+ Page 19 + ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ####### ######## ######## ########### ### ### ## ### ## # ### # Interpersonal Computing and ### ### ## ### ## ### Technology: ### ### ## ### ### An Electronic Journal for ### ######## ### ### the 21st Century ### ### ### ### ### ### ### ## ### ISSN: 1064-4326 ### ### ### ## ### April, 1994 ####### ### ######## ### Volume 2, Number 2, pp. 19-27 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Center for Teaching and Technology, Academic Computer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC 20057 Additional support provided by the Center for Academic Computing, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802 This article is archived as CRAIN IPCTV2N2 on LISTSERV@GUVM ---------------------------------------------------------------- EFFECTS OF INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA ON IMMEDIATE AND LONG TERM RECALL Loretta A. Crain Clarion University of Pennsylvania With the advent of instructional technology, it is necessary to determine whether the technology is actually a more effective teaching tool than traditional teacher centered instruction. Will students retain more information received from a lecture, from a video or from a computer? Will the technology produce greater amounts of immediate recall? Will the student be able to retain the information learned from non-traditional methods over an extended period of time? Two of the most used technologies in instruction are video and computer assisted instruction. The purpose of this research was to find out which of these forms of instruction produces more immediate and long term recall of the information presented in them. A comparison of each individual method (computer assisted instruction, video assisted instruction, and the traditional lecture format) was used to pinpoint the particular power of each to provide for immediate and long term recall of information. + Page 19 + Research in comparing all three instructional methods, video, CAI and lecture, has been limited. However, research on one of the three methods or on comparing two of the methods is available. Ukkonen, (1987) published a general guideline of how much one should recall from hearing and seeing information. Her research states that of the things we hear, we remember 70% after three hours and 10% after three days. Of the things we see, we remember 75% after three hours and 20% after three days. Of the things we see and hear we remember 85% after three hours and 65% after three days. Judging by these numbers, I expected the video group to have the highest mean score on immediate and long term recall tests. The research done by Gagne and Paget, (1980) tells a complete- ly different story from Ukkonen's guideline. In this study, college level Educational Psychology students were taught via lecture throughout the semester. Eight months after the course had ended, the students were contacted and asked to take a retention test. The retention test was called a survey in order to prevent students from studying. It was found that after being out of class for eight months, the average total retention of the information received from the class was 58.76%. In other words, 58.76% of the material presented through lecture was retained by the students. This percentage of long term recall from lecture closely resembles Ukkonen's guideline for recall of audio-visual after three days rather than lecture. Instructional video also makes a claim to be a form of instruction that produces high levels of immediate and long term recall. In a study by Klees, (1979) it was found that a group of Mexican ninth graders using instructional video in math and science scored significantly higher on achievement tests than the group learning through traditional methods. There are conflicting views on the effects of CAI on recall of information. Paden & Barr, (1980), conducted a study in which randomly selected students from a college economics class were to spend one of their two classes per week using a CAI program. The rest of the class was taught by lecture twice a week. It was found that students using the CAI program scored significantly higher on the final exam than the students who only attended the lectures. In contrast, Tsai & Pohl, (1980), found that there was no difference between their CAI group and their lecture group for both immediate and long term recall. + Page 20 + All three forms of instruction claim to produce the greatest amount of immediate and long term recall. However, this previous research does not consider the similarity in content between the methods of instruction. For example, in the study by Klees, it is not clear if students in the video and non-video groups were presented with the same information or if one method was more detailed than the other. Also in testing for long term recall (Gagne & Paget, 1980), it is not clear if students were asked the same questions on the retention test as they had been asked on the course exams. This research project took these concerns into account. The three instructional methods used were lecture, CAI and video. Each contained the same information and subjects in each instructional group were given the same test for immediate recall. The students in each group received the same questions as in the immediate recall test on the long term recall test. This research sought to answer the questions: 1. Which instructional method will produce the greatest amount of immediate recall? 2. Which instructional method will produce the greatest amount long term recall? METHOD Subjects Students of an introductory mass communication course in a medium-sized northeastern university participated in this study. Enrollment in this course usually consists of one hundred fifty to two hundred students who are mainly freshman and sophomore college students ages 17 to 20. There are also a few non- traditional students (i.e. returning adults, international students) in this class. The information presented to the students through the three different media was on the four steps of the public relations process. Because the sample came from an introductory mass communication course that was a prerequisite for upper level courses in public relations, the students had not been exposed to the principles of public relations. Therefore, there was a limited amount of previous knowledge of public relations principles which could have influenced recall. + Page 21 + Materials Three media were used to instruct the public relations process: lecture, CAI, and video. Each group of students was presented with the same information and the same quiz to insure that measurement was on recall of the same information. A lecture was prepared to instruct students on the four steps of the public relations process