Pergamon Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 11, No. 3-4, pp. 51 l-527, 1995

Copyright 8 1995 Elswier Science Ltd Printed in the USA. All rights reserved

0741-5632195 $9.50 + .oo

0747-5632(95)00040-2

The Efficacy of Interactive Video for

Teaching Basic Classroom Management

Skills to Pre-Service Teachers

Richard C. Overbaugh

Old Dominion University

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Use of Interactive Video in Instruction

Similar to research on hypermedia, studies investigating the effectiveness of instruction centering on the use of interactive video is sparse. In a study by Hasselbring et al. (1987/1988), it was found that interactive-video courseware, based on sound learning theory, can deliver consistently high-quality learning tasks. Walkley and Kelley (1989) compared three modes of instructional delivery (interactive video, teacher-directed, and self-directed) and found similar results: the interactive-video and teacher-directed conditions produced superior student performance.

Computer-Assisted instruction and Learner Differences

Zeidler and McIntosh (1989) found that students who have imagery skill difficulties can benefit from video-generated, graphic representations. In a similar vein, courseware can be customized to be effective with different learning styles or to address individual needs (Robinson, 1988). For example, tield- independent students prefer the freedom that computer-assisted instruction

Requests for reprints should be addressed to Richard C. Overbaugh, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA 23529.

512 Overbaugh

(CAI) allows (Canino & Cicchelli, 1988). Even if the program does not allow complete freedom of sequence and pace, different types of learners can be given a sense of control through the advisement technique: the learners have control, but the computer advises them in terms of what they should do (Gay, Trumbull, & Smith, 1988).

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This study examined the effects of an interactive-video computer-aided instruction program on instructing pre-service education majors in the area of classroom management. Interactive video was chosen as the medium for instruction for three primary reasons: (a) the lifelike simulations made possible by using video clips of a real classroom; (b) compression of real time; and (c) the flexibility of trying multiple approaches to the same problem, good or bad, without risking the negative effects that may result if similar actions occurred in a real classroom. A control group was not included because CA1 has been shown, at worst, to produce achievement equivalent to traditional classroom methods and, at best, superior achievement and better attitudes toward lesson content and learning in general. Primary blocking variables were class rank (first year vs. final year) and learning style (visual vs. auditory). Secondary blocking variables were levels of computer anxiety and cumulative grade point average (GPA).

Research Questions

1. What effects does an interactive-video classroom management simulation have on the achievement of pre-service teachers representing two class ranks and two learning styles?

? What effects does an interactive-video classroom management simulation have L.

3.

on the stages of concern of pre-service teachers represeniing two class ranks and two learning styles?

What are the relationships between pre-service teachers’ (a) class rank and achievement, (b) level of computer anxiety and achievement, and (c) GPA and achievement?

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

Sample

The sample (N = 88) consisted of two levels of education majors at West Virginia University. Students in the first group (n = 59) were enrolled in their first education class (C&I 7) and those in the second group (n = 29) were enrolled in their final education class (C&I 104) before student teaching. The sample was initially composed of three C&I 7 classes plus nine volunteers from other C&I 7 classes, and all C&I 104 students, giving a total sample of 135. Of this initial sample, 47 were dropped from the study for the following reasons: (a) no pretest data (5), (b) did not follow directions on either pre- or posttest instruments (21), (c) learning style inventory indicated dual learning modalities

Efficacy of interactive video 513

(9), (d) learning style inventory indicated kinesthetic (2), (e) student missed more than 50 minutes of treatment (l), and (f) no posttest data (9).

Independent Variables

Treatment. The treatment was an interactive-video computer-based simulation designed to provide a near-to-real classroom environment in which users experiment with various solutions to four typical classroom management problems and learn eight basic principles of classroom management: (a) fairness, (b) consistency, (c) firmness, (d) courtesy, (e) flexibility, (f) trust, (g) respect, and (h) humor. The videodisc, Classroom Discipline, used for the program was developed by a team of education staff at the Instructional Technology Centre of the University of Alberta (University of Alberta, 1987). The disc is a level two interactive-video program requiring the now defunct Sony LDPlOOOA videodisc player. Because the disc was quite good, I repurposed the program with HyperCard to make it a level three application.

The simulation generally follows the original program structure but, rather than presenting simple multiple choices, the HyperCard-based program requires a higher level of user interaction and cognitive engagement through learner- generated descriptions of problem assessments and desired courses of action. The simulation presents one of the following opening sequences: (a) a student enters the class late and does not offer a late slip or any sort of explanation; (b) a student has made a mess around his desk with crumpled paper and, when told to pick it up, insolently answers, “No!“; (c) a student continues to work on an assignment for another class, even after she was told not to; or (d) a noisy, rowdy class must be prepared to begin the daily lesson. In brief, a video clip is played after which the program stops and waits for the user to describe the problem, devise and enter a possible solution, and make a choice from a menu. Once a decision is made, the program branches to possible consequences. As in real situations, a decision, once made, cannot be reversed, so the user must wait until the results have been played out and the program stops for subsequent decisions. There are several branches and sequences in each of the four scenarios leading to 148 possible positive and negative conclusions. At the culmination of each scenario, feedback is provided to the student based on the decisions made throughout the simulation. (See Appendix A for a more thorough description of the program.)

