IIIIIIIII

'" llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllflllllflflllllm

3 1293 10605

LIBRARY

Michigan Stat!
U n. 3 in; “mi ' I

  
  
     

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF VISUALLY
DIRECTED METHODS AND TOPICS
USING THREE PICTURE-PASSAGE FORMATS

presented by

Charles R. Beck

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph- mgggreem Ele. Ed.

 

 

if“ ’\I A QOSLLwnfiA-ulki

Major professor

Date

 

0-7639

 

 

OVERDUE FINES:
25¢ per day per item
RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS:

Place 17: book return to remove
charge from circulation records

 

 

 

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF VISUALLY-
DIRECTED METHODS AND TOPICS
USING THREE PICTURE-PASSAGE FORMATS

By

Charles R. Beck

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Elementary Education
Department of Instructional Development and Technology

1981

in wax .
m\\®

ABSTRACT

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF VISUALLY-
DIRECTED METHODS AND TOPICS
USING THREE PICTURE-PASSAGE FORMATS

By
Charles R. Beck

This study had three purposes. First. the study
attempted to find out whether a simultaneous presentation
of pictures and passages, as exemplified by a set of sta-
tionary and manipulative boards. would be more conducive
to learning than a successive presentation of pictures and
passages. as exemplified by a set of booklets. Second,
the study attempted to find out whether the manipulative
boards, which required the students to position the pic-
tures above their appropriate passages. would be more con-
ducive to learning than the stationary boards. which pre-
sented the pictures already mounted above their appropri-
ate passages. Third, the study attempted to find out
whether a topic of higher interest would be more conducive
to learning than a topic of lower interest for each of the
treatments: booklets. stationary. and manipulative boards.

A convenient sample of 180 fifth-grade students
were randomly assigned to two independent variables: three
methods (booklets. stationary. and manipulative boards)

and two topics (Chimps and Indians). Each student was as-

Charles R. Beck

signed to a single method and topic.

Achievement posttests were the major instruments.
Each test (Chimps and Indians) was divided into two depen-
dent variables: passage and picture content items. In
terms of validity, both tests conformed to the same struc-
tural specifications: that is, both had the same number of
items, set of learning objectives. and reading levels. In
terms of reliability. both tests achieved similar and high
reliability coefficients and mean indices of discrimina-
tion.

The following conclusions were derived from the
MANOVA and ANOVA tests of significance: (1) The simultane-
ous presentations (boards) were more conducive to learning
both higher and lower interest topics, in terms of picture
content, than the successive presentation (booklet); (2)
The manipulative boards were not more conducive to learn-
ing a higher or lower interest topic than the stationary
boards; and (3) The topic of higher interest (Chimps) was
more conducive to picture and passage learning, for each
of the three methods. than the topic of lower interest
(Indians). Based on the conditions and findings of this
study. it would appear that students could achieve higher
levels of learning if they were given more simultaneous

(multiple-image) presentations.

@Copyright by
CHARLES R. BECK
1981

ii

DEDICATION

I dedicate this dissertation to my wife
and parents. Without their constant
inspiration, confidence. and love.

I could not have conducted this research.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am deeply indebted to the chairman of my doctor-
al guidance committee. Dr. Janet Alleman-Brooks, for her
wise counsel and steadfast support throughout my studies
at Michigan State University. From our first meeting in
Japan, she extended a warm friendship and source of inspi-
ration which I shall always cherish.

I wish to express a special thanks to Dr. William
Joyce. who as a member of the doctoral guidance committee.
offered many perceptive insights and constructive sugges-
tions during the writing of this paper. He was generous
with his time and he supported me in many thoughtful ways.

A special appreciation is extended to Dr. Castille
Gentry for serving on the doctoral guidance committee and
providing his professional guidance throughout the study.
From our first meeting in Japan, he provided much of the
technical expertise I needed to conduct this research.

A deep gratitude is expressed to Dr. Kent Gustaf-
son, who as a member of the doctoral guidance committee.
shared his perceptive insight into the overall design of
this project. His technical knowledge and thoughtful sug-
gestions helped to clarify the nature of this research.

A special thanks is owed to the principals. teach-
ers. and pupils who participated in this field research.

Their cooperation made this dissertation possible.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

Chapter
I. IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . 1
Need for the Study: Theoretical Bases . . . 1
Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . 7
Significance of the Study . . . . . . . . . 7
Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 11
Research and Statistical Hypotheses . . . . 13
summary 0 D O O O O I I O O O O O O O O O O 1“

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Imagery Development and Visual-Verbal

Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Imagery and Developmental Theory . . . . . 16
Paired Associate Learning . . . . . 18
Picture Facilitation of Passage Content . 20
Principles of Visual Perception and

Learning . . . . . . . . 22
Visual Field and Multiple-Image

Perception . . . . . . . . . 23

Proximity and Similarity . . . . .
Spatial Relations and Organization
Repetition and Exposure Time . . .
Whole and Simultaneous Presentation
Sensory Modality Learning . . . . . .
Child Deve10pmental Growth . . .
Paradigms Based on Sensory Modalities
Studies Based on Sensory Modalities .
Principles of Multimodal Learning . .
Picture-Topic Preferences and Reading

U
U

Comprehension a e a a e e a e a a e a e 38
Picture Characteristics and Preferences . 8
Children' s Topic Preferences . . . . . . . 0

Topic Interests and Reading
Comprehension . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Design Recommendations for Instructional
Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
summary 0 I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 1’7

Chapter
III. METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN . . . . . . . . .

Research Questions . . . . . . . . . .
Population and Sample . . . . . . . .
Research Design . . . . .
Basic Design Elements and Procedures
Description of the Instruments . . .
Achievement Posttests . . . . .
Student Attitude Questionnaires
Independent Variables . . .
Independent Variable: Methods
Independent Variable: Topics .
Question Sheets . . .
Results of the Pilot Studies . .
Instrument Validation . . . .
Experimental Procedures .
Selection of a Posttest-Only Design
Variables and Design Validity . .
Intemal Validity a e e e o o 0
External Validity . . .
Potential Confounding Variables
Statistical Models of Analyses . . .
Two-Way Multivariate Analysis of
Variance . . . . . . . .
Two—Way Analysis of Variance .

Statistical Hypotheses . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . .

IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . . . .

Purposes of the Study . . . . . . . .
Research and Test Hypotheses . . . . .
Findings of the Study . . . . .
Two-Way Multivariate Analysis of
Variance . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Two-Way Analysis of Variance . . . .
Student Questionnaire Data . . . .
Posttest-Questionnaire Data Analysis
Posttest Item Analysis . . . .
Posttest Reliability Coefficients
Treatment Observations . . . . . .
Question Sheet Analysis . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

V. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE
RESEARCH O I O O O O O O O O O O O O I

Summary 0 O O O O O O O O O I O O O 0

vi

129
129

Chapter Page

Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . 129
Need for the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Review of the Literature . . . . . . . . . 130
Methodology and Design . . . . . . . . . . 131
Analysis of the Data . . . . . . . . . . . 132
Conclusions of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 133
Discussion of the Findings . . . . . . . . . 136
Assessment of the Variables . . . . . . . 136
Implications for Educators and
Instructional Designers . . . . . . . . 1&2

Implications for Future Research . . . . . . 14G
APPENDICES

A. THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . 1&9

B. ITEM IDENTIFICATION TABLES . . . . . . . . . . 166

C. THE TREATMENT MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . . . 170

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206

vii

Table

3.1

3.2

3-3

3.4

#.1

4.2

14.3

h.#

[4‘05

h.6

4.7

h.8

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Comparative Specifications for Two Achieve-
ment TeStS O O O I I O I O O O O O I O O O O 56

Two-Way Table of Specifications for an
Achievement Test on Wild Chimpanzees . . . . 57

Two-Way Table of Specifications for an
Achievement Test on Cliff Village Indians . 58

Layout of Data in a 3 X 2 Two—Factor MANOVA
(Multivariate Analysis of Variance) Design
with 30 Observations Per Cell . . . . . . . 85

Two-Way MANOVA (Fixed Effects) Based on
Multivariate F-Tests (Passage and Picture
Content Combined) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Two-Way ANOVA (Fixed Effects) Based on Uni-
variate F-Tests for Passage Content . . . . 95

Two-Way ANOVA (Fixed Effects) Based on Uni-
variate F-Tests for Picture Content . . . . 96

Cell, Row, and Column Means and Standard
Deviations for 30 Passage Items Based on
30 Observations Per Cell . . . . . . . . . . 98

Cell, Row, and Column Means and Standard
Deviations for 20 Picture Items Based on
30 Observations Per Cell . . . . . . . . . . 98

Responses of 27 Students to an Attitude
Questionnaire (Form A: Comparing a Booklet
to a Stationary Board) . . . . . . . . . . . 102

Responses of 26 Students to an Attitude
Questionnaire (Form B: Comparing a Booklet
to a Manipulative Board) . . . . . . . . . . 103

Responses of 27 Students to an Attitude

Questionnaire (Form C: Comparing a Station-
ary to a Manipulative Board) . . . . . . . . 10h

viii

Table
4.9

1+0 10

n.11

9.12

4.13

h.1#

n.15

4.16

4.17

#.18

1+. 19

Relationship Between Posttest Scores and
Method Preferences (Booklets Versus Sta-
tionary Boards) Based on 2? Respondents . .

