so as to achieve one of the goals of Vision 2020 which is to produce a thinking

society. An integrated or infusion approach of teaching thinking skills is adopted

21

which involves the inclusion of thinking skills instruction within the subject

matter ever since. Thus, the need to inculcate the culture and skills in thinking is

ranked highly in the educational achievements of Malaysian students. Roman

(2003) deliberated the skills that the 21st century worker will need and amongst them

are logical and intuitive analytical skills.

Evidence that is available from the literature on scientific reasoning suggests

significant weakness in methodical thinking within school students that have

implications on their thinking skills (Beyer, 1987). Cognitive strategies, even though

they have been the focus of attention in scientific reasoning research, may sadly be the

most analytical element that is lacking in our students’ forte. This fact became apparent

from the pre-test results administered in this study. The researcher thus raised the

possibility that students at the middle school level have a non-existent mental model that

underlies weakness in methodical thinking, and that impedes the ir analytical thinking

capability.

Why should we be concerned about students’ adeptness in divergent analytical

thinking in our classrooms? Obviously we want to educate citizens of Malaysia whose

decisions and choices will be based upon a multitude of ideas that span across a wide

ranging school of thought. Maintaining a high level of productivity in today’s modern

society requires one to be analytical and analytical in processing ideas as well as

capability in utilizing a number of different strategies of thinking.

1.9 The Significance of the Research Project

Indeed, very few studies have been conducted using newer instructional

techniques, such as by means of multimedia package in a networked environment using

the collaborative learning approach. From the researcher’s literature search, it can be

generalized that the teaching of skills, especially in divergent analytical thinking skills,

22

is still very much an emerging field of study in Malaysia. Since the aim of the current

research project was to develop multimedia technology to meet the needs of Malaysian

students and teachers, it was felt that the project would contribute to the literature on the

teaching of thinking skills using interactive multimedia technology. The correlation

between students’ degree of contentment towards different aspects of design used in the

package and their improvements in performance would also throw some light on issues

regarding factors that could influence students’ readiness and acceptance to use a new

medium of instruction.

1.10 Limitations of the Study

Some of the limitations of the study will now be reviewed.

The first limitation of the study is the lack of generalization. The results could

not be generalized outside fully residential smart schools in Johore, since the study only

involved students of those schools. Entry requirements and socio-cultural background

of these schools are not representative of day schools in the country. Superior academic

excellence is a dominant factor of the respondents involved in the study. Limited

exposure to social environment might have inhibited diversity in students’ responses.

Although variance was homogeneous in this study through the method of sample

selection, it would be interesting to look into a more heterogeneous population.

Secondly, the number of scenarios posed to the respondents for each module was

limited to six. This was due to the time constraint involved in each session. Respondents

showed a much more positive eagerness in exploring the package in the second post-test

when they tried out scenarios or problems created by their peers which was more diverse

in nature, more relevant to their personal interests and much greater in number.

23

Thirdly, the effects of the package on enhancing students’ performance and any

attitudinal change that followed would be seen as short term effect. This is due to the

short length of exposure time for respondents to explore the package.

1.11 Definition of Some of the Main Terms Used

1. Divergent Analytical Thinking Skills

It is regarded as a thinking exercise in which students generate as much verbal

ideas as possible on a task based divergent thinking paradigm, universally known as

ideational fluency. Since the scope of this project is focussed on analytical thinking

based on peer group’s views as the knowledge base and involved only verbal tasks, the

term divergent analytical thinking was coined. Ainon and Abdullah (1995) pointed out

that analytical thinking is an effort to perceive a situation in detail, breaking up entities

into its components, to compare and contrast, to find the root cause of a problem and to

find correlations between facts and situations. Modules in the package facilitate the

generation of ideas either from one’s own thought or reproduce ideas generated from

his/her peers. The performance score would take into account the number of ideas

generated by a student (ideational fluency) and the number of view points taken

(ideational flexibility). The quality of ideas generated is not judged.

The elements in the interactive multimedia package are comprised of three

modules on analytical thinking skills namely: Comparing and Contrasting, Relationship

between Parts to a Whole and Proposal Ponder. It is an endeavor to cover some and not

all aspects of analytical thinking skills.

The items posed to the students are designed to generate analytical and creative

thinking in considering all possible solutions and view points. The ability to generate

24

statements through the use of graphic and verbal organizers with the utilization of

CoRT1 techniques and peers’ responses as knowledge base to proliferate these ideas will

be the success indicator of the multimedia package.

The analytical rubric used to measure divergent analytical thinking performance

scores are illustrated in Section 3.5.

