15
Applying Learning Theory and Instructional Film Principles to Films for Learning Observation Skills I BETTY D. PEARSON Three operations basic to nursing-observing, inferring, and acting-served as the framework for the instructional prob- lem. The term observation has been frequently applied both to the perception of facts (objective data, or cues) and to the inferences or judgments and conclusions based upon them. The important instructional goal for this research concerned discrimination between these two tasks (Gagn~, 1962, p. 55). This seems a prerequisite to achievement of keener obser- vation skills for supplying data basic to forming judgments or inferences as a direction for action. The desirable perform- ance objective is: The nurse will record behavioral cues as observations, and will not record inferences of patient behavior as direct obser- vation. Three factors led to the choice of film as the instructional tool. First, the replication of the interpersonal event of a 1This research was supported (in part) by special grants from Sigma Theta Tau, national honor society of nursing, and National Institutes of Health, Fellowship IF4-NU-27-251,04, Division of Nursing, Bureau of Health Pro- fessions Education and Manpower Training. Betty D. Pearson is assistant professor of nursing, College of Human Development, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park. AVCRVOL.20, FALL 1972 281

Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

Applying Learning Theory and

Instructional Film Principles to

Films for Learning

Observation Skills I

BETTY D. PEARSON

Three operations basic to nursing-observing, inferring, and acting-served as the framework for the instructional prob- lem. The term observation has been frequently applied both to the perception of facts (objective data, or cues) and to the inferences or judgments and conclusions based upon them. The important instructional goal for this research concerned discrimination between these two tasks (Gagn~, 1962, p. 55). This seems a prerequisite to achievement of keener obser- vation skills for supplying data basic to forming judgments or inferences as a direction for action. The desirable perform- ance objective is:

The nurse will record behavioral cues as observations, and will not record inferences of patient behavior as direct obser- vation.

Three factors led to the choice of film as the instructional tool. First, the replication of the interpersonal event of a

1This research was supported (in part) by special grants from Sigma Theta Tau, national honor society of nursing, and National Institutes of Health, Fellowship IF4-NU-27-251,04, Division of Nursing, Bureau of Health Pro- fessions Education and Manpower Training.

Betty D. Pearson is assistant professor of nursing, College of Human Development, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park.

AVCR VOL. 20, FALL 1972 281

Page 2: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

AV COMMUNICATION REVIEW 1972 FALL : 282

RATIONALE

nurse observing a patient contains so many uncontrollable factors it does not seem wise to assume the same patient would in fact be the same from one observation to the next. Secondly, by having students learn concepts of patient obser- vations in a pre-clinical situation using films, more students could be instructed on the same task in an environment of reduced risk. Third, for the nursing student, observation of patients frequently accompanies a variety of activities; thus the filmed method permitted the student to focus on just this one aspect of the clinical situation. Confronted with the design of sensitive and effective strat- egies for shaping learning I found myself in need of some scientific framework to use as guide. Principles from learning theories served as guides for the broad approach, and prin- ciples from instructional film research specified the more concrete conditions required to accomplish complex forms of human learning from films. Hilgard (1966) summarized and listed principles from cognitive (Gestalt origin) and neobe- haviorist (stimulus-response origin) learning theories useful for planning learning experiences. These principles suggest important considerations for selecting learning experiences, managing motivation, and developing learning styles. But additional direction concerning the task of designing in- structional films was also needed.

Principles from learning theories serve only indirectly, if at all, as guides or directives for use of the interpretative powers of the camera; i.e., subjective, objective, and point-of- view camera angles, the cut, and other subtleties of the medium (Mascelli, 1965). However, Twyford (1953) sum- marized the results of research in instructional film from 35 reports and listed generalizations which serve as specific guides for the design of film. Other research conducted on film and videotape instruction since his summary, reveal, in my view, no need for major revision of his listings.