Relationship Between Posttest Scores and
Method Preferences (Booklets Versus Manip-
ulative Boards) Based on 26 Respondents . .

Relationship Between Posttest Scores and
Method Preferences (Stationary Versus Manip-
ulative Boards) Based on 2? Respondents . .

Relationship Between Posttest Scores and
Topic Preferences (Chimps Versus Indians)
Based on 80 Respondents . . . . . . . . . .

Item Analysis Data Based on Indices of Diffi-
culty and Discrimination for 30 Items Based
on the Passage Content from a Posttest on
Wild Chimpanzees . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item Analysis Data Based on Indices of Diffi-
culty and Discrimination for 20 Items Based
on the Picture Content from a Posttest on
Wild Chimpanzees . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item Analysis Data Based on Indices of Diffi-
culty and Discrimination for 30 Items Based
on the Passage Content from a Posttest on
Cliff Village Indians . . . . . . . . . . .

Item Analysis Data Based on Indices of Diffi-
culty and Discrimination for 20 Items Based
on the Picture Content from a Posttest on
Cliff Village Indiarls o a a o a o o a o o a

Data for Calculating the Reliability (Kuder-
Richardson Formula 20) of 30 Items Based
on the Passage Content from a Posttest on
Wild Chimpanzees . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Data for Calculating the Reliability (Kuder-
Richardson Formula 20) of 20 Items Based
on the Picture Content from a Posttest on
Wild Chimpanzees . O O O O O O C O O O C O 0

Data for Calculating the Reliability (Kuder-
Richardson Formula 20) of 30 Items Based
on the Passage Content from a Posttest on
Cliff Indians 0 O O O O C O O O I O O I O 0

ix

Page

108

108

109

109

112

113

11k

115

118

119

120

Table
n.20

4.21

n.22

Page

Data for Calculating the Reliability (Kuder-
Richardson Formula 20) of 20 Items Based
on the Picture Content from a Posttest on
Cliff Indians 0 O C O O O O O O O O I O O O 121

Treatment Time and Requests for Assistance
Means and Standard Deviations Based on 30
Observations Per Cell . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Question Sheet Means and Standard Deviations
Based on 30 Observations Per Cell . . . . . 125

Two-Way Distribution of Items for an Achieve-
ment Test on Wild Chimpanzees . . . . . . . 166

Two-Way Distribution of Items for an Achieve-
ment Test on Cliff Village Indians . . . . . 167

Item Answer and Reference Key for a Posttest
on Wild Chimpanzees . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

Item Answer and Reference Key for a Posttest
on Cliff Village Indians . . . . . . . . . . 169

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

3.1 Lesson Board Design and Dimensions for Sta-
tionary and Manipulative Materials . . . . . 65

3.2 Lateral Visual Field (Peripheral Angle with
Head and Eyes Held Stationary) . . . . . . . 67

3.3 Vertical Visual Field (Peripheral Angle with
Head and Eyes Held Stationary) . . . . . . . 67

3.4 Expectations and Observations for Two Achieve-
ment Tests (Based on the Revised Tests of
50 Multiple-Choice Items) . . . . . . . . . 72

4.1 Graphic Representation of the Mean Passage
Scores for Three Methods of Presentation
on Two Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

4.2 Graphic Representation of the Mean Passage
Scores for Two Topics on Three Methods of
Presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

4.3 Graphic Representation of the Mean Picture
Scores for Three Methods of Presentation
on Two Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

4.4 Graphic Representation of the Mean Picture

Scores for Two Topics on Three Methods of
Presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

xi

CHAPTER I
IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM

This chapter discusses the following tOpics: Need
for the Study: Theoretical Bases: Statement of the Prob-
lem; Significance of the Study: and Limitations of the
Study. It also includes a statement of the Research and

Statistical Hypotheses.

Need for the Study: Theoretical Bases

It is generally accepted by educators and others
in instructional design that pictures and words combined
offer a more powerful mnemonic strategy than either pic-
tures or words alone. Recently. there has been an increas-
ing amount of research designed to examine this relation-
ship. Most of the studies (e.g.. Paivio. 1970: Rohwer.
1970: Levin. 1976) support the contention that pictures
are more concrete than words and that picture/word combi-
nations are more concrete and powerful than either words
or pictures. While the majority of studies have focused
on simple paired-associate tasks for younger children. a
limited number of studies (e.g.. Koenke & Otto. 1969:
Rusted & Coltheart. 1979: Haring & Fry. 1979) have paired

pictures with prose passages for older children. In

general. the results have substantiated the claim that pic-
tures facilitate passage comprehension.

Mediation theory helps to support visual-verbal
associations by asserting that the images stimulated by
both items in a paired-associate task become incorporated
into a compound image which increases the associate con-
nection between the two items. As an adjunct to mediation
theory. Paivio's (1971) dual-coding hypothesis proposes
two separate memory systems. a left hemisphere for verbal
processes and a right hemisphere for imagery processes.
While words may only be coded in one hemisphere. pictures
are frequently coded in both hemispheres thus making im-
ages easier to recall.

Piaget's (1971) child developmental theory asserts
that older children. after they enter the concrete opera-
tions stage. acquire a more functional and dynamic kind of
imagery which is transformational and manipulative. Pia-
get's learning stages support a developmental hypothesis
which states that older children have a greater capacity
than younger children to develop spontaneous verbal labels
for pictures. This implies that older children may learn
relatively more than younger children from pictorial pres-
entations.

Travers and Alvarado (1970) state that ”Research
has established that. as the child grows older. his capa-
bility of handling complex stimuli and his preference for

interpreting the material as a whole increase" (p. 54).

"A related finding is that humans show a preference for
viewing visual displays that have some complexity to them.
Such a preference is shown at a very early age" (p. 58).
”The Preference for complexity shown by children in the
older age groups and by adults is also related to the in-
creased capacity to handle perceptual complexity that
comes with age" (p. 59).

Perrin (1969) asserts that multiple-image presen-
tation may be valuable for presenting comparisons and
showing relationships. “The immediacy of this kind of
communication allows the viewer to process larger amounts
of information in a very short time" (p. 369). A variety
of learning principles. including simultaneity. proximity.
and repetition among others. would appear to favor a sim-
ultaneous presentation of pictures and passages as opposed
to a succession of pictures and passages. Fleming and
Levie (1978) state that "Presenting examples in close suc-
cession or simultaneously in small groups. and keeping
previous examples in view while others are added facili-
tate concept acquisition“ (p. 179).

A simultaneous display of pictures and passages
may be used to strengthen the proximity of the elements.
The principle of proximity states that "Other things being
equal. units that are closer together will tend to be per-
ceived as part of a single entity” (Rock. 1975. p. 254).

This ability to see the parts as a single entity is a

child developmental process according to Piaget and In-
helder (1956). By about the age of nine. the child devel-
ops a capacity to handle complex stimuli and a preference
for integrating the material as a whole.

If a set of pictures and'passages are displayed
throughout the instructional period. this condition en-
courages and facilitates repeated eye movements. “There-
fore. it appears that the primary reason that recognition
is better following long exposures is that subjects have
more time to make multiple fixations during the exposure”
(Goldstein. 1975. p. 57). This observation is a varia-
tion on Thorndike's Law of Frequency: that is. learning
is influenced by the frequency with which the stimuli are
encountered. Loftus (1972) measured eye fixations and
found that the more fixations a person makes on a picture.
the higher the probability that he will correctly recog-
nize it later.

While a booklet usually places the questions at
the end of the article. it is convenient to place the
question sheet in front of the simultaneous visual dis-
play. This arrangement emphasizes the principle of con-
tiguity; namely. events that occur close together and pro-
vide direct and immediate response are more likely to be
associated and remembered.

The organizational properties of a simultaneous

visual display are enhanced by strong vertical and hori—

zontal lines. figure—ground relationships. and by famil-
iar directionality (i.e.. left to right and top to bot-
tom). "Where material to be learned is organized and that
organization is apparent to the learner. acquisition will
be facilitated" (Fleming & Levie. 1978. p. 132). Further-
more. these organizational properties will be reinforced
and accented if the display elements are presented simul-
taneously and continuously.

Piaget (1956) and Bruner (1966) maintain that the
tactual mode is the forerunner of the visual mode. and
that visual processes are built on knowledge acquired tac-
tually. As the child grows older. according to Piaget
(1971). his ability to coordinate and combine information
from different sensory modalities also matures. Thus.
even though there is a shift to the visual mode at about
age seven. overt activities and kinetic manipulations help
to facilitate dynamic imagery and sentence production.
"More learning can occur where information is received
concurrently in two modalities. e.g.. vision and audition
or vision and touch. than where received in only one mo-
dality" (Fleming & Levie. 1978. p. 107).

Studies of younger children generally support the
learning principle of multisensory stimuli (e.g.. tactual
and visual). However. in the case of older children.
there is insufficient research and the findings are in-

conclusive. Silverston and Deichmann (1975) assert that

"No conclusions regarding the contribution to tactile and
kinesthetic modality dynamics to the reading process can
be derived" (p. 162). Raskin and Baker (1975) suggest
that "Teachers may begin with visual presentation and pro-
ceed to add touch and other modalities until the appropri-
ate approach is found for the individual child" (p. 51).