Class rank. The sample of pre-service education majors (N = 88) was divided into first year education majors (n = 59) and those enrolled in their final semester before student teaching (n = 29).

Learning modality. The sample completed a learning modality inventory developed by Barbe and Milone (1980) that identifies indiviudals as (a) auditory, (b) visual, (c) kinesthetic, or (d) a combination. Permission to use the instrument was granted from Zaner-Blosser Incorporated, Columbus, Ohio. Learning modality was included because people often do not learn new material as successfully when it is presented in a modality different from their own (Barbe & Milone, 1980; Kirby, Moore, & Schofield, 1988). Students with dual learning modalities were not included (n = 9); and, since only two students were identified as kinesthetic learners, they, too, were not included. Test-retest reliability, conducted by the researcher, was .79.

514 Overbaugh

Computer anxiety. Computer anxiety served as a secondary independent variable and was measured by a modified version of Spielberger’s Self-Evaluation Questionnaire used by Reed and Palumbo (1987). The instrument proved to be very reliable in the Reed and Palumbo study (Cronbach alpha = .91 and .93) which involved a similar sample.

Grade point average. Cumulative GPAs also served as a secondary independent variable.

Dependent Measures

Achievement. A Classroom Management Achievement Test (CMAT), developed by me and a content area expert, assessed student knowledge of seven of the eight management principles when applied to situations similar to those in the program (humor was not included because the program is weak in that domain). The test, consisting of 15 short text-based scenarios, placed users in the role of a teacher who must decide what major principle the example did or did not display. A panel of experts evaluated and modified the test until 100% agreement was reached, establishing content validity. The K-R 20 reliability test, applied before and after the treatment, resulted in an overall reliability of .478. (See Appendix B for question examples.)

Stages of concern scores. The sample completed a version of the Stages of Concern Questionnaire (Hall, George, & Rutherford, 1977) before and after the treatment. This instrument’s premise is that, when introduced to an innovation, teachers tend to have very self-oriented concerns. As they learn more, teachers become concerned with how to manage that innovation in their classroom and, finally, begin to explore how they can work with others to share experiences and discover new ways to use previously learned ideas. More specifically, the first concern stage is awareness: “I am not concerned about classroom discipline.” The second stage is informational: “I am concerned about learning more about classroom discipline techniques.” The third stage is personal: “I am concerned about how using various classroom discipline techniques will affect me personally in the classroom.” The fourth stage is management: “I am concerned about the time needed to learn about discipline techniques”. The fifth stage is consequence: “I am concerned about the effects of my discipline strategies on students.” The sixth stage is collaboration: “I am concerned about working with others to learn more about classroom discipline.” The seventh stage is refocusing: “I am concerned about learning new ways to use what I already know about classroom discipline.”

The Cronbach alpha reliability test was applied to each stage before and after the treatment, and the resulting absolute values averaged for each stage. Stages two and five were low (alpha = .209 and .159, respectively), stages six and seven were moderately reliable (alpha = .425 and .477, respectively) and stages one, three, and four were relatively high (alpha = .764, .838, and .722, respectively). Finally, the seven stages were averaged for a final reliability of alpha = 513.

Procedure

The sample completed four instruments before the treatment: (a) the Barbe and Milone (1980) learning modality inventory, (b) the modified Spielberger

Efficacy of interactive video 515

computer anxiety instrument, (c) the stages of concern instrument, and (d) the CMAT. The Office of Admissions and Records provided cumulative GPAs.

Initial activities included: (a) a discussion of laserdisc technology and its ability to add realism to computer-based simulations; (b) an explanation of the simulation’s content and basic structure; (c) a demonstration presenting the objectives, orienting questions, definitions and examples of the management principles, and suggestions for program use; and (d) a run through of the first scenario.

Following the introductory activities, students engaged in the scenarios in small groups of three for a total of approximately 3 hours. The C&I 104 classes and volunteer C&I 7 students completed the 3 program hours in two 90-minute sessions. The C&I 7 classes completed the 3 program hours in three 60minute sessions. The sample met for a final 45minute posttreatment data collection which included (a) the Barbe and Milone (1980) learning modality inventory, (b) the modified Spielberger computer anxiety instrument, (c) the stages of concern instrument, and (d) the CMAT.