2. Graphic organizers

It is defined as a mapping framework or symbolic guidelines to organize factual

data and highlight relationships between them (Poh, 2000). Module 1 (Compare and

Contrast) and Module 2 (Relationship between Parts to a Whole) of the developed

package made use of graphic organizers taken from Poh Swee Hiang’s (2000) “KBKK:

Kemahiran Berfikir Secara Kritis dan Kreatif” and Som and Mohd Dahlan’s (1998)

book of the same name with a slight modification by the researcher of this study. The

graphic organizer used in Module 3 (Proposal Ponder) is constructed specially for this

study by the researcher. Please refer to Figures 2.3, 2.4 and 4.9 for diagrammatic

illustrations.

3. Verbal organizers

Som and Mohd Dahlan (1998) viewed the importance of planting probing

questions in thinking as “a tool to stimulate a person to procure information, to explore

understanding, to generate interest and evaluate one’s aptitude on a subject.” The use of

verbal organizers in this study is not in the usual form of questions posing but statements

generated by the package based on respondents input to confirm, substantiate and verify

ideas put forward. This constituted a meta-cognitive element in the package to facilitate

reflection on individual responses. Please refer to Tables 2.3 and 2.4 and Figure 4.9 for

diagrammatic illustration.

25

4. Interactive multimedia

Interactive multimedia refers to an interactive learning material incorporating

different, integrated types of media which is interactive in nature. Hofstetter (1995)

defined multimedia as “a computer to present and combine text, graphics, audio, and

video.” Hofstetter also maintained: “If one of these components is missing, you do not

have multimedia. For example, if a computer does not provide interactivity, you have

mixed media, not multimedia”. Vaughan (1999) further strengthened the definition of

multimedia, and described it as “woven combinations of text, graphic art, sound,

animation, and video elements. When you allow an end user – the viewer of a

multimedia project – to control what elements are delivered, and when, it is called

interactive multimedia.” The use of audio and video materials as well as appropriate

Flash animations and helpful navigational buttons will be highlighted in the package.

5. Analytical thinking skills performance score and initial performance score gain

The respondents’ performance in the pre-test, first post-test and second post-test

sessions are based upon the total number of statements produced by the respondents for

the module that they worked on. These scores will be further amplified if the responses

given are categorically different or from different view points. This is to cater for

ideational fluency and flexibility of the responses key- in. This analytical rubric used will

be further elaborated in Chapter 4. The initial gain in performance score would

constitute the difference between first post-test and pre-test scores to indicate the extent

of initial impact of the package and used later to correlate with students’ level of

contentment on the design of the package.

6. CoRT1 tools

CoRT stands for Cognitive Research Trust initiated by Edward de Bono. CoRT1

tools are used in education to train the mind to be more creative, constructive and

analytical by widening one’s perception or views (Poh, 2000). It is composed of seven

26

techniques but only PMI (Plus, Minus, Interesting), CAF (Consider All Factors), C&S

(Consequence and Sequel) and OPV (Other Peoples’ Views) were used in this study.

These tools constitute the ‘divergent’ factor of the package.

7. Collaborative approach in an intranetworked environment

Students are individually involved in authentic inquiry such as organizing ideas

and resources, questioning and interpreting responses and decision making. Responses

and feedbacks by peers are open to free access by all the members of the group through

the sharing of text files stored on the network server in asynchronous mode. Thus, each

and every member in the Local Area Network would collaboratively contribute ideas

towards the problems at hand.

8. Problem scenarios

Questions in the pre-test and post-test are posed using everyday situational

problems that are seen relevant to the students’ past experiences or knowledge base.

These ill-structured questions do not have a right or wrong answer attached to it and is

entirely dependent on the students’ own discretion to provide as many responses as they

possibly could. Nevertheless, towards the end of each problem scenario, the students

would have to reflect and decide on the best response as they saw fit to represent the

outcome to the problem. This was to provide a purpose for the whole exercise as well as

to accommodate for analytical thinking and decision making skills but would not affect

their performance scores.

27

1.12 Summary

The study is aimed at investigating the feasibility of providing students with an

alternative mode of enhancing divergent analytical thinking skills through multimedia

driven, collaborative learning approach. The possible relationships between students’

level of analytical thinking skills, gender and their level of contentment towards

different aspects of the design of the package were also explored. It is imperative that

the design of research is capable of magnifying differences in effectiveness of the

package between different profiles of students so as to ensure a profound and

multifaceted study can be carried out successfully, thus specific strategies were

employed in the data analysis stage to highlight any significant differences that might

have existed between them.

202

List of References

Ainon Mohd and Abdullah Hassan (1995). Kepintaran Daya Cipta & Kemahiran

Berfikir. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publications.

Albion, P. R. and Gibson, I. W. (1998). Designing Problem-Based Learning Multimedia

for Teacher Education. In S. Mcneil et al. (eds) Technology and Teacher

Education Annual 1998. 1240-1244.