The research on children's picture style prefer-
ences (Sloan. 1972: Lucas. 1977: Myatt & Carter. 1979)
indicates that older children clearly prefer realistic
photographs to other types of illustrations. They also
prefer multicolors over black-and-white or a single color.
Travers and Alvarado (1970) report that the use of color
facilitates the perception of the dynamic features. As
children grow older. they become capable of reporting on
the dynamic features of the presentation (p. 56). Fur-
thermore. children show a preference for viewing visual
displays (e.g.. a set of related pictures with ongoing
scenes) that have some complexity to them (p. 58).

The research on children's reading preferences
(Norvell. 1958; Ashley. 1970) shows that animals are one
of the most popular topics for all elementary grades and
for both sexes. The topic of "animals” is consistently
more popular than ”people of long ago" or related topics
in social studies.

Surprisingly. there is a limited amount of re-

search on the relationship of children's reading interest

to reading comprehension. Two recent studies (Asher. Hy-
mel. & Wigfield. 1978; Asher. 1979) show that fifth grad-
ers. of both sexes and different races. comprehend more

high- than low-interest reading material.

Statement of the Problem

This study was designed to provide research based
on three areas of concern and inquiry. First. the study
attempted to find out whether a simultaneous presentation
of pictures and passages. as exemplified by the station-
ary and manipulative boards. would be more conducive to
learning than a successive presentation of pictures and
passages. as exemplified by the booklets. Second. the
study attempted to find out whether the manipulative
boards. which required the students to position the pic-
tures above their appropriate passages. would be more
conducive to learning than the stationary boards. which
presented the pictures already mounted above their appro-
priate passages. Third. the study attempted to find out
whether a topic of higher student interest would be more
conducive to learning than a topic of lower student in-
terest for each of the treatments: booklets. stationary.

and manipulative boards.

Significance of the Study

This study has several important dimensions for

educators and instructional designers. First. while pic-

ture-passage combinations are frequently used in a variety
of instructional formats. little is known about the com-
parative effectiveness of these presentations. While the
principles of proximity. repetition. organization. simul-
taneity. etc.. appear to support a simultaneous presenta-
tion of pictures and passages. little is known about the
instructional effectiveness of this technique. Perrin's
(1969) theory of multiple-image communication "...suggests
that for making contrasts and comparisons. and for learn-
ing relationships. simultaneous images reduce the task of
memory (a dimension of visual task) and enable the viewer
to make immediate comparisons" (p. 376). Even though the
case for simultaneous and multiple-image displays is sup-
ported by a substantial array of learning principles and
child developmental theory. the preponderant amount of
visual-verbal instruction follows the traditional textbook
format. (While the quality and quantity of textbook pic-
tures have generally improved in recent years. the pic-
tures are often given a minor role and picture-passage
cues are frequently missing.) Unfortunately. very little
is known about the instructional merit of a successive
book(let) presentation as opposed to a simultaneous dis-
play presentation. Since the researcher could not find
any research which attempted to compare these methods. it
would appear that this study will be breaking new ground.

Second. since most paired-associate paradigms have

concentrated on simple picture-word tasks for younger
children. there is a need to investigate the effectiveness
of more complex picture-passage combinations for older
children. As Fleming (1977) observes. "...most of the
work (pictorial research) has been done with very simple
pictures and paired-associate tasks. neither of which are
adequately representative of school learning" (p. 46).
While picture-word tasks are important to a young child.
the larger portion of his elementary education will con—
centrate on more sophisticated pictures and passages and.
regrettably. the combined strength may be overlooked.
Thus. this study should provide some important data by
applying a multivariate analysis of the picture and the
passage retention. Even in those studies concerned with
picture-passage learning. the treatment and testing stages
are frequently unrepresentative of the usual classroom en-
vironment. For example. the child(ren) may be given a
special set of directions and then treated and tested in-
dividually by a pretrained instructor. This study tries
to minimize the unrepresentative elements by presenting
self-contained materials which minimize the need for spe-
cial directions or assistance.

Third. it is important to find out whether multi-
sensory (i.e.. visual-tactual) learning will prove more
beneficial to older children than single modality (i.e..

visual) learning. given the conditions in this study.

10

This data will be derived from a comparison of the sta-
tionary and manipulative boards and based on the picture
and the passage poettest results. The researcher has been
unable to locate a single study in which a tactual varia-
ble has been tested using simultaneous displays of pic-
tures and passages with older children. While the tactual
experience of sorting and positioning pictures may add
concreteness to the lesson. will it actually produce more
retention and concept development than an identical set of
pictures already attached to a display board? While many
studies indicate the advantages of multisensory learning
for younger children. older children have been largely
overlooked in these investigations. Therefore. this study
could make a significant contribution to visual-tactual
research at the upper elementary level.

Finally. it is important to determine whether the
amount of interest children express for different topics
will influence the degree of success associated with a
successive and/or simultaneous picture-passage format.
Some important questions need to be investigated. For
example. if children express a higher interest for a given
tapic. will they tend to learn more regardless of the for-
mat or only with a particular format? Would a lower in-
terest topic benefit more from a visual-tactual format
than a pure visual format? More research on these ques-

tions could help educators and instructional designers

11

match the appropriate topic interest to the proper pic-
ture-passage format(s).

Recent studies (Asher. Hymel. & Wigfield. 1978;
Asher. 1979) have shown that high topic interest leads to
greater reading comprehension. In the case of this study.
even if a child's high topic interest facilitated his pas-
sage retention. would it also increase his picture reten-
tion or vice versa? While this single study cannot pro-
vide definitive answers to the important questions it
raises. it may provide some valuable indications.

In summary.the data collected from this study
should be helpful in designing and presenting visually-
directed materials. especially with simultaneous presenta-
tions of pictures and passages. Perhaps even more signif—
icantly. this research may help to determine the merit of
using alternative formats to supplement the usual textbook

approach.

Limitations of the Study

The results of this study were circumscribed. in
terms of generalizability. by several considerations.
First. the fifth grade subjects were drawn from convenient
classrooms and not randomly sampled from the total school
district population of Lansing. Michigan. The generaliza-
bility was further restricted to a middle to lower middle
working class. urbanized. and racially integrated popula-

tion.

12

Second. although the literature reviewed did not
limit the definition of multiple-image presentations to a
still set of pictures and passages on stationary and ma-
nipulative surfaces. the specific media used in this study
did represent restricted samples. While there was a scar-
city of literature on visual-tactual learning at the fifth
grade level. the specific materials and type of manipula-
tion called for in this study did place limitations on its
generalizability. Since the methods and tOpics were spe-
cifically designed for this experiment. their specifica-
tions had to be taken into consideration. For example.
before generalizing the results of this study. it was im-
portant to specify the number. size. and content of the
pictures and passages. along with the board dimensions.

Finally. the results of this study were also lim-
ited by the nature of the instrumentation. Each method
and topic was tested by a multiple-choice posttest based
on passage and picture content. The administration of the
posttests called for cued. written. and delayed recall.
The researcher chose a single test instrument (multiple-
choice format). as opposed to more than one objective test
form. because it could provide a consistent measurement of
the passage and picture content within the limited scape
of the topics. Furthermore. the 50 item multiple-choice
tests were carefully designed to encompass the most im-

portant concepts covered by the topics.

13

Research and Statistical Hypotheses

Three research hypotheses were derived from the
need for the study and the significance of the study. The
first two hypotheses were based on the methods and the
third hypothesis was based on the tepics.

First. the mean scores associated with the sta-
tionary board group and the manipulative board group were
each expected to exceed the mean score associated with the
booklet group. This expectation applied to both dependent
variables: passage and picture content.

Second. the mean score associated with the manipu—
lative board group was expected to exceed the one associa-
ted with the stationary board group. This expectation ap-
plied to both dependent variables: passage and picture
content.

Third. the mean score associated with the topic of
higher interest (Chimps) was expected to exceed the one
associated with the topic of lower interest (Indians) for
each of the methods. This expectation applied to both de-
pendent variables: passage and picture content.

This study was based on three statistical hypothe-
ses. For the purpose of testing. they were stated in the
null form.

1. There would be no difference in the means of
the booklet group versus the stationary and manipulative

board groups in regard to the dependent variables: passage

14

and picture content.

2. There would be no difference in the means of
the stationary board group versus the manipulative board
group in regard to the dependent variables: passage and
picture content.

3. There would be no difference in the means of
the two topic groups (Chimps versus Indians) in regard to
the dependent variables: passage and picture content.

To reject a null hypothesis. the test required a
significant difference for at least one of the dependent
variables: passage and/or picture content. The alpha

level was set at .05.

Summary

The first research hypothesis appeared to have
substantial theoretical support. For example. it was not-
ed that a variety of learning principles. including sim-
ultaneity. proximity. and repetition among others. ap—
peared to support a simultaneous presentation of pictures
and passages as opposed to a succession of pictures and
passages. However. it was pointed out that very little
is known about the instructional merit of a successive
book(let) presentation as opposed to a simultaneous dis-
play presentation.

The theoretical support for the second research
hypothesis was more tenuous than the first. According to

the child deve10pmental theory of Piaget. as the child

15

grows older. his ability to coordinate and combine infor-
mation from different sensory modalities also matures.
However. in the case of older children. there has been an
insufficient amount of research regarding the contribution
of tactual learning.