ANALYSES AND RESULTS

Class Rank, Learning Modality, and Achievement

To answer the first research question, “What effects does an interactive-video classroom management simulation have on the achievement of pre-service teachers representing two class ranks and two learning styles?“, a 2 x 2 ANOVA (class rank x learning modality) with pretest achievement scores as the dependent variable was conducted to identify differences before the treatment. There were no significant differences for either class rank, F(1, 84) = 1.014, p = .317, or learning modality, F(1, 84) = .436, p = 511, and no interaction, F(1, 84) = 582, p = .448. A second 2 x 2 ANOVA (class rank x learning modality) with posttest achievement scores as the dependent variable was conducted. Again, there were no significant differences for either class rank, F(1, 84) = .527, p = .470, or learning style, F( 1, 84) = 1.922, p = .169, and no interaction F(l, 84) = .124, p = .726, after the treatment. Finally, because there were no significant differences for either learning style or class rank, paired t tests were conducted to compare the sample’s scores on the achievement test from pre- to posttreatment. Both groups (C&I 7 and C&I 104) showed significant improvement from pre- to posttreatment: C&I 7 A4 = 13.390 (pre), A4 = 15.763 (post); C&I 104 A4 = 14.276 (pre), M = 16.690 (post); t(58) = -4.485, p = .OOOl and t(28) = -2.894, p = .007 respectively (Table 1).

C/ass Rank, Learning Modality, and Stages of Concern

In order to answer the second research question, “What effects does an interactive-video classroom management simulation have on the stages of

Table 1. Results of f Tests for Pre- and Posttreatment Achievement Scores

Group df Pretreatment Mean (X) Posttreatment Mean (Y) X-Y t P

C&I 7 58 13.390 15.783 -2.373 - 4.485 .OOOl C&l 104 28 14.278 16.690 -2.414 -2.894 .007

516 Overbaugh

concern of pre-service teachers representing two class ranks and two learning styles?“, seven 2 x 2 ANOVAs (class rank x learning modality) with pretreatment stages of concern scores as the dependent variable were conducted. There were no significant differences. Second, to identify differences that may have occurred as a result of the treatment, a further seven 2 x 2 ANOVAs (class rank x learning modality) with posttreatment stages of concern scores as the dependent variable were conducted. The only significant difference was found on the seventh stage of concern, refocusing, between the two class ranks: C&I 7 (M = 27.797) versus C&I 104 (M = 29.966), F(1, 84) = 4.156, p = .045 (Table 2). Third, since there were no significant differences for either class rank or learning modality at the pre- or posttreatment point, 14 paired t tests (7 for the C&I 7 group and 7 for the C&I 104 group) were conducted to identify any shifts in the sample’s levels of concern for each stage. As can be seen in Table 3 , three significant changes occurred for the C&I 7 group: their concerns dropped significantly for the first stage, awareness, t (58) = 3.256, p = .002 (M = 9.339

Table 2. Results of Posttreatment 2 x 2 ANOVA for Each Stage of Concern

Stage of Concern Class Rank (A) Learning Modality (B) AxB Error

Awareness ss MS F

P

Informational ss MS F

P

Personal ss MS F

P Management

ss MS F

P Consequence

ss MS F P

Collaboration ss MS F

P

ss - 80.351 MS 60.351 F 4.156

3.996 .286 17.654 3.996 ,286 17.654

,217 .016 ,960 642 .901 .330

34.685 7.418 5.633 34.685 7.418 5.633

1.132 .241 .183 .291 .625 .670

6.344 1.204 2.766 6.344 1.204 2.766

.370 .070 .I61 545 .792 .690

24.872 24.872

1.22 ,271

31.592 7.045 2.089 31.592 7.045 2.089 1.495 .333 ,099 .225 .565 .754

18.076 .324 ,048 18.076 .324 .048

.678 .012 .002

.413 .923 ,966

17.247 13.085 17.247 13.085 6.850 .645

.359 ,424

6.279 6.279

.325

.037

.037

.002 D .045* ,570 .965

1545.149 18.395

2589.399 30.826

1441.085 17.156

1704.675 20.294

1774.834 21.129

2239.788 26.664

1623.928 19.332

Nofe. df for class rank = 1; df for learning style = 1; df for A x B = 1; df for Error = 84. l p c.05.

Efficacy of interactive vi&o 517

Table 3. Results of t Tests for Pre- to Posttreatment Stages of Concern Scores

C&l 7 C&l 104

Stage of Concern df X-Y t value p df X - Y t value P

Awareness 58 1.783 3.258 .002’ 28 1.310 1.915 ,088 Informational 58 -1.051 -1.853 .104 28 -.517 -.594 .557 Personal 58 .102 .197 644 28 1.138 1.442 .I80 Management 58 1.390 2.29 ,028’ 28 - .379 - .485 .632 Consequence 58 .034 .080 .952 28 .I72 ,241 .811 Collaboration 58 -2.000 -4.249 .OOl” 28 -1.241 -1.703 .I00 Refocusing 58 -.831 -1.668 .lOl 28 -1.000 -1.868 .107

Note. X - Y = pretreatment mean minus posttreatment mean.

l p < .05.

[pre], it4 = 7.576 [post]), and fourth stage, management, t(58) = 2.29, p = .026 (M = 15.153 [pre], A4 = 13.763 [post]); and their concerns rose significantly for the sixth stage, collaboration, t(58) = -4.249, p = .OOOl (A4 = 24.220 [pre], M = 26.220 [post]). No significant changes occurred for the C&I 104 group.