Arburn, T. M., and Bethel, L. J. (1999). Assisting At-risk Community College Students

Acquisition of Critical Thinking Learning Strategies. Paper presented at the

Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science

Teaching, Boston, 1999. In Astleiner, H. (2002). Teaching Critical Thinking

Online. Journal of Instructional Psychology. 29 (2): 53-75.

Asmah Omar (1994). Critical Thinking Skills Across the Curriculum. A Survey of the

Teachers’ Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes in Secondary Schools in Kuching,

Sarawak. University of Houston, Texas: M.Ed. Thesis.

Aspillaga, M. (1991). Screen Design – Location of Information and Its Effects on

Learning. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction. 18(3): 89-92.

Astleiner, H. (2002). Teaching Critical Thinking Online. Journal of Instructional

Psychology. 29 (2): 53-75.

203

Baharuddin Aris. (1999). The Use of Information Technology in Education: Using an

Interactive Multimedia Courseware Package to Upgrade Teachers’ Knowledge

and Change Their Attitudes. The Robert Gordon University, UK: Ph.D.

Dissertation.

Bailey, D. H. (1996). Constructivism and Multimedia: Theory and Application;

Innovation and Transformation. International Journal of Instructional Media.

23(2): 161-166.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman.

In Solvberg, A.M. (2002). Computer-related Control Beliefs and Motivation: A

Panel Study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education .35(4): 473-487.

Barrett, E. and Lally, V. (1999). Gender Differences in an On-line Environment.

Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning. 15: 48-60.

Barron, A. and Baumbach, D. (1990). A CD-ROM Tutorial : Training for a New

Technology. Educational Technology. 30 (6): 20-23.

Beyer, B. (1987). Practical Strategies for the Teaching of Thinking. Boston: Ally and

Bacon Inc.

Black, J. B, et al. (1994). Constructivist Design of Graphic Computer Simulations.

Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the

National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and

Technology. 1994. Nashville, TN.

Brandon, P. R. (1988). Recent Developments in Instructional Hardware and Software.

Educational Technology. 28 (10): 7-12.

204

Brookfield, S. (1997). Developing Critical Thinkers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Brown, R.G. (1991). Schools of Thought. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cited in

Rojewski, J and Schell, J.W. (1994). Cognitive Apprenticeship for Learners with

Special Needs. Remedial & Special Education. 15(4): 234-244.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of

Learning. Educational Researcher.18 (1): 32-42.

Bullen,M.(1998). Participation and Critical Thinking in Online, University Distance

Education. [WWW document] URL:

http://cade.athabascau.ca/voll13.2/bullen.html

Caine, R., and Caine, G. (1991). Making Connections: Teaching and the Human Brain.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Cairncross, S. and Mannion, M. (2001). Interactive Multimedia and Learning: Realizing

the Benefits. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 28(2). 156-

165.

Cervero, R. M. (1992). Professional Practice, Learning, and Continuing

Education: An Integrated Perspective. International Journal of Lifelong

Education. 11(2): 91-101.

Chan, D.W. et al. (2001). Assessing Ideational Fluency in Primary Students in Hong

Kong. Creativity Research Journal. 13(3): 359-365.

Clark, R. and Craig, T. (1992). Research And Theory On Multi-Media Learning Effects.

In: Giardina, M. (Ed.), Interactive Learning Environments; Human Factors and

Technical Consideration on Design Issues. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

205

Collins, A. (1991). Cognitive Apprenticeship and Instructional Technology. Summary

by Laconya Ruby: For Educational Technology, Winter 1994.

Collins, A., Brown, J.S. and Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive Apprenticeship: Making

Thinking Visible. American Educator. 6(46).

Crook, C. (1991). Computers for Pre-School Children: The Role of Direct Manipulation

Interface. Early Child Development and Care. 69: 5-18.

Crowe, H. A. and Palmera-Leynes, A. T. (1995). Computers in the Classroom –

Learning Goals and Learning Theories. Presented at the SEAMEO INNOTECH

International Conference, 1995, Manila, Philippines. In Baharuddin,A. (1999).

The Use of Information Technology in Education: Using an Interactive

Multimedia Courseware Package to Upgrade Teachers’ Knowledge and Change

Their Attitudes. The Robert Gordon University, UK: Ph.D. Dissertation.

Crowl, T. K. (1996). Fundamentals of Educational Research. Madison, WI: Brown &

Benchmark.

De Corte, E. (1990). Towards Powerful Learning Environments for the Acquisition of

Problem Solving Skills. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 5: 5–19.

De Jong, T.and Van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific Discovery Learning With

Computer Simulations Of Conceptual Domains. Review of Educational

Research. 68: 179-201.