The third research hypothesis appeared to receive
a reasonable amount of support based on topical studies
of children's reading interests. Research on children's
reading preferences has shown that "animals" are consis-
tently more popular than “peeple of long ago" or related
tOpics in social studies. However. it has not been deter-
mined whether the amount of interest children express for
different tepics will influence the degree of success as-
sociated with a successive and/or simultaneous picture-
passage format.

It was pointed out that this study should be help-
ful in designing and presenting visually-directed materi-
als. especially with simultaneous presentations of pic-
’tures and passages. It was argued that this research
could help to determine the merit of using alternative

formats to supplement the usual textbook approach.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

This chapter includes the following topics: Image-
ry Development and Visual-Verbal Learning: Principles of
Visual Perception and Learning: Sensory Modality Learning:
Picture-Topic Preferences and Reading Comprehension: and
Design Recommendations for Instructional Materials. They

examine research pertaining to the research hypotheses.

Imagery Development and Visual-Verbal Learning
This topic includes the following subtopics: Im-

agery and Developmental Theory: Paired-Associate Learning:
and Picture Facilitation of Passage Content. These sub-

topics present the rationale for picture-passage formats.

Imagery and DevelOpmental Theogy
While imagery has been subjected to a variety of

definitions. this study will adhere to Fleming's (1977)
description of imagery as ”...an internal representation
of such external events." Furthermore. "...it is a phe-
nomenon of memory. i.e.. the recalled image. reconstructed
with varying fidelity from past experience" (p. 44). Im-
ages can be provided by the experimenter in the form of
pictures (imposed images). or the learner can be instruct-

ed to generate his own images (induced images). Stimulus

16

17

and response images can be depicted in separate pictures
(unelaborated) or can be depicted in an interactive scene
(elaborated). In a review of imagery research. Pressley
(1977) reports that "Pictures (imposed images) can increase
children's prose learning if the pictures accurately depict
information from the text." He concludes that "There is
one fact about imagery and children's learning which is in-
disputably true: imposed pictures are almost always learned.
better than words" (p. 613).

Bruner (1966) argues that during cognitive develop-
ment. the primary information source shifts from inactive
or tactile/kinesthetic processes to iconic or visual pro-
cesses. As the child grows older. these iconic processes
shift to symbolic or language processes. This theory would
seem to imply that pictures should not be the primary empha-
sis for older children since they might obstruct the sym-
bolic processes. Piaget (1971) contends that when children
enter the concrete operations stage (about 7 to 12 years of
age). they acquire a more functional kind of imagery which
is transformational and kinetic: characterized by dynamic
change and movement. Thus. the older child is more adept
at manipulating imposed and induced images than the younger
child. Nelson (1971) observes that "The child's ability to
recall. recognize. or reproduce previously presented infor-
mation has been shown to improve with increasing age for a

large and diverse set of tasks" (p. 346). In general. re-

18

search has supported a developmental hypothesis. based on
Piaget's theory. which states that older children have a
greater capacity than younger children to develOp spontan-
eous verbal labels for pictures. This implies that older
children may learn relatively more than younger children

from pictorial presentations.

Pairedqgsgociate Legggigg

The bulk of experimental research on picture-word
relationships in children's learning has focused on paired-
associate paradigms. For younger and older children alike.
simple picture-word associations have shown that "Pictori-
ally represented objects are more memorable than their as-
sociated verbal labels“ (Levin. 1976. p. 106). This pic-
ture superiority has been documented in a number of studies
(Reese. 1970. and Shepard. 1967) where children were re-
quired to recall or recognize previously exposed stimuli.

While most researchers in paired—associate learning
usually attest to the mnemonic superiority of pictures over
words. Anderson (1976) is reluctant to draw any definitive
conclusions. He argues that it is difficult to interpret
the relative effectiveness of words and pictures because it
is virtually impossible to equate words and pictures on
most psychological dimensions. ”Picture superiority ef-
fects are ambiguous simply because the level of interitem

similarity across form classes has not been equated”

(p. 378).

19

Mediation theory contends that the images aroused
by both items in a paired—associate task become incorpora-
ted into a compound image (relational association) which
increases the associative connection between the two items.
Stimulus imagery is especially important because. during
the testing portion of the task. the stimulus acts as a
cue (conceptual peg) which reinstates the image mediator
and allows decoding of the response terms (Paivio. 1969).
Many studies have supported Paivio's (1971) ”Dual Coding
Hypothesis” which asserts that there are two memory sys-
tems for recalling information: verbal processing and vis-
ual processing. Neurological testing (Sperry. 1964) has
shown that these verbal and visual functions are identified
with the left and right hemispheres of the brain. Paivio's
”Dual Coding Hypothesis” states that pictures are easier to
retrieve than words because pictures are frequently coded
in both cerebral hemispheres while words are more apt to
receive just a verbal coding.

Rohwer (1970) reports that picture-word pairs are
superior to all other combinations (picture-picture. word-
picture. and word-word pairs) for eliciting correct re-
sponses. Children ”...should be taught the use of both
verbal and visual kinds of elaborate activities” (p. 402).
Rohwer recommends that ”Whenever possible. items to be
associated should be presented in some kind of meaningful

linguistic context rather than as isolated terms. and. es-

20

pecially for older children. the items should be depicted
in some kind of spatial relation. or involved in some kind

of meaningful interaction" (p. 402).

Picture Facilitation of Passage Content

Some recent studies have focused on the influence
of pictures on learning related prose passages. These ex-
periments (e.g.. Peeck. 1974: Levin & Lesgold. 1978: Peng
& Levin. 1979) have shown that providing pictures to sup-
plement narrative text improves the child's recall and
comprehension of prose passages.* Peeck (1974) randomly
assigned 71 fourth graders to either an experimental group
(text with illustrations) or a control group (text without
illustrations). The posttests were given at three differ-
ent times: immediately. after four days. and after one
week. The experimental group scored higher on the reten-
tion test. regardless of the time lapse. than the control
group for questions concerning exclusively pictorial infor-
mation and for questions concerning correctly illustrated
text content. Subjects who read the illustrated text

scored significantly higher than subjects who read the text

 

*It should be noted that these studies included dif-
ferent variables from this study: (1) While this study in-
cluded multiple-image (simultaneous) formats. these studies
involved textbook (successive) formats: (2) While this study
involved expository passages. these studies were based on
narrative passages: and (3) While this study was based on
silent reading. delayed. and cued recall. two of these stu-
dies (Levin.& Lesgold. 1978: Peng & Levin. 1979) did not in-
volve these three variables.

21

without illustrations. The instrumentation involved mul-
tiple-choice items and cued recall.

Koenke and Otto (1969) conducted a study to deter-
mine the extent to which content relevant pictures contri-
buted to children's comprehension of the main idea inher-
ent in a printed passage. Ninety sixth grade students
read three 200 word passages written on a fifth grade lev-
el. The students read the passages and viewed the pic-
tures silently and then responded immediately to oral
questions. Students who read passages accompanied by pic-
tures responded with main ideas on a significantly higher
level than students who did not see the passages. The
researchers drew two conclusions from their findings: (1)
When sixth grade students are told to discover the main
ideas not explicitly stated in the passages. they look at
the accompanying pictures to enhance their understanding
of the main idea: and (2) "As long as pictures have gener-
al relevance to a tOpic. their presence is likely to en-
hance main idea responses even in the absence of explicit
directions to attend to them" (p. 301).

In a study involving 64 fifth grade students. Odom
and Nesbitt (1974) found that greater retention occurred
when pictures and sentences were mutually cued to one anoth-
er. This study was limited to a small sample and the pic-
tures-sentences were reasonably simple and short. Rusted
and Coltheart (1979) found that nine and ten year old

children. of high and low reading ability. could recall

22

more prose passages when pictures were present. After read-
ing aloud a set of 12 passages with accompanying animal pic-
tures. the students relied on immediate and free-recall to
test their retention. While the pictures enhanced the re-
call of prose passages. they had no effect on the recogni-
tion and pronunciation of novel words.

Haring and Fry (1979) observe that ”Investigations
of picture effects on comprehension of orally presented ma-
terials do not explore directly the effect of pictures on
reading comprehension” (p. 185). They analyzed a prose
passage into main ideas and nonessential details with cor-
responding pictures. Fourth and sixth grade students re-
lied on free recall to write down all they could remember
of the narrative (storybook) passages immediately and again
five days later. The results found that pictures did fa-
cilitate both immediate and delayed recall. However. this
finding was true for the main ideas but not for the nones-

sential details.

Principles of Visual Perception and Learning
This topic applies to the first research hypothe-

sis: namely. that each board is expected to outscore the

booklet. This topic includes the following subtopics: Vis-
ual Field and Multiple-Image Perception: Proximity and Sim-
ilarity: Spatial Relations and Organization: Repetition and

Exposure Time: and Whole and Simultaneous Presentation.