C/ass Rank, Computer Anxiety, and Achievement

To answer the third research question, “What are the relationships between pre- service teachers’ (a) class rank and achievement, (b) level of computer anxiety and achievement, and (c) GPA and achievement?” two multiple regressions were conducted with (a) class rank, (b) level of pretreatment computer anxiety, and (c) cumulative GPA as predictor variables. Pretreatment achievement was the dependent variable for the first regression and posttreatment achievement was the dependent variable for the second regression.

Table 4 gives the results of these multiple regressions on achievement. The first regression, with pretreatment achievement scores as the dependent variable, had an R value of .331 (R2 = .l 10). GPA scores and pretreatment computer anxiety correlated significantly with the achievement test scores (t value = 2.341, p = .022; t value = 2.178, p = .032, respectively) and collectively accounted for 11% of the variance of achievement. Class rank did not correlate significantly. The second regression, which used posttreatment achievement scores as the dependent variable, revealed no significant correlations.

Table 4. Results of Multiple Regressions on Achievement

Pretreatment Posttreatment

Y-intercept Slope

Rank Computer anxiety Grade point average

t Values Rank Computer anxiety Grade point average

Beta Weight Rank Computer anxiety Grade point average

.331

.llO 12.327

-.021 - .069 1.519

.023 @ = .982) 2.178 (p = .032) 2.341 @ =.022)

- .003 - .230

.254

.179

.032 17.201

.885 - .045

.211

642 @ = .4023) 1.200 @ =.234) .233 @ = .7855)

.096 -.I32

.031

518 Overbaugh

DISCUSSION

Instrument Reliability

Ac/&vement test. Although the instrument (CMAT) was reviewed and modified by a panel of experts until 100% agreement was reached to establish content validity, the reliability of the achievement test was moderate before and after the treatment (K-R 20 = 519 [pre], K-R 20 = .436 [post]). A possible explanation is that the relatively short treatment was insufficient to alter the subjects’ previously formed notions of the management principles to fit the simulation’s specific framework. This reasoning is supported when the definitions are examined. Many of the domains overlap, and discriminating between them may have been difficult. For example, firmness and consistency both refer to resolutely applying a given classroom management strategy. On the other hand, firmness refers to maintaining a policy when faced with some sort of resistance, whereas consistency simply refers to consistently using an established strategy. With this in mind, and given that the primary activity of the simulation was to view problems, devise solution strategies, and view possible results, the users were not inclined to attend rigorously to the definitions of and discriminations between the eight management domains.

Stages of concern hstnment. The overall reliability of the stages of concern instrument (alpha = 513) resulted from averaging two low stages (information and consequence), two moderate stages (collaboration and refocusing), and three relatively high stages (awareness, personal, and management). The different reliabilities occurring within the instrument are interesting. When the raw data of each stage are examined, reasons for the disparate reliabilities emerge.

For the stages with the low or moderate reliabilities (information, consequence, collaboration, and refocusing) nearly every student consistently indicated high levels of concern (M = 26.657, 28.647, 25.636, 28.424, respectively; the highest possible score was 35). The fact that pre-service teachers were concerned about their knowledge of classroom management and the consequences of the application of that knowledge was unsurprising. Also unsurprising was the fairly high concerns about working with others (collaboration) and learning new ways to apply old principles (refocusing).

This reasoning is supported when the remaining three stages of concern with high reliability (awareness, personal, and management; M = 8.194, 24.783, 14.738, respectively) are examined. These stages reflect logical variations among the sample. The first stage, awareness, shows that the sample assessed their base knowledge differently. The third and fourth stages, personal and management, indicate varied concerns about what may happen in an actual classroom. As the sample had not yet taught, assessing their personal and management concerns required hypothesiiing what may happen in the field, a task which some students were able to do more accurately than others.

To summarize, the students in the sample recognized the need for learning as much as possible about classroom management. The fact that the sample expressed their management concerns through consistently high scores on various stages of the instrument, resulting in low reliability on those stages, does not necessarily reduce the instrument’s suitability for accurately portraying a group of pre-service teachers.

Efficacy of interactive video 519

C/ass Rank, Learning ModaNty and Achievement

Pretreatment differences. The lack of significant difference between the pretreatment achievement means of the C&I 7 and the C&I 104 students is not surprising because the curriculum does not offer classroom management training. First-year students’ ideas about classroom management are based on their previous schooling, and those ideas will not change during higher education without instruction.

Pre- to posttreatment changes in achievement. The significant and nearly identical increases in the achievement test scores for C&I 7 (M = 15.763 [post] - 13.390 [pre] = 2.373) and C&I 104 (M = 16.690 [post] - 14.276 [pre] = 2.414) indicate that the treatment was equally effective for both groups. It should be noted, however, that even though the increases were significant, the posttreatment CMAT scores were only 54% of the total possible 30 points. As discussed earlier, the lack of a dramatic increase in CMAT scores may be because of the overlap of the eight management principle definitions. If the students had been directed to continually review and learn the definitions, perhaps aided by some sort of computer-based or paper worksheet, CMAT scores may have been higher. Another factor that may have contributed to the moderate increase may be the lack of accountability for learning the definitions. If the sample had been held responsible for learning the definitions through assessments applied to their course grade, they may have made a greater effort.