Some of the instructional film research generalizations overlap several of the principles from learning theories, but others fill in gaps or are more specific guides for planning instructional films. The fact that Hilgard (1966, p. 563) had derived separate sets of principles from analysis of learning theories led me to feel that only by applying these sets of principles to two treatments and experimentally testing them

Page 3: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

APPLYING LEARNING THEORY TO FILMS : 283

could I have a scientific basis for further decision making. I

found no literature indicating that such a study had been done.

A five-column format (time, learning principles, film re- search principles, visual, and audio), devised for writing the working drafts of the two scripts, aided in attending to prin- ciples and generalizations as well as in matching the two scripts for content and duration of activities. In writing the two scripts, there were no major difficulties in keeping the content and duration of the activities equivalent, nor were there problems in application of the principles from theory and research. (Lively re-writing to adjust the scripts in accord with these requirements did occur). The visual display of the instructional film Observation, consisting of a patient as the major figure, resulted from applying cognitive learning theory principles of perceptual features concerning "figure- ground relations"; the visual experience derived from appli- cation of neobehaviorism learning theory principles of nov- elty by which "behavior can be imitation of models" (Hilgard, 1966, p. 563) resulted in the film The Observer with a nurse, as model, observing a patient. This was the only salient visual difference. The first drafts of the scripts also resulted in an audio difference related to application of the cognitive theory principles of understanding and convergent/divergent think- ing, for which neobehaviorist learning theory provided no analogous principles. To avoid confounding the research design I selected the visual difference as most relevant for film research and used it as the independent variable of this experiment. The resulting narration, identical or equivalent for both scripts, blurred the differences. For example, The Observer narration, "'Do this please-make a mental list of three or four cues-facts or occurrences Karen observed," balances Observation narration, "Do this please-make a mental list of three or four cues-facts or occurrences you observed." Twyford (1953, p. 2) advised use of personal pronouns and direct forms of address, as well as the learning theory principle regarding active learner participation.

The decision to use a voice-over type of narration seemed a rational choice for establishing the picture-commentary relationship of both films. First, the decision to direct visual emphasis toward the patient (Observation) or the patient

Page 4: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

AV COMMUNICATION REVIEW 1972 FALL : 2 8 4

and nurse as model (The Observer) in effect eliminated vis- ualization of the narrator. Secondly, Twyford's (1953, p. 2) generalization of the picture-commentary relationship ad- vised "where learning is measured by non-verbal tests, the pictures appear to carry the main teaching burden." For this study the measurement test of learning involved visual pres- entation as well as written (verbal) student responses. Third, to teach the concept of observation as separate from the concept of an inference requires emphasis on definitions explicated by concrete examples. Thus, to have the patient speak (lip-synchronous dialog) would be to introduce another set of skills, namely instruction in interview technique-not the objective for these instructional films.

The films have three sequences. The first introduces the patient, or the nurse and patient, the learning goals, the concept, and the setting. The second progresses through a breakfast meal and raises questions asking mental responses of the learners. The final sequences advance through oral hygiene and a bed bath, with questions requiring a written response from the learner, prior to a visual (montages) and aural summary. Both films provide feedback following all questions. Specific observable features of the 15-year-old male patient (such as his deeply crevassed tongue) provide cue examples, but no medical diagnosis is given. The woman selected to portray the nurse provides modeling behaviors and visual modeling as a young (25 or 30 years old), attrac- tive, married (evidenced by rings), professional.

Despite the numerous principles utilized, not all decisions could be based on such guidance. For example, .the age, sex, physical appearance, and activities of the patient became unguided choices, whereas specification of the nurse as a model proved a better guided selection. The nurse-model represented an interpretation of what Gunter (1969, p. 132) expressed as probable short-term role expectancies of the young-adult female in nursing. Whether selection of a dif- ferent patient and/or nurse-model would result in signifi- cantly altered learning remains unknown at this time. On the basis of such content decisions, however, it seemed prudent to discard any male nursing student's responses from this study.