23

Visual Field and Multiple-Image Perception

The visual field is defined as that area or space
we can see with our head and eyes held stationary. The
visual field extends about 180 degrees laterally and 150
degrees vertically (Gibson. 1950).* Most of the informa-
tion within the visual field. at a given moment. is sub-
ject to peripheral vision. According to Goldstein (1975).
"When you look directly at the object. you are fixating
that object and the image of that fixated object always
falls on the fovea. the small area of the retina that is
most sensitive to detail. Visual acuity. our ability to
see detail. is high at the fovea but drops off rapidly as
we move away from the fovea and towards the peripheral
retina" (p. 37). Peripheral vision has the important func-
tion of integrating the pieces and providing a sense of
continuity for a complex scene. "Although peripheral in-
formation is used to determine the next fixation. the tar-
get presently being fixated is also being analyzed. Thus.
two tasks are being performed simultaneously" (Haber &
Hershenson. 1980. p. 333).

Perrin (1969) states that multiple-image presenta-
tion may be valuable for presenting comparisons and showing

relationships. This is especially true when the purpose

 

*Figures 3.2 and 3.3. in chapter 3. illustrate how
the stationary and manipulative boards fall within the vis-
ual field.

24

of the presentation is to present specific concepts and/or
fairly technical information which are designed to be re~
called later. ”The immediacy of this kind of communication
allows the viewer to process larger amounts of information
in a very short time. Thus. information density is effec-
tively increased. and certain kinds of information are more
efficiently learned. For visual comparisons it seems axio-
matic that simultaneous images are more effective than se-
quentially presented images" (p. 369). Of course. there
are circumstances which might mitigate or even negate this
theory. such as an overload of images or an overly rapid
presentation.

Haber and Hershenson (1980) define scanning and how
it relates to serial and parallel processing. Scanning "...
describes the procedure of going systematically from one
portion of an information field to the next. and then to the
next. and so forth. When a field is scanned. each item is
treated in turn. This is called serial processing. An al-
ternative procedure processes all the items of information
at once. This is called parallel processing" (p. 294). It
would appear that a multiple-image presentation could take
advantage of both serial and parallel processing. especial-
ly if the viewer is given selective directions. While the
viewer's initial contact might elicit some parallel pro-
cessing to integrate the parts. a set of directions could
produce serial processing by isolating parts and comparing

subsets.

25

It would appear that a set of multiple-images could
help the learner to compare sizes. shapes. and distances.
Kennedy (1974) observes that when we examine pictures. "We
actually use relative size. not absolute size. Only when
we compare the depicted object with other objects in the
same scene can we know its size" (p. 67). According to Pi-
aget (1971). comparing objects and relationships is essen-
tial to the intellectual process at the concrete operations
stage. In Bloom's (1956) taxonomy of cognitive thinking
skills. the ability to establish logical relationships is
identified as the "analysis level." It is a forerunner to

the uppermost levels of synthesis and evaluation.

Proximity and Similarity

Proximity and similarity belong to the Gestalt laws
of perceptual organization. The Gestalt laws govern the
segregation of the perceptual field into separate forms
which are most stable or which create a minimum of stress.
The principle of proximity states that "Other things being
equal. units that are closer together will tend to be per-
ceived as part of a single entity" (Rock. 1975. p. 254).
The closer together we arrange the images. the stronger are
,the forces of attraction. This principle facilitates com-
parisons in terms of similarities and differences. Forgus
(1966) notes that proximity and similarity are usually dif-
ficult to separate in practice. If their effect is in a

common direction. they tend to strengthen one another.

26

"Proximity gains further significance because it is not on-
ly a stimulus condition for perception but also in learning.
though under a different label. namely contiguity. Events
that occur close together. i.e.. that are contiguous. are
considered likely to become associated or learned" (Fleming
& Levie. 1978. p. 71).

The principle of similarity says that groups may be
formed from elements that are similar to one another. This
principle may be utilized to group or organize objects in a
variety of ways. including appearance. function. direction.
content. and even color. Gould (1976) observes that "Color
provides a good cue for subjects to perform grouping opera-
tions on figure-background relations. whereas shape or size
of objects evidently are not as effective. More generally.
color coding is an effective means for people to locate
targets quickly" (p. 324).*

Rock (1975) observes that "Before proximity can reg-
ulate perceptual organization. a certain amount of process-
ing of information concerning spacing must first occur. The
objective distance between units in space must first be per-
ceived and only then does relative proximity among such
units determine grouping" (p. 283). This statement leads to

spatial relations and organization.

 

*In this study. the Chimpanzee pictures are unified
by cool colors and the Cave Indian pictures are unified by
warm colors.

27

Spatial Relations and Organization

Spatial relations and organization are interdepen-
dent and their principles complement each other. Spatial
relations are designed to influence the perception of rela-
tionships. According to Fleming and Levie (1978). they
frequently depend on such factors as proximity. inclusion.
directionality. superordination. and accentuation. Proxim-
ity has already been discussed in some detail. As an exam-
ple of inclusion. a display board could be used to deline-
ate the boundaries for sets of pictures and passages. In
the case of directionality. a set of visuals may be num-
bered in a familiar order. such as left-to-right and top-
to-bottom. Superordination may be achieved by placing the
pictures above the passages in a stimulus position. Accen-
tuation may be achieved by the mutual cuing and reinforce-
ment between the materials.

Spatial relations have a strong affinity for verti-
cal and horizontal lines. Forgus (1966) states that "The
main coordinates of two-dimensional space are the gravita—
tional vertical and the horizontal which is perpendicular
to it. These two planes constitute the main frame of ref-
erence against which we ordinarily judge spatial direction
that is located in two dimensions" (p. 185). As a princi-
ple of perception. Fleming and Levie (1978) state that
"Horizontals and verticals are perceptually special. i.e..

in contrast to oblique orientations of line and pattern.

28

they are more intense (evoke more activity in the visual
cortex of the brain). are more readily compared (similari-
ties and differences more apparent) and more accurately
judged for spatial orientation" (p. 36). While a vertical
and horizontal orientation may be applied to a variety of
visual formats. a multiple-image presentation is a power-
ful device for accenting these coordinates.

Figure-ground relationships are critical to spa-
tial relations and organization. The principle of sur-
roundedness means that the inner region is usually re-
garded as the figure while the surrounding region is
viewed as the ground. Fleming and Levie (1978) state that
the figure is perceived as having internal unity and so-
lidity while the ground is less definitely defined and
appears behind the figure. "A given contour can belong to
only one of the areas it bounds and shapes. and whichever
side it shapes will be perceived as figure" (p. 42). The
most distinctive figures have closed and continuous con-
tours.

Studies have shown. according to Gould (1976).
"...that people fixate on contours much more frequently
than they fixate on homogeneous areas of a picture. This
is true. of course. because contours carry more information
than do homogeneous areas. as both information theorists
and visual neurophysiologists have pointed out" (p. 326).
Kennedy (1974) points out that perception consists. to a

large extent. on how clearly the figure emerges from the

29

ground. If the contour lines are indistinct and fail to
clearly outline the relevant from the irrelevant features.
the information will be difficult to interpret and may even
be lost. Since a simultaneous visual format may focus on a
set of related images. it is in a position to accent the
figure-ground relationships.

The aforementioned principles have stressed the
importance of spatial relations and organization. "Organ-
ized presentations are generally easier to learn than un-
organized or randomly ordered presentations. and thus in-
teractive mental imagery (organized) would be expected to
be better remembered than unorganized imagery" (Fleming.
1977. p. 48). As a principle of memory. Fleming and Levie
(1978) state that "Where material to be learned is organ-
ized and that organization is apparent to the learner.

acquisition will be facilitated" (p. 132).

Repetition and;§xposure_gipg

These concepts are interdependent since greater
exposure time allows for more repetition. Goldstein (1975)
maintains that "Our perceptual system demands that an ob-
ject be fixated if it is to be seen in detail: thus. if
the purpose of a presentation is to present detailed in-
formation. then time must be allowed for the observer to
fixate every relevant image at least once” (p. 59). Fur-
thermore. "...if it is necessary that observers recall de-

tails of a particular picture. or a complex idea transmit-

30

ted by the picture. longer exposure times may be necessary"
(1» 58).

Loftus (1972) conducted a study which found that
the number of fixations a picture receives is a major fac-
tor in the subsequent memory for that picture. College
students viewed 180 pictures while their eye movements were
recorded. A recognition test indicated that as the number
of fixations increased. the probability of picture recall
also increased. There was little or no memory for pictures
which were originally viewed only peripherally.

Research has shown that high-valued or high fideli-
ty pictures receive more fixations and tend to be remem-
bered better than low-valued pictures. It would appear
that elaborated images. if viewed as a composite for an ex-
tended period of time. could reinforce picture fidelity and
encourage repetitive fixations. Travers and Alvarado (1970)
state that high fidelity pictures ”...provide the viewer
with much the same sensory input that he would have if he
were viewing the actual scene represented by the pictures"
(p. 49). Kennedy (1974) argues that pictures usually pro-
vide us with clear and precise information about "...ob—
jects and scenes that are not in our immediate surround-

ings" (p. 12).

Whole and Simultaneous Presentation
While these concepts are related to several of the

aforementioned principles (such as proximity. similarity.

31

spatial relations. and organization). they warrant addition-
al clarification and substantiation. Fleming and Levie
(1978) have stated an important principle of learning to
this study. ”Presenting examples in close succession or
simultaneously in small groups. and keeping previous exam-
ples in view while others are added facilitate concept ac-
quisition" (p. 179).“ Hochberg (1968) argues that cogni-
tive expectancies play a major part in integrating a series
of glimpses. The viewer generates a ”schematic map” through
which a succession of images are related and stored. These
maps are a composite of what has already been seen and what
is expected to be seen. This schematic mapping is particu-
larly appropriate for successive presentations.