Another possible reason for the lack of high posttreatment CMAT scores is that the definitions of the management principles were only part of the program. The primary intent of the simulation is to give users the opportunity to explore various management problem strategies as well as the basic principles on which those solutions are built. The use of video in the simulation seemed to attract the students’ interest and cause them to focus on trying various solutions to see the result, rather than focus on defining the principles and discriminating between similar ones.

Posttreatment differences. The equal effectiveness of the treatment for both groups was somewhat surprising because the C&I 104 students were expected to attend to the simulation more rigorously than the C&I 7 students, owing to their imminent entry into the field. Thus, the treatment’s equal effectiveness indicates that perhaps the presentation mode (interactive video) superseded any predisposition toward learning the content.

The lack of significant differences between the visual and auditory learning modalities resulting from the treatment indicates that the simulation, a combination of visual and audio material, seemed to fulfill the learning requirements of students categorized in either modality.

Class Rank, Learning Modality, and Stages of Concern

Concern scores were fairly high across most stages (Figure 1) which is in contrast to what usually occurs. According to Hall et al. (1977), scores should generally be high on only one stage, or two or three adjacent stages (e.g., Reed, 1990). The high scores across the instrument probably occurred because classroom management ideas are not new to education students. As mentioned previously, all students have numerous ideas pertaining to classroom management and management problem solutions based on many years of school experience. These

520 Overbaugh

100

90

a0 70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

-B C&l 7 Pre

+ C&l 7 Post

0 C&l 104 Pre

0 C&l 104 Post

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Stage of Concern

Figure 1. Pre- and posttreatment stages of concern scores converted to percentiles for graphic presentation (as suggested by Hall, George, 8 Rutherford, 1977).

ideas, however, were formed from a student point of view and may be problematic after the transition from student to professional educator. The simulation was designed to catalyze this transition by causing users to modify some of their ideas. With this in mind, innovation, assessed by the stages of concern instrument, refers to new, simulation-generated ideas about previously learned aspects of classroom management. Therefore, because the sample was familiar with many aspects of classroom management and could easily project possible applications of various strategies for their future professional experience, the high scores are not surprising. This reasoning is supported by the fact that the first stage, awareness, had the lowest scores (Table 5), indicating that the sample considered themselves already aware of classroom management. Similarly, a significant rise in the sample’s stages of concern scores would be difficult because of the high pretreatment levels. That is, when the initial scores were high, it was unlikely that concerns would change significantly across the treatment, particularly given the relatively brief time spent with the simulation. The high scores across most of the stages also implies that the students were aware of deficits in their classroom management knowledge and that they had projected a definite need to learn more.

The scores on the management concerns are noteworthy. This stage reflects ideas about how much time will be required to learn new management techniques and how well schedules will allow adequate time for management strategy development. Both groups’ scores were quite low before and after the treatment in comparison with the surrounding stages (Table 5). A likely explanation is that the sample did not know what their daily schedule would be like once they entered the field and assumed that plenty of time would be available to learn about classroom management.

Also interesting is that the C&I 7 students significantly reduced their management concerns, whereas the C&I 104 students did not. Perhaps the relatively short treatment provided the C&I 7 group with a sense that learning

Efficacy of interactive video 521

about new management techniques would not require a lot of time and would, therefore, not be difficult to fit into their schedules.

Changes did occur that suggest a longer treatment may result in more changes: the C&I 7 students reduced their concerns on stages one and four (awareness and management) and raised their concerns on stage six (collaboration), suggesting a slight shift toward higher concerns in the later stages. Also, given the high scores across most stages, what may occur as a result of a longer treatment would probably be limited primarily to a reduction in lower stage concerns and a slight increase in the upper stages.

A final explanation for the lack of significant stages of concern findings is that the treatment may simply have been ineffective. This is reasonable because the treatment was so brief. In a study by Reed (1990), in which significant concern shifts were found, the treatment encompassed 15 weeks.

C/ass Rank, Computer Anxiety, and Achievement

The multiple regressions revealed correlations between (a) GPA and pretreat- ment achievement and (b) pretreatment computer anxiety and pretreatment achievement. Higher pretreatment achievement scores were obtained by students with higher GPAs and students with lower computer anxiety. No other correlations were significant. The correlation between GPA and achievement