Both films provide the student with verbal mediators. Thus,

Page 5: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

APPLYING LEARNING THEORY TO FILMS : 285

THE HYPOTHESES

the students, while hearing observation, inference, or cue

defined, also see a visualization of key words on the screen. For example, the narrator in one instance states, "Observa- tion is the act of noting some fact or occurrence," while on

the screen appears:

OBSERVATION: NOTING OF

FACT OR OCCURRENCE

Positive and negative examples of the concept "'observation" occur in close succession, with repetition of the concept aurally while the visual presentation utilizes a cut-back to the observed behaviors. The questions, "How do you define observation?" and "How do you define inference?" precede verification and/or visual and aural repetition of these defi- nitions. The need to match the two films for content, activity, duration of sequences, and quality of camera work pervaded the entire production process. Twyford cautioned only that the rate of development of a film should be slow enough to permit learners to grasp the material as it is shown. Thus the decision to produce lO-minute films seemed rational. Three major questions arise when using instructional films to teach nursing students how to distinguish between obser- vations and inferences. Do nurses who receive filmed instruc- tion report more observations? Do nurses who receive filmed instruction report fewer inferences as observations? Do nurses who receive filmed instruction report observations as the majority of the items reported? Since I found no research literature indicating which method of developing instruc- tional films would best result in achieving the learning ob- jectives, the hypotheses for this study had no directional prediction. The nine hypotheses of this study were:

1. There will be no significant difference in the number of behavioral cues reported as observations by nurses who learned observation skills by instructional film Observation (patient as the major figure) as compared to nurses who learned by instructional film The Observer (patient and nurse as major figures, nurse as model).

2. There will be no significant difference in the number of behavioral cues reported as observations by nurses who

Page 6: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

AV COMMUNICATION REVIEW 1972 FALL : 286

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND PROCEDURES

learned observation skills by instructional film Observation (patient as the major figure) as compared to nurses who received no filmed instruction.

3. There will be no significant difference in the number of

behavioral cues reported as observations by nurses who learned observation skills by instructional film The Observer (patient and nurse as major figures, nurse as model) as com- pared to nurses who received no filmed instruction.

4. There will be no significant difference in the number of

inferences reported as observations by nurses who learned observation skills by instructional film Observation as com- pared to nurses who learned by instructional film The Observer.

5. There will be no significant difference in the number of

inferences reported as observations by nurses who learned observation skills by instructional film Observation as com- pared to nurses who received no filmed instruction.

6. There will be no significant difference in the number of

inferences reported as observations by nurses who learned observation skills by instructional film The Observer as

compared to nurses who received no filmed instruction.

7. There will be no significant difference between the means of individual scores derived by substracting the num- ber of inferences recorded as observations from the number of behavioral cues recorded as observations when instruc- tional film Observation is compared with instructional film The Observer.

8. There will be no significant difference between the means of individual scores derived by subtracting the number of inferences recorded as observations from the number of behavioral cues recorded as observations when instructional

film Observation is compared with no filmed instruction. 9. There will be no significant difference between the

means of individual scores derived by subtracting the number of behavioral cues recorded as observations when instruc- tional film The Observer is compared with no filmed in-

struction.

The design of the study hinged, of course, on the best method for testing the hypotheses. The design was a posttest-only true experimental design (Campbell & Stanley, 1966, p. 6).

Page 7: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

APPLYING LEARNING THEORY TO FILMS : 287

SUBJECTS

PROCEDURES

Criterion Test

Following Campbell and Stanley's graphic methods the

design took this form:

RX10 RX20 RX 3 0

where R indicates random assignment, X exposure to an experimental variable, and O is a measurement or test. The experimental variable X 1 represents exposure to instructional film Observation, X 2 represents exposure to instructional film The Observer, X 3 represents exposure to neither film, and 0 represents the test. Because the motion pictures repre- sented a very small fraction of the total instructional time for the nursing course, delayed testing appeared inappropriate; it would not reveal differences in the filmed instructional methods as much as it might reflect the effects of teacher variability for the small groups, morale of the instructional groups, and all other instructional materials used before delayed testing measures could be taken. A filmed mode of testing was employed immediately after viewing of the films. This study drew upon beginning nursing students in a baccalaureate school of nursing. Students (N=146) had been randomly assigned to their instructors in groups of approximately 20. The groups were randomly assigned to one of three experimental instructional sections. Previous unpublished data from this school had revealed no significant differences due to instructor groupings for this course. Male students' responses were discarded and other data randomly discarded so that the total N was 129, with 43 in each of the three groups. Groups X 1 and X 2 viewed Observation or The Observer, a preparatory film, and the test film during a 20-minute por- tion of their two-hour class; group X 3 viewed only the pre- paratory film and test film during regular class-time. All groups were allowed six minutes to write their responses. For all groups the 20-minute segments occurred randomly as beginning, midpoint, or late in the two-hour interval. Each classroom used provided equivalent, but not necessarily optimal, viewing conditions; i.e., matte screen, darkened room, and the projector running in the rear of the room. Learning was tested in a filmed simulated situation similar

Page 8: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

AV C O M M U N I C A T I O N REVIEW 1972 FALL : 2 8 8

Jury Procedures

in format to the instructional mode. As criterion test for the instructional objective, I used a silent, color three-minute filmed sequence developed at the Walter Reed Institute of Research (Verhonick, Nichols, Glor, & McCarthy, 1968), omitting diagnostic titles. The students recorded their re- sponses in writing on papers carrying the directions, "Please list below all the observation of fact or occurrence that you noticed about the patient in the filmed sequence you just viewed." The technical quality of the filmed patient sequences used for testing matched that of instructional films Observa-

tion and The Observer. A practice three-minute patient se- quence film was presented to all students immediately prior to the test in order that all three groups would be prepared for the filmed mode of testing. In the preparatory patient sequence film, a male in a hospital bed simulated a patient experiencing a heart attack. In the test patient sequence film, another male simulated a patient in a hospital bed experi- encing relapse of a tropical fever. A jury classified the student-responses as either observations or inferences in order to insure unbiased classification pro- cedures. Training of the 10-member volunteer jury consisted of a five-minute verbal introduction and viewing of the film Observation. The jury was next tested via lists of 25 items, 13 of which were judged observations and 12 inferences in a previous study (Pearson, 1968). I predicted simply that the judges' frequencies of response would differ and thus used the two-tailed binomial test. Inter-judge reliability at the .001 level of significance was established when 10 of 10 jury members classified responses the same (Siegel, 1956, p. 250). The binomial test indicated intra-judge reliability at the .001 level when the judges correctly classified 23 out of 25 items. The jury achieved both .001 levels of significance.

Each jury member then classified items from responses of the three learning groups of this study. Again I utilized nu- meric coding and the table of random numbers to select items. Thus if any jury member, despite training, classified items in a faulty manner the effects influenced all three groups. Each jury member's list of items included every fifteenth item (n=36) also randomly interspersed in their lists for addi- tional reliability testing. Again, the .001 level of significance from the two-tailed binomial test prevailed.

Page 9: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

APPLYING LEARNING THEORY TO FILMS : 289

RESULTS

TABLE 1

Analysis of the data for mean differences was computed by

analysis of variance and I chose Duncan's multiple range

test to determine exactly how the groups differed. The first three hypotheses tested group differences between the fre- quency of behavioral cues reported as observations. Analysis of these data provided the following group means and stand- ard deviations: group X 1 (Observation), mean 6.5349, standard deviation 2.5387; group X 2 (The Observer), mean 6.0456, standard deviation 1.8892; and group X 3 (no in-

structional film), mean 5.1860, standard deviation 2.5566. The analysis of variance test for differences between the means produced an F value of 3.6, reaching the .05 level of significance, as shown in Table 1.

Three-Group Analysis of

Variance for

Source of Sum of df Mean F Variation Sq ua res Sq ua res

Frequency of Behavioral Cues

Reported as Observations

Between groups 40.1085 2 20.0543 Within groups 695.1163 126 5.5168

Total 735.2248 128

3.63351*

*Significant at the .05 level (Edwards, 1968, p. 425).