De Simone, Scmid, R.F. and McEwen, L.A. (2001). Supporting the Learning Process

with Collaborative Concept Mapping Using Computer-Based Communication

Tools and Processes. Educational Research and Evaluation. 7(2): 263-283.

206

Delcloss, V. R. and Hartman, A. (1993). The Impact of an Interactive Multimedia

System on the Quality of Learning in Educational Psychology: An Exploratory

Study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education. 26(1): 83-94.

D'Ignazio, F. (1992). Multimedia Sandbox: Teaching, Learning, and the Transformation

of Knowledge. The Computing Teacher. 54-55.

Dillon, A.and Gabbard, R.(1998). Hypermedia as an Educational Technology. A Review

of the Quantitative Reseach Literature on Leraner Comprehension, Control and

Style. Review of Educational Research. 68: 322-349.

Donnely, R. and Patterson, G. (1997). The Planning and Development of an Interactive

Computerized Information Technology Tutor for Postgraduate Students.

Innovations in Education and Training International. 34 (3): 194-199.

Duffelmeyer, B. B. (2000). Critical Computer Literacy: Computers In First-Year

Composition As Topic And Environment. [WWW document]. URL

http://corax.cwrl.utexas.edu/cac/current_issue/duffelmeyer. html

Ediger, M. (1999). The Pupil in the Rural School. Journal of Instructional Psychology.

26 (4): 280-285.

Ellington, H. I. (1997). Flexible Learning Approaches in Practice. Proceedings of

Flexible Learning in Tertiary Education, Keynote presentations at Napier

University, Edinburgh, Scotland. In Baharuddin, A. (1999). The Use of

Information Technology in Education: Using an Interactive Multimedia

Courseware Package to Upgrade Teachers’ Knowledge and Change Their

Attitudes. The Robert Gordon University, UK: Ph.D. Dissertation.

207

Edwards, J. (1991). The Direct Teaching of Thinking Skills. In Evans, G. (ed.) Learning

and Teaching Cognitive Skills. Victoria, Australia: ACER. 87-106.

Enis, R.H. (2002). A Super Streamlined Conception of Critical Thinking. [WWW

document] URL: http://www.criticalthinking.com/articles.html

Faryniarz, J. V., and Lockwood, L.G. (1992). Effectiveness Of Microcomputer

Simulations In Stimulating Environmental Problem Solving By Community

College Students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 29: 453-470.

Ford, N. and Chen, S. Y. (2001). Matching/ mismatching Revisited: An Empirical

Study of Learning and Teaching Styles. British Journal of Educational

Technology. 32(1): 5-22.

Frear, V. and Hirschbuhl, J.J. (1999). Does Interactive Multimedia Promote

Achievement And Higher Level Thinking Skills For Today's Science Students?

British Journal of Educational Technology. 30 (4): 323-354.

Frisby, C. L. (1992). Construct Validity and Psychometric Properties of the Cornell

Critical Thinking Test (Level Z): A Contrasted Groups Analysis. Psychological

Reports. 71: 291-303.

Fullerton, K. (2000). The Interactive Effects of Field Dependence-Independence and

Internet Document Manipulation Style on Student Achievement from Computer-

Based Instruction. University of Pittsburgh: D.Ed Dissertation.

Garcia, J. F. C. (2001). An Instrument to Help Teachers Assess Learners’ Attitudes

Towards Multimedia Instruction. Education 122(1): 94-101.

Garrison, D.R. (1997). Self-directed Learning: Towards a Comprehensive Model. Adult

Education Quarterly. 48(1): 18-34.

208

Ghinea, G. and Chen, S.Y. (2003). The Impact of Cognitive Styles on Perceptual

Distributed Multimedia Quality. British Journal of Educational Technology.

34(4): 393-406.

Gifford, A. P. (2000). Broadening Concepts Through Vocabulary Development.

Reading Improvement. 37 (1): 2-12.

Gilliani, B. B. (2000). Culturally Responsive Educational Web Sites. Media and

Information Technologies. 37(3): 185-194.

Gilster, P. (1997). Digital Literacy: The Thinking and Survival Skills New Users Need

to Make the Internet Personally and Professionally Meaningful. New York:

Wiley.

Glebas, G. J. (1997). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Using the Spreadsheet Application

as a Cognitive Tool to Increase Mathematics Achievement. [WWW document].

URL http://home.att.net/tildesabelg/thesis.html

Gokhale, A.A. (1995). Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking. Journal of

Technology Education. 7(22): 30-45.

Hannafin, M., Land, S., and Oliver, K. (1999). Open Learning Environments.

Foundations, Methods, and Models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.) Instructional-

design Theories and Models. A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory.