Table 5. Means and Standard Deviations for Each Group on Each Stage of Concern

Posttreatment

C&l 7 C&I 104 n = 59 n = 59

Pretreatment

C&I 7 C&l 104 n = 29 n = 29 Stage of Concern

Awareness M SD Percentile

Informational M SD Percentile

Personal M SD Percentile

Management M SD Percentile

Consequence M SD Percentile

Collaboration M SD Percentile

Refocusing M SD Percentile

9.339 8.588 7.578 7.276 3.799 3.480 4.477 3.798

77 77 72 72

25.220 27.310 26.271 27.828 5.443 4.063 5.985 4.351

90 93 91 95

24.288 25.897 24.186 24.759 3.922 3.783 4.265 3.729

83 87 83 85

15.153 14.828 13.763 15.207 4.571 5.285 4.732 4.003

56 56 52 56

27.949 29.448 27.915 29.276 4.812 3.429 4.959 3.565

66 72 66 72

24.220 25.931 26.220 26.172 4.694 4.140 5.465 4.260

64 72 72 72

26.966 28.968 27.797 29.966 4.491 3.289 4.615 3.758

96 94 92 96

522 Overbaugh

indicates that students with higher grades were able to analyze more competently the test scenarios and identify which management principles were or were not being demonstrated. The correlation between computer anxiety and achievement is curious. A possible explanation is that those with lower anxiety generally had more computer experience because they were usually students who sought out more advanced classes and utilized computers as tools to enhance their classwork. Therefore, they might have been more comfortable with the learning medium. The lack of correlation between class rank and achievement is not surprising. As discussed earlier, both groups, C&I 7 and C&I 104, had not received any formal training in classroom management.

The lack of correlations after the treatment shows that the simulation was successful in overcoming differences related to GPA and computer anxiety. Evidently, similiar to the study by Savenye and Strand (1989) in which science was successfully taught to students of differing academic ability with the aid of interactive-video courseware, the classroom management simulation was equally effective for students varying in academic achievement as well as those with high computer anxiety.

Student Reactions to the Classroom Management Simulation

The posttreatment battery of instruments included some open-ended questions to allow the students to express their opinions about the program. In response to the question “What did you like most about the classroom management simulation?“, the students unanimously indicated they enjoyed using the program, particularly because the video made it seem realistic. This positive attitude toward the program and its content is similar to attitudes found in other studies involving interactive-video courseware (Abrams & Streit, 1986; Bangert- Drowns, Kulik, & Kulik, 1985; Branch, Ledford, Robertson, & Robison, 1987; Milheim, 1989; Robinson, 1988). Many students also said the program was self- explanatory and easy to use. Notably, very few C&I 104 students and almost no C&I 7 students had Macintosh experience, yet no one had any trouble using the program because the only operating skill needed was to move the mouse and click on HyperCard “buttons”.

When answering the question “What changes, if any, would you recommend in the classroom management simulation ?“, nearly every student wanted more scenarios. Some also expressed a desire to work alone rather than in small groups. In response to the question “Would you recommend the classroom management simulation to others?“, every student said they would. Many added that they felt it should become a part of the teacher preparation classes.

Nearly every student enjoyed using the classroom management simulation. Overall, they indicated that the experience was as close to reality as possible, given the treatment medium. They enjoyed seeing the results of their strategy choices and often expressed surprise when strategies they did not think would work accomplished the desired result. In actual use, most students very conscientiously responded to the program’s questions the first few times through each scenario, particularly the C&I 104 group. After five or six times, however, most simply began to click “Done” buttons and choose a strategy to see what would happen. When questioned, they indicated they had tried out the strategies they thought were appropriate and were then just “playing around” to see what may happen in other solution paths. Because they had spent time actively

Efficacy of interactive video 523

responding to the program questions, this seemed like a reasonable course of action, particularly when unexpected outcomes occurred.

These findings, along with the quantitative results, indicate that the classroom management simulation is an efficacious tool for gaining classroom experience before going out into the field or when field work is not an option.

SUMMARY

Results

The results of this study are promising given the relatively brief treatment period. The significant, but not dramatic, achievement gains imply that more time spent with the simulation may result in higher achievement. The significant findings from the stages of concern instrument also suggest that the simulation may have begun to cause the expected shift in concerns. As discussed earlier, the C&I students’ high concerns across most of the stages showed they (a) had some knowledge about classroom management, (b) had considered their limitations, (c) had wondered how they would learn more, and (d) had projected their needs to the time when they would enter the field. With such high concerns across the stages, the anticipated treatment effect from a longer treatment will probably be limited to a reduction of concerns in the earlier stages and only a slight increase in the later stages, which occurred to a limited degree with the C&I 7 group.

As discussed earlier, a longer treatment may result in more dramatic changes. However, an important point worth emphasizing is that computers are rarely the sole learning medium. Computers are generally regarded as learning tools that have the potential to enrich traditional learning tasks and facilitate higher levels of achievement. Perhaps the classroom management simulation would prove more effective if used as an integral part of a class in which an instructor provided more concrete procedures for program use and goals as outcomes. Group discussions, in which various management principles would be analyzed for appropriateness and inappropriateness in given situations, would be an important part of such a structured approach. Utilizing the simulation in such a manner would eliminate user tendencies to (a) neglect the specifics of and differences between the principles of management and (b) hurry through the scenarios in order to just “see what happens” without attending to the principles demonstrated or infringed.