Kates and Yudin (1964) conducted a study of three
instructional formats based on slides of geometric shapes
without words or passages: (1) a successive presentation. in
which one example was shown at a time: (2) a focus condition.
in which two examples were presented together: and (3) a sim-
ultaneous presentation. in which each new example was shown
with all the Previous examples remaining in view. Simultan-
eous presentation was superior to the other two modes of
presentation because the students did not have to rely upon
memory from previous examples. Many studies have confirmed

the superiority of a simultaneous presentation of learning ma-

 

*In this study. while the booklets provide for a
close succession of images. the boards provide for simultan-
eous images for an extended time period.

32

terials in regard to sentence (Reynolds. 1968) and picture
(Baumeister. 1979) acquisition.

Research has shown that when different stimuli are
presented simultaneously to each eye. only one stimulus is
usually seen at a time. This condition is referred to as
”retinal rivalry." This poses a problem when the pictures
are presented in rapid succession. ”While it is not
strictly possible to see two things at once. nearly simul-
taneous vision can be accomplished by rapidly switching
attention from one part of the visual field to another
with eye and head movements" (Goldstein. 1975. p. 51).

Piaget and Inhelder (1956) maintain that older
children. by the age of about nine. are capable of inte-
grating the parts into a whole. The child develops a ca-
pacity to handle complex stimuli and a preference for in-
terpreting the material as a whole. Travers and Alvarado
(1970) contend that older children and adults show a pref-
erence for viewing more complex visual displays which may
be interpreted as ongoing scenes. Fleming and Levie
(1978) report two perceptual principles concerned with
complexity and balance: (1) "Attention is drawn and held
by complexity. providing the complexity does not exceed
the perceivers' cognitive capacities: and (2) In direct-
ing our attention. we seek a balance between novelty and
familiarity. between complexity and simplicity. between

uncertainty and certainty" (pp. 22. 25).

33

Sensory Modality Learning
This topic applies to the second research hypothe-

sis: namely. the mean score associated with the manipula-
tive board group is expected to exceed the one associated
with the stationary board group. This tepics includes the
following subtopics: Child Developmental Growth: Paradigms
Based on Sensory Modalities: Studies Based on Sensory Mo-

dalities: and Principles of Multimodal Learning.

Child Developmental Growth
Both Piaget (1956) and Bruner (1966) argue that

sensory functioning is the foundation for the development
of knowledge. Bruner maintains that the tactual mode is
the forerunner to the visual mode and. furthermore. that
visual processes are built on knowledge acquired tactually.
Piaget contends that directional awareness and spatial or-
ientation. which are basic to success in reading. are based
on early integration of tactual and visual cues.

Both Piaget and Bruner recognize that young child-
ren shift from inactive (tactile/kinesthetic) to iconic
(visual) processes. Bruner argues that this transition is
an improvement over the limited inactive stage which pre-
cedes it but which must be outgrown. If the inactive stage
is not outgrown. it becomes an obstacle to further develOp-
ment. While Piaget (1958) also recognizes this natural
transition in early childhood development. from the tact-

ual modality to a preference for visually dominated be-

34

havior at about age 7. he feels. unlike Bruner. that the
motor (tactual) influence should continue to have an impor-
tant role in intellectual growth. Piaget (1971) emphasizes
the important emergence of intersensory coordination. The
child becomes increasingly capable of coordinating and com-
bining information from the different sensory modalities as
he grows older. The concrete operations stage produces a
more dynamic and anticipatory imagery which involve move-
ment of objects in space or transformations of stationary
objects. Thus. overt activities and kinetic manipulations
are not obsolete. according to Piaget. but are expected to

facilitate dynamic imagery and sentence production.

Paradigps Based on Sensory Modalities

There are three sensory modalities most frequently
used in instruction: the visual. auditory. and tactual.
Most of the research deals with one or a combination of
these sensory paradigms: intramodal. intermodal. and multi-
modal. In the intramodal condition (also known as intra-
sensory transfer). a child learns a task using one modality
and then is tested on a similar task using the same modal-
ity. In the intermodal condition (also known as intersen-
sory transfer). the child learns a task in one modality and
then is tested for retention using a different modality.

In the multimodal condition (also known as multisensory in-
tegration). two or more sensory systems. such as vision and

touch. are integrated simultaneously. A task is presented

35

simultaneously and then the child is tested using either
modality or a combination. Most studies have examined the
intramodal and/or intermodal paradigms while little atten—

tion has been given to multimodal learning.*

Studies Based on Sensopy Modalities

Only a small number of studies have actually inves-
tigated the influence of visual-tactual tasks on picture
and/or passage retention for older children. Most of the
research has been based on reading studies involving pri-
mary grade students. Silverston and Deichmann (1975)
state that ”The kinesthetic and tactile modalities have
not been emphasized in the investigation of reading pro-
cesses." Furthermore. ”No conclusions regarding the con-
tribution of tactile and kinesthetic modality dynamics to
the reading process can be derived" (pp. 161-162).

Derevensky (1978) reports that ”Investigations
into the learning process and information processing have
established that children learn to read through the audi-
tory. visual. and kinesthetic (tactual) sensory modes.
Yet there appears to be little unanimity on the degree of
the relationship or the level of dependence of reading
ability with respect to particular sensory modalities"

(p. 10).

 

*Multimodal learning is the closest paradigm to
the manipulative board process used in this study.

36

Ford (1967) found that tactile-visual (intermodal)
transfer was a predictor of reading achievement for 121
fourth grade boys from a middle-class suburban community.
The study did not yield high correlations between tactual-
visual performance and reading achievement. Ford states
that ”On the basis of certain theoretical and observation-
al data there would be good reason to expect a relation-
ship between tactual-visual abilities and educational
achievement" (p. 839).

Bissell. White. and Zivin (1971) argue the merit
of intersensory learning because ”Information obtained
through one modality comes to be related to and modified
by ongoing activity in the others" (p. 135). As children
grow older. their intersensory coordination enables them
”...to integrate information obtained from the kinesthet-
ic modality with information obtained from the visual mo-
dality" (p. 147). ”The fact that the human mind is a
composite system and that complete understanding involves
understanding something through the various senses sug-
guests that instruction based on the kinesthetic modality
should be included at all levels of education. no matter
how old the students” (p. 154). While Bissell. White.
and Zivin express considerable confidence in intersensory
integration. many other researchers would argue that the
functional relationship between modalities is still very

uncertain and requires future experimental designs.

3?

Principles of Multimodal Learning

Raskin and Baker (1975) contend that research re-
sults have consistently shown that vision is the dominant
and superior modality for all age groups and both sexes.
As a general principle. the ”Teachers may begin with vis-
ual presentation and proceed to add touch and other modal-
ities until the appropriate approach is found for the in-
dividual child" (p. 51). ”The best conclusion at this
time is that vision is the mode of greatest accuracy for
information gathering for normal. retarded. and learning
disabled children. The question of the efficiency of mul-
tisensory training over a period of time is not yet an-
swered" (p. 53).

As a memory principle. Fleming and Levie (1978)
state that "More learning can occur where information is
received concurrently in two modalities. e.g.. vision and
audition or vision and touch. than where received in only
one modality" (p. 107). Fleming and Levie point out that
"This principle only states a possibility. which numerous
circumstances can negate. Conflicting information in two
modalities can interfere with learning" (p. 107).

It should be noted that the visual-tactual find-
ings and the aforementioned principles have been based on
diverse variables which make it risky to draw inferences
or state conclusions. For example. the studies vary from

two to three dimensional materials. immediate to delayed

38

recall. and free to cued recall. Finally. the bulk of
visual-tactual research has concentrated on simple paired-
associate tasks which provide little insight into more
sophisticated sets of interacting pictures and passages.

Picture-Topic Preferences and Readipg Comprehension
This topic applies to the third research hypothe-

sis: namely. the mean score associated with the topic of
higher interest is expected to exceed the one associated
with the topic of lower interest for each of the methods.
This topic includes the following subtopics: Picture

Characteristics and Preferences: Children's Topic Prefer-

ences: and Topic Interests and Reading Comprehension.

Picpure Characteristics and Preferences
Knowlton (1966) defines three kinds of pictures:

(1) Realistic pictures represent actual events and/or ob-
jects portrayed: (2) Analogical pictures represent either
the phenomenal or nonphenomenal world: and (3) Logical
pictures signify relationships between elements--maps.
schematic drawings. etc. In the case of realistic pic-
tures. according to Knowlton. ”...if some scene in the
visual world is of interest. a detailed realistic portray-
al of it will often evoke something of the same positively
valued response that is evoked by direct perception of the
situation portrayed” (p. 177).

Duchastel (1978) suggests that textbook illustra-

39

tions may have three roles: attentional. explicative. and/
or retentional. First. they may be designed to interest
and motivate the reader. Second. they may help to explain
a concept being made in the passage. Third. they may en-
hance the long-term recall of the prose. Duchastel ex-
plains that these roles are not mutually exclusive al-
though trade-offs may enter into the process of deciding
which role(s) to emphasize.