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 115-140.

Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer Across Domains

American Psychologist. 53:449-455.

209

Hofstetter, F. T. (1995). Multimedia Literacy. New York : McGraw-Hill, Inc. In

Baharuddin, A.(1999). The Use of Information Technology in Education : Using

an Interactive Multimedia Courseware Package to Upgrade Teachers’

Knowledge and Change Their Attitudes. The Robert Gordon University, UK:

Ph.D Thesis.

Hendricks, C.C. (2001). Teaching Causal Reasoning Through Cognitive Apprenticeship:

What Are Results From Situated Learning? Journal of Educational Research. 94

(5): 302-312.

Jackson, M.J. (1986). Thumbs Up for Direct Teaching of Thinking Skills. Educational

Leadership. 31-36.

Jamaluddin Harun and Zaidatun, Tasir (2000). Macromedia Authorware Attain 5, Siri 1:

Pengenalan. Kuala Lumpur: Venton Publishing.

Jessup, L. M. and Egbert, J. L. (1996). Understanding Computer-Supported Group

Work: The Effects Of Interaction Frequency On Group Process And Outcome.

Journal of Research on Computing in Education. 28 (2): 190-203.

Johnson, B. and Christensen, L. (2000). Educational Research: Qualitative and

Quantitative Approaches.” Needham Heights, MA: Ally and Bacon. In Zaidatun

Tasir (2002). Pembinaan dan Penilaian Keberkesanan Perisian Multimedia

Interaktif Matematik Berasaskan Kecerdasan Pelbagai. Universiti Teknologi

Malaysia: Ph.D Thesis.

Johnson, S. D. (1995). Transfer of Learning. The Technology Teacher. 33-34.

Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Computers in the Classroom: Mindtools for Critical Thinking.

Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. In Astleiner, H. (2002). Teaching Critical

Thinking Online. Journal of Instructional Psychology. 29(2): 53-75.

210

Kartini Baharun (1998). Critical Thinking Skills, Dispositions And Classroom Practices

Of History Teachers In Malaysia Secondary Schools. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis,

University of Manchester. U.K.

Kaur, A. (1996). Design Factors in Interactive Multimedia Courseware – Practices in

Malaysia. Proceedings of the National Symposium on Educational Computing,

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Kearsley, G. (1990). Designing Educational Software for International Use. Journal of

Research on Computing in Education. 23 (2): 242-250.

Kennedy, M., Fisher, M. B. and Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical Thinking: Literature

Review and Needed Research. In Idol, L. and Jones, B. F. Educational Values

and Cognitive Instruction: Implications for Reform. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Kramarski, B. and Ritkof, R. (2002). The Effects of Meta-cognitive and E-mail

Interactions on Learning Graphing. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 18

(1): 33-43.

Krampen, G. (1997). Promotion of Creativity (Divergent Productions) and Convergent

Production by Systematic-Relaxation Exercises: Empirical Evidence from Five

Experimental Studies with Children, Young Adults, and Elderly. European

Journal of Personality. 11: 83-89.

Krendl, K. A. and Broihier, M. (1992). Student Responses to Computers: A

Longitudinal Study. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 8(2): 215-227.

Lam Kah Kei (1994). An Assessment Of The Critical Thinking Skills In Pre-service

Primary Teachers. University of Houston: M.Ed. Thesis.

211

Lebow, D., and Wager, W. W. (1994). Authentic Activity as a Model for Appropriate

Learning Activity: Implications for Emerging Instructional Technologies.

Canadian Journal of Educational Communication. 23(3): 231-144.

Lee, I. S. (2000). Factors Affecting Learners: Discourse Participation in a Computer

Conferencing. ERIC Document Number: ED439698, 2000.

Levin, H. (1997). Gender Differences in Learning Interest Among Pre-Schoolers as

Derived from Multimedia Interfaces Design. MA Thesis, School of Education,

Bar-Illan University, Israel. In D. Passig and H. Levin (2000). Gender

Preferences for Multimedia Interfaces. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning.

16: 64-71.

Lewis, J. (1997). Thinking in a Whole New Light. Women in Business.49(3): 38-41.

Looi, C.K. and Tan, B.T. (1998). A Cognitive-Apprenticeship-Based Environment for

Learning Word Problem Solving. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and

Science Teaching. 17(4): 339-354.

MacDonald, S. & Cairncross, S. (1995). Case Study - The Development of an

Interactive Multimedia Application to Support Open Learning Engineering

Students. In Percival, F., Land, R. & Edgar-Nevill, D. (Eds.) Aspects of

Educational and Training Technology XXVIII., London : Kogan Page.