Duncan's multiple range tests (.05) produced two homo- geneous subsets X 1 (Observation) and X 2 (The Observer), and subset X 2 (The Observer) and X 3 (no film). (The multiple range test determines significant differences as subsets of elements, no pair of which differs by more than the shortest significant range for a subset of that size). Thus, since the means of X 1 (Observation) and X 3 (no film) are not both contained in a subset of means that has a nonsignificant range (Duncan, 1955, p. 29) the number of behavioral cues reported as observation by nurses who learned observation skills by Observation is significantly greater than the number of such cues reported as observations by nurses who received no filmed instruction. The number of behavioral cues re- ported as observations by nurses who learned observation skills by The Observer is not significantly different from those reported by nurses receiving no filmed instruction.

Hypotheses four, five, and six concerned group differences between the frequency of inferences reported. Analysis of these data provided the following group means and standard

Page 10: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

AV COMMUNICATION REVIEW 1972 FALL : 290

deviations: group X 1 (Observation), mean of 0.6744, stand-

ard deviation 0.9442; group X 2 (The Observer), mean of

0.6744, standard deviation 0.8652; and group X 3 (those viewing neither instructional film), mean 3.3256, standard deviation 1.9238. The analysis of variance test for differ-

ences between the means produced F values of 56.6, exceed-

ing the .01 level of significance as shown in Table 2. Based on this finding Duncan's multiple range tests (.05)

were performed. There is one homogeneous subset X 2 (The Observer), X 1 (Observation). Thus, there were significantly

fewer inferences reported as observations by nurses who learned observation skills by instructional films The Ob- server and Observation as compared to nurses who received no such filmed instruction. Moreover, the number of infer-

ences reported by nurses viewing either instructional film is

the same. The remaining three hypotheses concerned group scores

derived by subtracting the number of inferences reported as

observations from the number of behavioral cues reported as inferences. The educational objective implied that the differ-

ence would be positive and large. Analysis of these data pro- vided the following group means and standard deviations: group X 1 (Observation), mean 5.8605, standard deviation 2.6599; group X 2 (The Observer), mean 5.4186, standard deviation 2.1518; and group X 3 (no film), mean 1.5581. standard deviation 3.7815. The analysis of variance test for differences between the means produced an F value of 27.8 which exceeded the .01 level of significance, as shown in Table 3. Based on this finding Duncan's multiple range tests

(.05) were performed. There is one homogeneous subset X 2 (The Observer), X 1 (Observation). Thus, since the means of

TABLE 2 Three-Group

Analysis of Variance for

Source of Sum of df Mean F Variation Squares Squares

Frequency of Inferences

Reported as Observations

Between groups 201.4884 2 100.7442 56.6864* Within groups 224.3256 126 1.7804

Total 425.8140 128

*Significant at greater than the 0.01 level (Edwards, 1968, p. 425).

Page 11: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

APPLYING LEARNING THEORY TO FILMS : 291

TABLE 3 Three-Group

Analysis of

Source of Sum of df Mean F Variation Sq ua res Sq ua res

Variance for Scores of

Difference Between

Observations and

Between groups 481.7209 2 240.8605 Within groups 1092.2326 126 8.6685

Total 1573.9535 128

27.7856*

Inferences

DISCUSSION

*Significant at greater than the 0.01 level (Edwards, 1968, p. 425).

X 1 and X 2 are both contained in a subset of means that has

a significant range, the difference scores derived by subtract-

ing the number of inferences recorded as observations are

significantly greater for those nurses receiving filmed in- struction via either instructional film as compared to those nurses receiving no filmed instruction. Moreover, the dif- ference scores of nurses viewing either instructional film Observation or The Observer do not vary significantly from

each other. A cursory examination of the raw data revealed that a

larger number of items had been listed by the groups not

receiving filmed instruction than by either the group in- structed by Observation or The Observer. Analysis of these

data produced means (observations plus inferences) that

supported this cursory examination. Because the relationship of the quantity of observations to the quantity of inferences

could seem obscured when described by a difference score, I tested the relationship by the product-moment correlation. The correlation, however, between the number of items nurses reported as observations and the number reported as inferences bore no significant relationship for any of the three groups. A two-tailed test required an r of .304 for sig- nificance at the .05 level (Popham, 1967, p. 396), whereas the correlation coefficients for the three groups were:

X1 (film Observation) r = .055 X2 (film The Observer) r = -.165 X3 (no film) r = -.293

Conclusions drawn from the data of this study cannot with- out risk be generalized to other situations. Some of the major reasons for such caution are: 1) the nursing student popula- tion of this study may or may not be representative of the beginning nursing student population; 2) the responses to

Page 12: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

AV COMMUNICATION REVIEW 1972 FALL : 292

the particular criterion test film sequence of a patient situa- tion cannot be assumed to be the same as responses to patient situations of a different nature; and 3) in this classroom experiment complex interactions not precisely controlled or too irregular for exact mathematical analysis may or may not have altered the results.

Prudently, I shall offer minimal interpretations of the re- sults. The most obvious interpretation is that as a result of

both filmed instructional methods significantly fewer infer- ences were reported as observations, when compared to re- sponses from nurses of this study not receiving such in- struction. I wish to reemphasize that the films were not com- pared with any other form of instruction.

While analysis of the means for frequency of behavioral cues reported as observations achieved significance at the .05 level for Observation as compared to the group not receiving

filmed instruction, while The Observer did not achieve such significance, the data also indicated the two film groups as homogeneous. Thus, I hesitate to interpret these results as indicating any very significant, or general, superiority for the strategies employed in Observation as compared to The Observer. Analysis of inference and difference scores indi- cated the two film-instructed groups were homogeneous in their superiority to the group not receiving filmed instruction. Thus, no significant difference in learning the concept of observation as separate from the concept of inference occurred when the visual component of the instructional strategy varied only in regard to patient alone versus patient-and- nu rse.

There was no significant correlation in this study between number of observations and number of inferences reported. Since the intent of the instruction was to reduce such a posi- tive relationship, the variability of both measures (observation and inferences) is not approximately equal for groups X 1 (Observation) and X 2 (The Observer) even though the total number of items are approximately normally distributed in all groups. The scores derived by subtracting the number of inferences from the number of observations, however, signifi- cantly favored the film-instructed groups. This could be interpreted to suggest that the film-instructed groups re- ported fewer inferences due to use of their response time to

Page 13: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

APPLYING LEARNING THEORY TO FILMS : 293

RECOMMEN- DATIONS

From Quantitative Results

From the Process Experience of the

Study

From Post-Study Contemplation

SUMMARY

discriminate, whereas the nonfilm group used their response

time to record nondiscriminated responses. The lack of corre- lation between number of observations and number of infer-

ences suggests to me that the cognitions of the learners prob- ably represent a variety of learning modes or mechanisms. Pursuing this further might then result in the interpretation that the filmed instructions requiring 10 minutes are effective strategies for instructing nursing students to recognize (or discriminate) patient cues as separate from inferences. Several types of recommendations suggest themselves:

To educators assisting nurses to learn the concept of ob- servation as separate from inference I recommend the utiliza- tion of brief films as one form of instruction.

To filmmakers producing films to teach the concept of observation as separate from inference I recommend the use of low-cost methods such as one or two actors and voice- over narration. To filmmakers producing instructional films I recommend study of the principles of learning theories and instructional film research as sources of information to serve as guides in the numerous production decisions. Another experiment altering the audio portions of both films of this study in such a manner that the convergent/divergent principle from cognitive learning theories could be incor- porated into the film Observation and withheld from the film The Observer.