Because CA1 is an effective mode for independent study (Robinson, 1988), another possible use of the simulation is to make it available for students in the field who are forced to deal with management problems on an everyday basis in addition to their many other responsibilities. After exposure to real situations, users may be more receptive to exploring the scenarios more intensely to improve their automaticity in selecting appropriate management strategies based on knowledge gleaned from the simulation.

Conc/usion

Interactive-video computer-based simulations are potentially useful for introducing pre-service teachers to classroom situations because they are dependable, consistent, and easily accessible (Hasselbring et al., 1987; Roblyer, 1988). Education staff often have difficulty finding and coordinating quality,

524 Overbaugh

initial field experiences for their students. If field experiences can be effectively simulated, work on initial experiences can be pursued at any time, making those experiences dependable and easily accessible. Easy accessibility, combined with time compression, will also result in time and cost savings (Abrams & Streit, 1986; Milheim, 1989). That is, simulated field experiences are available at any time, saving the time and travel costs associated with actual field experience. This is similar to claims made by military users of interactive-video training courseware (Ramsberger, Harris, Knerr, & Hopwood, 1985). Because users’ experiences will be the same, or similar (depending on the nature of the simulation and what choices students make within the programs), they will have common experiences that lead more easily to classroom discussion (Hasselbring et al., 1987; Walkley & Kelley, 1989). Simulated field work may reduce anxiety because users know they can try ideas without risking failure with “real” students or worrying about possible negative effects from unacceptable actions (Gropper, 1983). Therefore, simulations using interactive video potentially provide an important, “risk-free,” stepping stone from non-experienced student to classroom professional. With these advantages, interactive-video computer- based simulations are promising tools to help prepare educators.

REFERENCES

Abrams, A., & Streit, L. (1986). Effectiveness of interactive video in teaching basic photography. T.H.E. Journal, 14(2), 92-96.

Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1985). Effectiveness of computer-based education in secondary schools. Journal of Computer Based Instruction, 12(3), 59-68.

Barbe, W. B., 8r Milone, M. N., Jr. (1980). Modality. Instructor, 89(6), 44-46. Branch, C. E., Ledford, B. R., Robertson, B. T., & Robison, L. (1987). The validation of an

interactive videodisc as an alternative to traditional teaching techniques: Auscultation of the heart. Educational Technology, 27(3), 16-21.

Canino, C., & Cicchelli, T. (1988). Cognitive styles, computerized treatments on mathematics achievement and reaction to treatments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 4, 253-264.

Gay, G., Trumbull, D., & Smith, J. (1988). Perceptions of control and use of control options in computer-assisted video instruction. Tech Trends, 33(S), 31-33.

Gropper, G. L. (1983). A behavioral approach to instructional prescription. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models (pp. 101-139). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hall, G. E., George, A., 8c Rutherford, W. L. (1977). Measuring the stages of concern about the innovation: A manual for use of the stages of concerns questionnaire. Austin: Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, The University of Texas.

Hasselbring, T., Sherwood, R., Bransford, J., Fleenor, K., Griffith, D., & Goin, L. (1987/1988). An evaluation of a level-one instructional videodisc program. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 16, 15 l-69.

Kirby, J. R., Moore. P. J., & Schofield, N. F. (1988). Verbal and visual learning styles. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 169-184.

Milheim, W. D. (1989). Perceived attitudinal effects of various types of learner control in an interactive video lesson. (ERIC Reproduction Service Document No. ED 308 828)

Ramsberger, P. F., Harris, C. D., Knerr, C. M., & Hopwood, D. (1985). Development of parallel learning strategies curricula using videodisc and standard off-line formats -final report. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 272 168)

Reed, W. M. (1990). The effect of computer-and-writing instruction on prospective English teachers’ attitudes toward and perceived uses of computers in writing instruction. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23, 3-27.

Reed, W. M., & Palumbo, D. B. (1987). Intensity of treatment and its relationship to programming problem solving. Computers in the Schools, 4(3/4), 119-128.

Efficacy of interactive video 525

Robinson, R. L. (1988). The development and evaluation of a computer assisted music instruction program for the improvement of tonal memory. Computers in the Schools, 5(1/2), 129-140.

Roblyer, M. D. (1988). Fundamental problems and principles of designing effective courseware. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware (pp. 7-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Savenye, W. C., & Strand, E. (1989). Teaching science using interactive videodisc: Results of the pilot year evaluation of the Texas Learning Technology Group Project. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 308 838)

University of Alberta. (1987). Classroom Discipline: A Simulation Approach [Computer Program Documentation]. Alberta, Canada: University of Alberta, The Instructional Technology Centre.

Walkley, J. W., & Kelley, L. E. (1989). The effectiveness of an interactive videodisc qualitative assessment training program. Research Quarterly, 60, 280-85.