Maddison, P and Maddison, A. (1987). The Advantages of Using Microcomputers in

Language Teaching. In D. Hainline, (Ed.), New Developments in Computer-

assisted Language Learning. New York, NY: Nichols Publishing Company. 20-

31

212

Mancall,J. C., Aaron, S. L. and Walker, S. A. (1986). Educating Students to Think: The

Role of the School Library Media Program. School Library Media Quarterly.

15(18). 27 cited in Astleiner, H. (2002). Teaching Critical Thinking Online.

Journal of Instructional Psychology. 29 (2): 53-75.

Masseti, B. (1996). An Empirical Examination of the Value of Creativity Support

Systems on Idea Generation. MIS Quarterly. 20 (1): 83-98.

McKenna, S. (1999). Evaluating IMM: Issues for Researchers [Online]. [WWW

document] URL http://www.csu.edu.au/division/oli/oli-rd/occpap17/eval.htm

Miller, L.M. (1996). Use Of Technology For Science And Mathematics Collaborative

Learning. School Science & Mathematics. 96 (2): 58- 75.

Ministry of Education of Malaysia. (1989). Integrated Secondary School Curriculum.

Kuala Lumpur: Curriculum Development Centre.

Mohd Salleh Abu and Zaidatun Tasir (2001). Pengenalan kepada Analisis Data

Berkomputer: SPSS 10.0 for Windows. Kuala Lumpur: Venton Publishing.

Mok Soon Sang (2003). Peperiksaan Penilaian Tahap Kecekapan Skim Perkhidmatan

Guru Bahagian II: Kompetensi Khusus/ Fungsi. Subang Jaya: Kumpulan

Budiman.

Mouatfi, J., Furnham, A. and Crump, J. (2003). Demographic and Personality Predictors

of Intelligence: A Study Using Neo Personality Inventory and the Myers-Briggs

Type Indicator. European Journal of Personality.17: 79-94.

Muler, E. W. (1985). Application of Experimental and Quasi-experimental Research

Designs to Educational Software Evaluation. Educational Technology. 25 (10):

27-31.

213

Myint, S.K., Lay, L.Y. and Tan, C.L. (2003). The Quality of Message Ideas, Thinking

and Interaction in an Asynchronous CMC Environment. Education Media

International. 40(1). 115-125.

Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative

Approaches. Needham Heights, MA: Ally and Bacon.

Newby, T.J. et al. (2000). Instructional Technology for Teaching and Learning:

Designing instruction, Integrating Computers and Using Media. Columbus,

Ohio: Prentice Hall. In Zaidatun Tasir (2002). Pembinaan dan Penilaian

Keberkesanan Perisian Multimedia Interaktif Matematik Berasaskan

Kecerdasan Pelbagai. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Ph.D Thesis.

Newman, D.R.,Johnson, C, Cochrane, C, & Webb, B. (1996). An Experiment in Group

Learning Technology. Evaluating Critical Thinking in Face-to-face and

Computer-supported Seminars. Interpersonal Computing and Technology. 4: 57-

74.

Nickerson, R.S. (1988). On Improving Thinking Through Instruction. Review of

Research in Education. 15: 3-57.

Nowaczyk, R. (1988). Introductory Statistics for Behavioral Research. NewYork: Holt,

Rinehart and Winston Inc.

Oborne, D. J. (1995). Ergonomics at Work. 3rd ed. Chichester: Wiley. In Zaidatun Tasir

(2002). Pembinaan dan Penilaian Keberkesanan Perisian Multimedia Interaktif

Matematik Berasaskan Kecerdasan Pelbagai. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia:

Ph.D Thesis.

214

Oliver, K. and Hannafin M.J. (2000). Student Management of Web-Based Hypermedia

Resources During Open-Ended Problem Solving. Journal of Educational

Research. 94(2): 75-112.

Owens, D. (1988). Designing Instruc tion for Older Adults. Programmed Learning and

Educational Technology. 25 (1): 23-27.

Passig, D. and Levin, H. (2000). Gender Preferences for Multimedia Interfaces. Journal

of Computer-Assisted Learning. 16: 64-71.

Paul, R. (1997). Critical Thinking Glossary: An Educator's Guide to Critical Thinking

Terms and Concepts. [WWW document]. URL

http://www.sonoma.edu/cthink/K12/k12library/Gloss/intro.nclk

Paulus, P. B. et al. (1996). Social Influence Processes in Computer Brainstorming.

Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 18(1): 3-14.

Phillips, J. A. (1997). Pengajaran Kemahiran Berfikir: Teori dan Amalan. Kuala

Lumpur: Utusan Publications.

Piers, E.V. and Morgan, F.T. (1973). “Effects of Free Association Training on

Children’s Ideational Fluency.” Journal of Personality. 41(1): 42-50.