and examples were given on how each step is used in actual public relations work. A videotape was produced containing explanations of the four steps of the public relations process with an actual public relations practitioner discussing how each step of the process is used. A CAI package was constructed containing an explanation of the public relations process and examples of when each step is used. The CAI module contained prompted responses to questions, and allowed the student to learn at his own pace. After each conceptual unit, the CAI package asked review questions, students were allowed to continue the module after having answered the review questions correctly. Three separate instruction areas were required. A short quiz to assess immediate recall was constructed and included objective questions on the content of the instruction. The questions were on the terminology presented in the lesson and on uses of the steps in the public relations process. There were fifteen questions on this quiz, ten of which were multiple choice and five were short answer. Procedures The class was divided randomly into three groups. This was accomplished by using a random number generator. Each student received a card explaining when and where they were to report for public relations "training." Group one reported to the regular classroom and received the lecture given by a trained instructor. Group two reported to another classroom, supervised by another trained instructor, to view the video. Group three reported to the computer lab, which was again, supervised by a trained instructor, to utilize the CAI package. During the course of instruction, students were permitted to take notes and to ask questions regarding the content of the instruction. This was to insure that each group had the same opportunity to clarify any information which they did not understand. + Page 22 + Before each presentation, students were asked to read and sign an informed consent form. Immediately following each instructional presentation the trained instructor handed out the quiz. Students had up to fifteen minutes to complete the quiz. The trained instructor in each group then collected the quizzes and dismissed the students. The quizzes were then graded and the number of questions answered correctly by each student in each group was recorded. Performance on this quiz determined which form of instruction, if any, produced the greatest amount of immediate recall. Four weeks after the instruction, all students participating in this study were given the same quiz as before during their regular class time. This quiz contained the same questions as before only in different order. Students were once again given fifteen minutes to complete the quiz. The trained instructor then collected the quizzes and they were graded. The students were then read a debriefing statement regarding the nature of the research in which they had participated. The number of questions answered correctly by each student in each group was recorded. Performance on this quiz will determine which form of instruction, if any, produced the greatest amount of long term recall. An analysis of variance was run on test scores from the immediate recall test and again on the long term recall test. Appendix A contains the quiz that was used to test for immediate recall. The number in parenthesis besides each item denotes the order in which that item appeared on the second quiz for long term recall. The questions are multiple choice and short answer items based on the objective information contained in the instruction. Results Of the 185 students in the class, 143 participated in this research. The CAI group consisted of 42 students, the video group consisted of 44 students and the lecture group consisted of 57 students. An analysis of variance was used to determine if any of the three groups scored significantly higher on the immediate recall test. A Duncan's Multiple Range test was used as a post hoc analysis to test for individual differences between any two levels of the three groups. The Duncan test is appropriate for multiple comparisons when cell sizes are unequal (SAS, p 474). It was found that the CAI and lecture groups mean scores for this test were significantly higher than the mean score of the video group (F = 8.22; d.f. = 2; P < .05). Of a possible score of 15, the CAI group had a mean score of 11.26, the lecture group had a mean score of 11.66 and the video group had a mean score of 9.41. Post hoc analysis revealed a significant difference between the video group (mean = 9.4) and the other two conditions (CAI, mean = 11.67, and lecture, mean = 11.26), with the lecture and CAI groups having no significant difference between them (MSE = 8; d.f. = 140; P < .05). + Page 23 + Another analysis of variance was used to determine if there was a significant difference between the groups on their mean score from the long term recall test. There was no significant difference between mean scores of the groups on recall of the information four weeks after the initial presentation (F = .51; d.f. = 2; P = .603). The mean test score for the CAI group was 9.72, the lecture group had a mean score of 9.63 and the video group had a mean score of 9.02. Post hoc analysis shows no significant difference between groups on the second test (MSE = 10.44; d.f. = 118; P > .05). A variable was created to reflect the difference between test one scores and test two scores for each group. ANCOVA was run to see if there was a difference between the groups on score difference from test one to test two controlling for test one. Again, no significant difference was found (F = .42; d.f. = 2; P = .66). Interestingly enough, all groups leveled off from test one to test two at an approximate mean of 9. The CAI mean score dropped by 1.54 from test one, the lecture mean score dropped by 2.03 and the video mean score stayed relatively the same, dropping only .39. Duncan's multiple range test was used as a post hoc analysis to determine if any difference between subgroups of the means was significant. Post hoc analysis showed no significant difference between any one of the groups from the other three (MSE = 10.52; d.f. = 117; P > .05). Discussion In comparing the findings of this research to the guidelines of Ukkonen (1987) on what one should remember of what is seen and heard, these findings are significantly lower for both immediate and long term recall. Ukkonen's guidelines state that what is seen and heard (in this case, video) creates the highest recall rate for both immediate and long term recall. My research found video to be the lowest in immediate and long term recall. The long term recall rate for the lecture group was similar to the long term recall of lecture rate of Gagne and Paget (1980). Klees (1979) claimed that a