Another experiment utilizing a rather complex individual- ized criterion test designed so that, upon request by the re- spondent, portions of the presentation could be observed again; only those, however, which would be feasible in a real- life situation. An item analysis of this behavior could impart as much as the written responses. In this paper I have discussed the design, execution, and re- sults of an educational experiment. Three operations basic to nursing-observing, inferring, and acting-served as the skeletal paradigm for the experimental problem. A need exist- ed for a study of methods for specifically improving the nurse's observation skills. The performance objective speci- fied that the nurse will record behavioral cues as observations, and will not record inferences of patient behavior as direct observations. Analysis of the learning theories and instruc-

Page 14: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

AV COMMUNICATION REVIEW 1972 FALL : 294

tional film research led me to write two instructional film scripts. In effect, theory and research findings served as use- ful tools in the design of instruction. The two 10-minute films produced represented a synthesis of the guides reviewed and were experimentally tested. The films differed visually; Observation presented the patient as the major figure, where- as The Observer presented the patient and his nurse as major figures, with the nurse serving as a model for the viewer.

Testing of the nine hypotheses took place in classroom setting, utilizing a filmed simulated situation similar in format to the instructional mode. In general, analysis of the results were consistent with the null hypotheses of no significant differences between the learning achievement by groups in- structed by films Observation and The Observer. The null hypotheses of no significant differences between both film- instructed groups and the nonfilm instructed group, however, were rejected. Significantly fewer inferences were reported as observation as a result of both instructional films.

In interpreting the results of this experiment, I have gen- eralized cautiously, because of major constraints surrounding circumstances of selection and scheduling of the learners. The possibilities exist, however, for designing creative, con- sistent instructional/learning/testing situations. This study shows, perhaps, one direction in which such efforts might go.

REFERENCES Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, C. J. Experimental and quasi-experi- mental designs for research. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1966.

Duncan, D. B. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics, 1955, 11, 1-42.

Edwards, A. L. Experimental design in psychological research. San Francisco: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.

Gagn~, R. M. Human functions in systems. In R. M. Gagn~ (Ed.), Psychological principles in system development. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1962. Pp. 35-73.

Gunter, L. M. The developing nursing student. Nursing Research, 1969, 18,131-136.

Hilgard, E. R. Theories of learning. New York: Appleton-Century- Crofts, 1966.

Mascelli, J. W. The five C's of cinematography. Hollywood: Cine: Grafic Publications, 1965.

Page 15: Applying learning theory and instructional film principles to films for learning observation skills

APPLYING LEARNING THEORY TO FILMS : 295

Pearson, B. D. A study of cues which staff nurses reported they utilized in making an inference of a patient state. Unpublished master's thesis, The University of Washington, Seattle, 1968.

Pearson, B. D. The recognition of patient cues as separate from inferences by nurses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Uni- versity of Washington, Seattle, 1971.

Popham, W. J. Educational statistics. New York: Harper and Row, 1967.

Siegel, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.

Twyford, L. C. Summary of reports of the instructional film research program. Unpublished Special Devices Center Technical Report, U. S. Navy, Port Washington, L. I., New York, 1953. (Mimeo- graphed, A. S. C. Library No. 371. 3342300 P. 3841, Pennsyl- vania State College.)

Verhonick, P. J., Nichols, G. S., Glor, B. A. K., & McCarthy, R. T. I came, I saw, I responded: Nursing observation and action survey. Nursing Research, 1968, 17, 38-44.

INVITATION TO SUBMIT RESEARCH

PAPERS

The Division of Theory and Research of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology invites researchers to submit papers for presentation at the AECT National Convention at Las Vegas, Nevada, April 8-13, 1973. Requiring twenty minutes of presentation time, the papers may deal with any phase of re- search in instructional technology. Completed research studies with data will be given preference. Interested persons should request guidelines for submission of papers and symposia for presentation at the AECT Convention from either of the addresses below. Com- plete papers or abstracts should reach Dr. Hall no later than Jan- uary 5, 1973.

Dr. Keith A. Hall Mr. Fred Wehrli AECT Division of Theory & Convention Coordinator

Research Association for Educational c/o CAI Laboratory Communications & Technology The Pennsylvania State University 1201 Sixteenth Street, N.W. 201 Chambers Building Washington, D.C. 20036 University Park, Pennsylvania

16802