Poh Swee Hiang (2000). KBKK: Kemahiran Berfikir Secara Kritis dan Kreatif. Kuala

Lumpur: Kumpulan Budiman.

Potts, B. (1994). Strategies For Teaching Critical Thinking. ERIC/ AE Digest.

ED385606 Feb 94.

215

Rajendran Nagappan. (1998). Teaching Higher-order Thinking Skills in Language

Classrooms: The Need for Transformation of Teaching Practice. Ph.D. Thesis.

Ravi Ponnusamy. (1999). Tahap Kemahiran Berfikir Secara Kritis dan Kreatif (KBKK)

Murid Tahun 6 Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Tamil dalam Mata Pelajaran Sains.

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: B.Ed. Thesis.

Razali Salleh (1999). Kajian Penggunaan Kemahiran Berfikir Secara Kritis dan Kreatif

(KBKK) dalam Matapelajaran Matematik KBSM Tingkatan Empat Sekolah

Menengah Daerah Tumpat, Kelantan. UTM: B.Ed. Thesis.

Reese, W et al. (2001). Effects of Intellectual Variables, Age, and Gender on Divergent

Thinking in Adulthood. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 25(6):

491-500.

Reimann, P., and Bosnjak, M. (1998). Supporting Hypertext-based Argumentation

Skills. [WWW document]. URL

http://www.or.zuma.mannheim.de/bosnjak/publications/edmedia98/default.htm

Ritchie, D. and Gimenez, F. (1995) Effectiveness Of Graphic Organizers In Computer-

Based Instruction With Dominant Spanish-Speaking And Dominant English-

Speaking Students. Journal of Research on Computing in Education. 28(2).

Roman, H.T. (2003). Multi-Dimensional Thinking: The Key to the Future. Technology

Teacher. 62 (5): 21-24.

Rozell, E.J. and Gardner, W.L. (1999). Computer-related Success and Failure: A

Longitudinal Study of the Factors Influencing Computer-related Performance.

Computers in Human Behavior. 15: 1-10.

216

Runco, M.A. (1990). Implicit Theories and Ideational Creativity. In Chan, D.W. et al.

(2001). Assessing Ideational Fluency in Primary Students in Hong Kong.

Creativity Research Journal. 13(3): 359-365.

Runco, M. A., Okuda, S. M. and Thurston, B. .J. (1987). The Psychometric Properties of

Four Systems for Scoring Divergent Thinking Tests. Journal of

Psychoeducational Assessment. 2: 149-156.

Sadhna Nair. (1998). Critical And Creative Thinking Skills In a Malaysian ESL Context:

A Case Study. Universiti Malaysia Sarawak: B.Ed. Thesis.

Safiah, Suut. (1996). Critical Thinking Skills: A Comparison Of Acquisition Between

Form Six Science Students And Form Six Arts Students. IAB/University of

Houston: M.Ed. Thesis.

Salkind, N.J. (1997). Exploring Research (3rd ed.)” New Jersey: Prentice Hall. In

Zaidatun Tasir (2002). Pembinaan dan Penilaian Keberkesanan Perisian

Multimedia Interaktif Matematik Berasaskan Kecerdasan Pelbagai. Universiti

Teknologi Malaysia: Ph.D Thesis.

Santos, L. M., & De Oliveira, M. (1999). Internet As A Freeway To Foster Critical

Thinking In Lab-Actitivies. [WWW document]. URL

http://www.narst.org/conference/santosdeoliveira/santosdeoliveir a.htm

Sapp, A. (2000). How Do You Develop Critical-Thinking Skills In Students Who Just

Want The Right Answer'? NEA Today. 18 (4): 27-31.

Savery, J. R. and Duffy, T. .M. (1995). Problem Based Learning: An Instructional

Model and Its Constructivist Framework. Educational Technology. 35(5): 31-38.

217

Scarce, R. (1997). Using Electronic Mail Discussions Groups To Enhance Students'

Critical Thinking Skills. [WWW document]. URL http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/

Schank, R. C. and Jona, M. Y. (1991). Empowering the Student: New Perspectives on

the Design of Teaching Systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences. 1(1): 7-

35.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical Problem Solving. New York: Academic. In

Hendricks, C.C. (2001). Teaching Causal Reasoning Through Cognitive

Apprenticeship: What Are Results From Situated Learning? Journal of

Educational Research. 94 (5): 302-312.

Scotney, B. and McClean, S. (1995). The Design and Use of Computer-Based Tutorials

for Teaching, Learning and Assessment of Quantitative Research Methods. In :

Percival, F., Land, R. & Edgar-Nevill, D. (eds.), Aspects of Educational and

Training Technology XXVIII. London : Kogan Page.