Zeidler, D. L., & McIntosh, W. J. (1989, March). The effectiveness of laser disc generatedmodels on conceptual shifts in college students. Paper presented at the 1989 Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 305 271)

APPENDIX A

The Classroom Management Simulation

The simulation introduction begins with a description of the program so that users know what to expect, followed by several advance organizers. A set of prequestions related to the scenarios is presented to induce users to begin to assess their knowledge of classroom management. For example, the third prequestion is “What would you do if a student replies to your request that he clean up a mess he has created with an insolent ‘No’?” Next, a list of user expectations is provided which includes (a) situational assessment skills, (b) taking into account other students’ reactions when applying management strategies to one or more students, and (c) thinking ahead to predict the effects of management strategies on students and their classmates. An overview of the program, via a list of the four scenarios, is also included in the introduction as well as the simulation’s objectives.

Another segment of the introduction is a screen from which the eight management principles (fairness, consistency, firmness, courtesy, flexibility, trust, respect, and humor) are defined and examples of each are given. This segment is extremely important because the users, who already have firm notions of what each of the terms means, need to know how the terms are interpreted from a classroom management point of view. The screen has the eight terms written in seemingly random places on the screen to discourage any attempt to prioritize them according to importance. Each word is also a button which, when clicked, links to a screen with a definition. From the definition screen, users can go to a classroom example in which the management principle is applied, or to a dictionary definition of the term which has the applicable parts of the definition highlighted. Users can return to the eight principles screen, or even the main menu, from any of the subordinate screens by clicking an appropriate button. The segment defining management principles is also available at any time during the simulation via an “idea” button present on nearly every screen of each scenario. If users elect to go to this segment, a new button appears that, when clicked, returns them to the exact scenario screen from where they came.

Overbaugh

After completing the introduction, the users are reminded that classroom management problems rarely have one “right” solution and are encouraged to try each scenario several times to explore various strategies, even ones that may not seem prudent, just to see what could happen. At this point, the users are returned to the main menu to begin the first scenario.

Each scenario has a title screen with a “play video” button and a “skip video” button. The skip video button is provided because the initial film clip is the longest and users generally do not wish to view it on subsequent times through the scenario. After the initial film clip, the program stops and the user is asked to type in a specific assessment of the problem, or what the problem may become if not addressed. When finished, the user clicks a “done” button and is asked to type in a solution to the problem. Only after entering a solution does the program present the options available on the laserdisc. The user clicks the solution that matches his/hers best and is then asked to describe why that solution was chosen and what management principles are being used. Now the simulation plays a video clip of a possible reaction by the student(s). This sequence of assessment, choosing a solution and seeing the results, occurs up to five times depending on the choices made. At the end of the scenario, three forms of review are provided. First, a summary card is presented that combines computer-generated text and the user-generated text (from the response boxes throughout the program) in a paragraph that summarizes all the steps, choices made, and reasons given by the user. The paragraph usually suffers from syntax mismatch, but is nearly always readable. The second review is a synthesis provided by a card on which users are asked to consider the management principles used and evaluate the efficacy of their problem solution. The final review is a program feedback card on which the strategies chosen are presented along with the principles they reflect or violate. The management principle terms in the feedback text are highlighted for added emphasis.

APPENDIX B

Example Questions from the Classroom Management Achievement Test

Directions. Put yourself in the role of teacher and evaluate each of the scenarios below. Determine what principle(s) of classroom management (listed below) you demonstrated the use of or lack of, and mark the appropriate blank on the answer sheet. Each scenario has one primary answer and MAY have one or more secondary answers.

Fairness Flexibility Consistency Respect

Courtesy Trust Firmness Humor

1. Two students are disturbing a class by talking in the back of the room, and you tell them twice to be quiet after which they are quiet for a few minutes. The third time they talk you tell them to go to the office because they cannot seem to control themselves and one student argues, “But we weren’t making that much noise, so why should we have to leave?” and refuses to budge. You then respond by telling one of them to move to a vacant seat away from the other and that the problem

Efficacy of interactive video 527

would be discussed later. The student grumbles and moves, and the class continues.

2. You take Shelly’s pencil away from her after she continues tapping it - not loudly, but enough to disturb others - after you warned her she would lose it. She responds by asking, “Why did you take my pencil?” “Because you were disturbing the class with it after I told you not to,” you reply. Shelly then informs you that another student was tapping her pencil, too, but you didn’t take hers. She asks why. You respond with, “I am talking to you about your behavior andno one else’s,” and walk away. She then mutters, “That’s not fair,” under her breath, but does not cause any more problems.

3. You have established open time in your classroom at lunch for students to come in and use the computers for school-related activities, and it is becoming a pretty popular place to be. Naturally, some students use the machines more effectively than others. You try to control the overcrowding by allowing themore productive students to dominate the terminals, and you do not ask them to leave when others arrive who you feel will not get as much out of the activities.

4. After participating in your band program for one year, most of your students are purchasing instruments. You feel a little disappointed when you notice Kristi’s “new” old case, thinking, “Here comes another Uncle Henry’s horn from the attic.” She seems excited about the instrument and eagerly gets it out of the case to show you. When you see it, your heart sinks; it is one of the worst models ever made and will probably stick out like a sore thumb. You ask, “Have you purchased this yet?” and she tells you her dad bought it the day before. You respond, “I wish he had checked with me before he bought this. I didn’t think any of these were still around.” You then add, “But it will do the job for a while.“.