video group scored significantly higher on achievement tests than those taught by traditional methods. Conversely, I found that the traditional lecture group performed better than the video group. + Page 24 + Findings in this research indicate that CAI and lecture produce greater amounts of immediate recall than video. However, over time, CAI and lecture recall rates fall to become equal with the video recall rates. It is interesting to note that recall stayed relatively the same for the video group. This could be considered a positive finding in that little was forgotten by the group in the time period between test one and test two. However, in light of the immediate recall scores from the lecture and computer assisted instruction group, the small difference between immediate and long term recall for the video group is not encouraging. The CAI and lecture groups had much higher levels of immediate recall, and dropped to the same level of long term recall as the video group. This shows that while video assisted instruction may produce comparable levels of long term recall as lecture and CAI, it is less effective in producing immediate recall of concepts than the other two. The findings in this research project suggest possible related uses for each of these instructional media. Paden and Barr (1980) found that students using CAI and lecture together scored significantly higher on final exams than those who only received lectures. This suggests that combinations of instructional media will enhance both immediate and long term recall. Since CAI and lecture both yielded high immediate recall rates, perhaps combining the two would create even higher long term and immediate recall. Since the CAI group scored high in immediate recall, CAI would have great use as a study guide or review before tests. Lecture with CAI as a reinforcement has a possibility of raising immediate and long term recall. Video assisted instruction may present other possibilities for increasing long term recall. A video assisted instruction session could follow a lecture as a reinforcement tool or could be used to stimulate discussion and interaction from students. Later, the use of a CAI package could further facilitate long term recall of concepts as an individualized review session. In conclusion, while this research shows that CAI and lecture formats seem to provide better opportunity for immediate recall of information than video assisted instruction, no single method of instruction can insure significant amounts of long term recall of concepts. Further research is needed to test combinations of these instructional methods to determine which can provide the most effective long term recall in a given class situation. + Page 25 + References Gagne, E. D. & Paget, K. D. (1980). Eight month retention of instance and definition recognition for educational psychology concepts. Journal of Experimental Education, 49(2), 76-83 Klees, S. J. (1979). Television as an educational medium: the case of Mexican secondary education. Comparative Education Review, 23, 81-102. Paden, D. W. & Barr, M. D. (1980). Computer assisted instruction in an elementary college economics course. Computers and Education, 4, 259-267. SAS Institute Inc. SAS User's Guide: Statistics, Version 5 Edition. Carey, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 1985. Tsai, S. I. & Pohl, N. F. (1980). Computer assisted instruction augmented with planned student teacher contacts. Journal of Experimental Education, 49(2), 120-126 Ukkonen, J. (1987). Audio visuality squeezed into the classroom. Educational Media International, 24, 153-155. Appendix A - Test NOTE: This is test one as it was used. The number in the parenthesis is the order in which that question appeared in test 2. THE PUBLIC RELATIONS PROCESS Last six numbers of your Social Security Number_______ Please circle the best answer to the following questions. 1.(5) Which of the following is not a step in the Public Relations process? A. Fact Finding B. Analysis C. Evaluation D. Planning 2.(1) When does Fact Finding take place? A. At the end B. During planning C. Third step D. First step 3.(2) What is action in the Public Relations process? A. Implementation B. Planning C. Evaluation D. First step 4.(8) Planning and programming involves: A. Research B. Developing strategy C. Public Relations D. Fact finding + Page 26 + 5.(3) In evaluation, the Public Relations practitioner: A. Does research B. Decides best course of action to take C. Looks at the success or failure of plan D. Implements plan 6.(4) What is meant by "the current situation" of a company? A. Health of the CEO's B. Media relations C. Fiscal year D. Overall functioning of company 7.(10) When a public Relations practitioner looks to see what the 1989 sales figures were, he/she is using: A. Fact finding B. Planning C. Action D. Evaluation 8.(7) When a Public Relations practitioner considers the success or failure of a plan, he/she is using: A. Fact finding B. Planning C. Action D. Evaluation 9.(9) The Public Relations practitioner has just begun using the plan. What step has he now started. A. Fact finding B. Planning C. Action D. Evaluation 10.(6) When the Public Relations practitioner decides which plan is best, he/she is involved in: A. Fact finding B. Planning C. Action D. Evaluation Please complete the following with a brief answer. 11.(15) A successful plan may result in (give one example): ______________________________________ ________________________________________________ 12.(14) The Public Relations practitioner makes his decision of which plan to use based on _________________________________________________ 13.(13) A non-successful plan may will result in (give one example): _____________________________ _________________________________________________ + Page 27 + 14.(12) The purpose of evaluation is _________________ _________________________________________________ 15.(11) Give one example of what is considered to be part of the current situation of a company. _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE: Loretta Crain received her B.S. degree from Clarion University of Pennsylvania in Education - Secondary English. Currently she is completing her M.S. degree in Commun- ications, also at Clarion University, specializing in instructional technology and design. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century Copyright 1994 Georgetown University. Copyright of individual articles in this publication is retained by the individual authors. Copyright of the compilation as a whole is held by Georgetown University. It is asked that any republication of this article state that the article was first published in IPCT-J. Contributions to IPCT-J can be submitted by electronic mail in APA style to: Gerald Phillips, Editor IPCT-J GMP3@PSUVM.PSU.EDU