Whipple (1953) examined fourth-grade textbooks and
found that picture preferences were based on several fac-
tors: including a definite center of interest. a scene of
action. multicolors over black-and-white or a single col-
or. and eventful as opposed to still-life topics. Lucas
(197?) gathered data from basal readers on the illustra-
tive preferences (i.e.. realism. cartoon. abstract. im-
pressionistic. photographic) of 521 fifth grade children.
His findings showed that children tended to choose photo-
graphic styles for information articles. The study rec-
ommended that more photographs should be used in published
materials. and that persons responsible for selecting il-
lustrations should be given training in critical picture
evaluation.

Myatt and Carter (1979) found that children of
both sexes. in grades one thru six. preferred photographs
to all other picture styles. including full line drawings
(paintings included). Sloan (1972) also found that fifth

40

graders preferred photographs to realistic pictures (paint-
ings included) with or without a story passage.

Children'e Topic Preferences
A singularly comprehensive. longitudinal study on

the reading interests of elementary students was conducted
by Norvell (1958). The research spanned 25 years and in-
cluded over 24.000 children in grades three thru six in
schools of all sizes in New York State. A questionnaire
was used with eight broad classifications. A category for
"animal stories" was included but there was no clear cate-
gory for ”Indians" or a related topic. While Norvell's
questionnaire could have provided a wider list of catego-
ries. the results did show that "animal stories” had the
highest rating from boys and the second highest for girls
after "girl's books."

A more recent study of children's reading inter-
ests was conducted by Ashley (1970). A representative
sample of 900 elementary children in the intermediate
grades were asked to indicate their likes and dislikes of
40 reading topics. There were 265 respondents at the
fifth grade level. The collective data for both sexes
showed that "real animals" was seventh on the pOpularity

list and "life in the past“ was sixteenth on the list.*

 

*For the topics in this study. "real animals" was
the closest topic to "Wild Chimpanzees" and "life in the
past" was the closest topic to "Cave Indians."

41

Another study of children's reading interests was
conducted by the Beta Upsilon Chapter (1974). A total of
405 ten and eleven year old students responded to a "read—
ing interest form” which included 20 topic categories.

The students chose “animals” and “mystery” as their favor-
ite topics. The topic of “animals” was chosen by a four-

to-one margin over ”history" and by a three-to-one margin

over ”people."

In summary. the research clearly shows that ”ani-
male” is one of the most popular tOpics for all elementary
school children and for both sexes. Topics from the area
of social studies. such as early cultures. would appear to

be less popular at the elementary level.

Topic Interests and Reading Comprehension*

Surprisingly. there is very little research on the
relationship of pupil's topical interests and reading com-
prehension. This is probably due to the widely held as-
sumption. by many educators. that there is a strong corre-
lation between the two factors. Asher. Hymel. and Wig-
field (1978) examined this relationship in a study involv-
ing 75 fifth grade children. Twenty-five color slides

covering a wide range of topics. from monkeys to humans.

 

*While the researcher found a small amount of re-
search on the above topic. he could not locate any studies
which attempted to examine the impact of children's topi-
cal interest on simultaneous picture-passage retention.

42

were used to assess student interests. The students were
divided into high- and low-interest conditions and given
cloze passages (paragraphs with fill in the missing words).
An ANCOVA was used to prevent any potential confounding
effects based on initial reading differences. The analysis
indicated that the effect of interest was significant. with
children comprehending more of high- than low-interest ma-
terial. A second result showed that sex was not signifi-
cant. Finally. the interaction of sex and interest was not
significant because both sexes did better on the high-inter—
est material.

In a study concerning the "Influence of Topic Inter-
est on Black Children's and White Children's Reading Compre-
hension.“ Asher (1979) found that both races did signifi-
cantly better on high- than low-interest material. Further-
more. an analysis of topic preferences indicated considera-
ble cross-race similarity of interests. The study involved
66 fifth grade children in an integrated suburban school.

In summary. recent evidence indicates that child-
ren's reading comprehension is influenced by their level of
interest in the topic material. Both sexes and races did
better on high- than low-interest topic matter in the fifth

grade.

Design Recommendations for Instructional Materials
This topic presents eight basic conditions/recommen-

dations for designing and presenting educational materials.

43

Since this study tested three instructional formats (book-
lets. stationary. and manipulative boards). these conditions
provide a criteria for evaluating the structure and presen-
tation of the materials. While most of the conditions are
especially relevant to the boards. with the exceptions of
numbers two and eight. the majority also apply to the book-
lets. Since many instructional designers have expressed
similar recommendations for designing educational materials.
this section will limit itself to a few noted specialists.

Gayne and Rohwer (1969) have listed eight condi-
tions by which the "manager of instruction may manipulate"
the learning process (p. 382). Each of these conditions.
will be described in the succeeding paragraphs.

First. the instructional designer should "...employ
techniques to gain and maintain the attention of the learn-

” It would appear that a simultaneous display. which

er.
accents the visual elements and their interrelationships.
should capture the learner's attention. Knowlton (1966)
observes that an "...important function of pictures in com-
munication is to gain attention. arouse interest. or please
esthetically" (p. 172).

Second. the designer should "...establish within
the learner certain preconditions for learning by giving
pretraining. by providing verbal directions. by stimulating

recall.” This condition implies that if the learner is

familiar with the instructional process and materials. this

44

will tend to increase the achievement level. This condi-
tion could be accomplished by: (1) A comprehensive pre-
training program designed to acquaint the subjects with
the procedures and materials: and/or (2) A set of related
lessons given to the same group of subjects over an ex-
tended period of time. Unfortunately. the researcher can-
not adequately satisfy this condition when: (1) The topics
and methods remain undisclosed prior to the treatment: and
(2) Each subject is given a single lesson treatment.

Third. the instructional designer should "...pre-
sent the stimuli directly involved in learning as actual
objects and events. printed materials. or pictures. among
other forms.” This condition implies that the most con-
crete stimuli should be given a prominant position. Grop-
per (1966) "...suggests that positive transfer effects
from one learning situation to another are more likely to
be obtained when learning based on a visual experience
precedes learning from a verbal experience than when the
reverse order is followed" (p. 48). Gibson (1969) argues
that the visual modality also takes precedence over the
tactual modality. He argues that the recollection or dis-
crimination of forms presented tactually and visually in-
dicate the superiority of visual processes throughout de-
velopment.

Fourth. the designer should "...aid the learning

process by methods of prompting and guiding. often in the

45

form of verbal communications." In this condition. Gayne
and Rohwer are calling for cuing devices to assist the
learner. As Allen (1975) puts it. "Directing attention to
relevant cues which emphasize material to be learned with-
in an instructional communication may increase learning..."
(p. 151). An elaborated display board. which combines and
exhibits pictures. passages. and question sheets simultan-
eously. may serve as a multiple-cuing device. For example.
the pictures and passages may be mutually cued and the
question sheet may guide the student's attention to a par-
ticular picture or a set of contrasting pictures. Severin
(1967) states that "Multi-channel communications which com-
bine words with related or relevant illustrations will pro-
vide the greatest gain because of the summation of cues
between the channels" (p. 243).

Fifth. the instructional designer should "...speci-
fy the conditions for responding as in the contrast between
overt and covert responses." Along similar lines. Allen
(1975) states that "The elicitation of an active response
or engagement of the learner in active participation during
the presentation of instructional material may increase the
learning..." (p. 153). A question sheet may elicit an ac-
tive response in the learner by directing him to locate and
position several subsets of pictures on a display board.
The question sheet may also direct the pattern of fixations

and eye movements.

46

Sixth. the designer should "...employ methods to
provide feedback to the learner concerning the correctness
or incorrectness of his performance at various stages of
learning." Most instructional designers would agree that
immediate feedback is more beneficial to the learner than
delayed feedback. For example. if the learner has just
matched a set of pictures to a set of passages. an answer
key should be immediately available to check the correct-
ness of this activity. Furthermore. after locating key
concepts to complete a set of sentences and choosing ti-
tles for sets of pictures. another answer key may be pro-
vided for self-correcting feedback.

Seventh. the instructional designer should estab-
lish "...conditions to promote retention. including such
factors as repetition and rehearsal." In a previous topic
based on principles of visual perception. it was asserted
that a simultaneous and continuous display of multiple-
images should facilitate repetition and retention. We may
expect a multiple-image display to elicit repetitive eye
movements based on serial and parallel processing. While
serial processing tends to be systematic and on a con-
scious level. parallel processing tends to be more random
and subliminal.

Eighth. the designer should "...use techniques
which enhance the transfer of learning to subsequent

learning tasks or other performances.” When a study is

4?

restricted to a single lesson treatment. it cannot begin to
evaluate the transfer of learning which might result from
subsequent tasks. Of course. the brevity of a study does
not portend a basic weakness in the treatment formats per
se. This matter of transfer learning. along with the pre—
training condition raised by Gayne and Rohwer. will be dis-
cussed in the last chapter.

In addition to the aforementioned conditions. Allen
(1975) has a suggestion concerning the organization of in-
structional materials. He states that “The structuring or
organizational outlining of the content of an instructional
communication may increase the learning of the content..."
(p. 150). As an example of instructional organization.
Wright. Gebhard. and Karttunen (1975) found that related
pictures in a common context induced an uniform recall
strategy and led to much better recall than presenting pic-
tures as unrelated items. Their findings applied to vari-

ous age groups ranging from elementary children to adults.