Solvberg, A.M. (2002). Computer-related Control Beliefs and Motivation: A Panel

Study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 35(4): 473-487.

Som Hj Nor and Mohd Dahalan Ramli. (1998). Kemahiran Berfikir Secara Kritis dan

Kreatif (KBKK). Kuala Lumpur: Longman.

Standen, P. and Herrington, J. (1997). Acumen: An Interactive Multimedia Simulation

Based on Situated Learning Theory. Proceedings of ASCILITE ’97.

Melbourne:Edith Cowan University.

Sternberg, R. J.,Wagner, R. K., and Okagaki, L. (1993). Practical Intelligence: The

Nature and Role of Tacit Knowledge in Work and at School. In Standen,P &

Herington, J. Acumen: An Interactive Multimedia Simulation Based on Situated

Learning Theory. Presented in ASCILITE 1997.

218

Stevensold, M. S. and Wilson, J. T. (1990). The Interaction of Verbal Ability With

Concept Mapping in Learning from a Chemistry Laboratory Activity. Science

Education. 74: 473-480.

Sutton, L. A. (2000). Various Interaction: A Learning Theory for Computer-Mediated

Communications. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American

Educaional Research Association, New Orleans. In Myint,S.K., Lay, L.Y. and

Tan, C.L. (2003). The Quality of Message Ideas, Thinking and Interaction in an

Asynchronous CMC Environment. Education Media International. 40(1). 115-

125.

Teong, S.K. (2003). The Effect of Meta-Cognitive Training on Mathematical Word-

Problem Solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 19: 46-55.

Torkzadeh, G. and Van Dyke, T.P. (2002). Effects of Training on Internet Self-efficacy

and Computer User Attitudes. Computer in Human Behavior.18(5): 479-494.

Torrance, E.P.and Mourad, S.A. (1978). Some Creativity and Style of Learning and

Thinking Correlates of Guglielmino's Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale.

Psychological Reports. 43: 1167-1171.

Tsai, C.C, Lin, S.S.J. and Yuan, S.M. (2001). Students’ Use of Web-Based Concept

Map Testing and Strategies for Learning. Journal of Computer-Assisted

Learning. 17: 72-84.

Tuckman, B.W. (1988). Conducting Educational Research (3rd ed). San Diego: Harcourt

Brace Jovanovich.

Vaughn, T. (1999). Multimedia: Working It Out [Online]. [WWW document] URL

http://www.timestream.com/products/mmcd/inter.html

219

Watson, J. (1990). Cooperative Learning and Computers: One Way to Address Student

Differences. The Computing Teacher. 18(4): 9-12.

Webb, N. (1985). Verbal Interaction and Learning in Peer-directed Groups. Theory Into

Practice. 24(1): 32-39.

Weiss, E. (1994). Making Computer People Literate. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass

Publishers. Cited in Passig, D. and Levin, H. (2000). Gender Preferences for

Multimedia Interfaces. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning. 16: 64-71.

Weller, H. G. (1988). Interactivity in Microcomputer-Based Instruction – its Essential

Components and How it Can be Enhanced. Educational Technology. 28 (2), 23-

27.

Wilen, W. W. (1985). Questioning, Thinking and Effective Citizenship. Social Science

Record. 22: 4-6.

Woodrow, J. E. J. (1994). The Development of Computer-Related Attitudes of

Secondary Students. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 11(4): 307-

338.

Yam, S.C. (1995). Cognitive Apprenticeship and Its Application to the Teaching of

Smalltalk in a Multimedia Interactive Learning Environment. Instructional

Science. 23: 133-161.

Yeh, Y.C. and Strang, H.R. (1997). The Impact Of A Computer Simulation On Critical-

Thinking Instruction. [WWW document]. URL

http://www.coe.uh.edu/insite/elec_pub/ HTML 1997/yeh.htm

220

Yeh, Y.C. and Wu, J.J. (1992). The Relationship Between Critical Thinking and

Academic Achievements Among Elementary and Secondary School Students.

Journal of Education and Psychology. 15: 79 – 100.

Zaidatun Tasir (2002). Pembinaan dan Penilaian Keberkesanan Perisian Multimedia

Interaktif Matematik Berasaskan Kecerdasan Pelbagai. Universiti Teknologi

Malaysia: Ph.D Thesis.

Zarinah, M. K. and Siti, S. S. (2002). An Evolution of the Use of Computer Coursewares

in Schools in Sufean Hussin (ed) Revitalising Education: Some Prospectives

Policy Innovations. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publications.

Documents

AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ...eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/2074/1/HamizerMohdSukorPFP2006.pdf3.14 Example of recoded response for Module 3 to illustrate scoring rubric 99 5.1