Summary

A review of the literature indicated that a variety
of learning principles. including simultaneity. proximity.
and repetition among others. appeared to support a simul-
taneous presentation as opposed to a successive presenta-
tion of pictures and passages. Thus. the research and the-
oretical bases provided a substantial amount of support for

the first research hypothesis: namely. that each board mean

48

was expected to outscore the booklet mean. especially in
terms of picture content.

While the instructional effectiveness of visual-
tactual formats designed for upper elementary remains un-
determined. child deveIOpmental theory appears to encour-
age multisensory learning. For example. Piagetian theory
asserts that as the child grows older. his ability to co-
ordinate and combine information from different sensory mo-
dalities also matures. Thus. the research and theoretical
bases provided some. albeit inconclusive. support for the
second research hypothesis: namely. that the manipulative
board mean was expected to outscore the stationary board
mean. especially in terms of picture content.

Research on children's reading preferences has
shown that animal topics are consistently more popular than
topics based on people or cultures of long ago for all ele-
mentary grades. Since a few recent studies have indicated
that topics of high interest produce high reading compre-
hension. it appeared that the Chimps would outscore the In-
dians across all three methods. Thus. the literature pro-
vided a reasonable amount of support for the third research
hypothesis: namely. that the higher interest topic mean
would outscore the lower interest topic mean for both pas-
sage and picture content.

Since the primary purpose of this study was to test

three instructional formats (booklets. stationary. and ma-

49

nipulative boards). the review of the literature concluded
with eight basic conditions/recommendations for designing
and presenting educational materials. While most of the
conditions were especially relevant to the boards. the ma-
jority also applied to the booklets. In summary. these
conditions provided additional rationale for the design and

presentation of the instructional materials in this study.

CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN

This chapter includes the following topics: Re—
search Questions: Population and Sample: Research Design:
and Statistical Models of Analyses. The Research Design
includes an extensive discussion of the instruments. inde-

pendent variables. pilot studies. and design validity.

Research Questions

The following three research questions were de—
rived from the statement of the problem and the review of
the literature. The first two were based on the methods
and the last one on the topics.

1. Given an identical set of pictures and pas-
sages in booklet form and on stationary and manipulative
board surfaces. was there a difference in the effective-
ness between the booklet and each of the boards?

2. Given an identical set of pictures and pas-
sages on stationary and manipulative board surfaces. was
there a difference in the effectiveness between the two
boards?

3. Given a topic of higher interest and a topic

of lower interest. was the topic of higher interest more

50

51

effective for each of the methods?

Populetion and Sample
The sample for this study consisted of 180 fifth

grade students from two elementary schools in the Lansing
School District of Michigan. The Lansing School System
included 41 elementary schools with over 13.700 students.
The two schools selected for this study were chosen be-
cause of their convenient location: therefore. they were
not chosen from a random sample. Since all of the Lansing
schools were subjected to cluster busing and racial inte—
gration. the schools had a very uniform student population.
The racial and ethnic composition included 64% White. 23%
Black. 10% Latino. 2% Asian. and 1% American Indian.

Most of the students came from homes within the
middle to lower middle income brackets. The population
was largely working class and employed in jobs related to
the auto industry. At the time of this study. there was a
high rate of unemployment because of a recession in the
automobile industry.

The fifth grade classrooms for this study were
heterogeneous in ability levels. In the Lansing schools.
there was no effort to group students according to their
intelligence quotients on either an intra- or inter-school
basis. Since the materials for this study were written

close to grade level. most of the fifth grade students

52

were able to work comfortably with the treatments. A few
students were excluded from the study because of serious

reading and/or language problems.

Research Desigp
Basic Desigp Elements and Procedures

The overall design consisted of five basic ele-
ments. The elements included posttests and questionnaires.
three treatments. two tepics. MANOVA and ANOVA models. and
a random sample.

1. Observations were based on a pair of achieve-
ment posttests: one based on Wild Chimps and the other on
Cave Indians. These posttests were designed along paral-
lel specifications for the purpose of comparing the two
topics. Each test was analyzed in regard to picture and
passage content: therefore. each test contained two depen-
dent variables. In addition to the posttests. student at-
titude questionnaires were used to examine preferences in
regard to the methods and topics.

2. Three treatments (methods) were compared in
this study: booklets. stationary. and manipulative boards.
Each treatment consisted of a set of 12 pictures and 12
passages. along with a question sheet.

3. Two lesson topics were used in this study: one
on Wild Chimpanzees and one on Cave Indians. Both topics
had identical specifications: i.e.. the same size and num-

ber of pictures and passages. The question sheets also

53

had the same types and number of questions.

4. The primary statistic for this study was a
multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). To determine
which dependent variable(s) were significant. two ANOVA's
were administered based on passage and picture content.

5. A total of 180 fifth grade students were ran-
domly distributed among the method and topic combinations
with each student randomly assigned to a single cell.
Since the study was based on a 3 X 2 balanced design.
there were 30 students assigned to each of six cells.

All 180 subjects were processed according to the
same set of procedures. The design procedure used the
following sequence:

1. The 180 subjects were randomly and evenly as-
signed in groups of six. At a given time. six subjects
were working simultaneously and independently at each
treatment. Depending on the size of the class. about five
consecutive time blocks of 45 minutes each were needed to
treat a class per day.

2. Each subject worked on a question sheet to ac-
company his/her particular topic and method (e.g.. a Chimp
stationary board). Each student was assigned to only one
topic and method to maintain independence and to avoid
multiple-treatment interference.

3. A posttest was administered to the entire

class two days after the treatment. Half of the class was

54

tested on Wild Chimpanzees and the other half was tested
on Cave Indians.

4. Student attitude questionnaires were used to
survey the preferences and reactions of the students in
regard to the methods and topics. A total of 80 students
were given two treatments and two topics each. To avoid
multiple-treatment interference. the researcher did not

analyze the data from the second posttest scores.

Description of the Instruments

The instruments used to collect the data included
achievement posttests and student attitude questionnaires.
There were two posttests and three questionnaires.

1. Achievement Postteets. Two posttests (i.e..
Chimps and Indians) were constructed to compare the in-
structional effectiveness of the three method treatments
and the two instructional topics. Both tests conformed to
the same structural specifications for establishing their
parallel nature. For example. both tests contained 30
four-alternative items and 20 three-alternative items.
Furthermore. both tests conformed to the same set of
learning objectives. The first 30 items. based on passage
content. tested two objectives: (1) recalling factual in-
formation and defining terminology: and (2) understanding
conceptual relationships and generalizations. The last 20

items. based on picture content. tested two objectives:

55

(1) understanding conceptual relationships based on image
recall: and (2) comparing objects within and/or between
pictures based on image recall. The tests relied on a
“cued recall” procedure for eliciting the student's reten-
tion of picture and passage content. The stem to each
multiple-choice item referred back to information pre-
sented to the student during the treatment in either pic-
ture or passage form. (Table 3.1 compares the specifica-
tions for both tests and emphasizes their parallel nature.)

Both tests were designed for a course in test con-
struction. After the tests were constructed. they were
reviewed by the class instructor. Dr. Robert Ebel of Mich-
igan State University. and revised by the author. Every
effort was made to match the two tests in terms of reading
level and vocabulary. The researcher used the "Fry Reada-
bility Graph" to assess the difficulty level of each post-
test. The Fry method calls for the counting of syllables
and sentences per 100 words. While multiple-choice items
lend themselves to syllable counts. the sentences had to
be extrapolated from the passages per 100 words. It was
determined that the posttests were practically identical
and. like the passage content. written between the fifth
and sixth grade levels.

Two-way tables of specifications (see Tables 3.2

and 3.3) are provided for assessing the content validity

and parallel nature of the two tests. The purpose of these

56

 

TABLE 3.1 Comparative Specifications

for Two Achievement Tests

 

 

Form of Items

Four-Alternative Items
Three-Alternative Items

Total Number of Items

Kinde of Objectives

Factual Recall and Terminology
(Based on Passage Content)

Conceptual Relationships/Generali-
zations (Based on Passage Content)

Conceptual Relationships
(Based on Picture Content)

Comparing Visual Objects
(Based on Picture Content)

Content Categories*

Number of Categories
Item Range for Six Categories
Mean Number of Items Per Category

 

Chimp Indian
Test Test
30 3O
20 20
50 50
.24 .24
.36 .36
.20 .24
.20 .16

6
4 4
8.3 8.3

 

*Note: The six content categories for each test are not
listed because they cover different topics and.
therefore. provide a limited basis for comparison.

57

 

TABLE 3.2 Two-Way Table of Specifications for an
Achievement Test on Wild Chimpanzees

 

 

LEARNING OBJECTIVES BASED ON QUESTIONS

 

Passage Content Picture Content

 

Each Content Category

 

Categories Categories a
8
: : -3 u: m
I c :n m asap: 0 a: E
:2. 3.2.8 3.7.3:: 2.9:. .2
r2336 «“5: we: see: ..
5a -m4 8 ca m UHH $4
30533 532...? 583... 295“: °
HHHO PPHH -wwam-a co m
rqc:os: m:1;:d m:m;:m 31::9 .4 a:
HHDH noon some «ova
8 e5. «8253 385“ 825533 *5
TEST CONTENT 9350 sou-m: con-u: cacao o
.3 a? .2 o; 8
1. Individual and Group
Behavior of Grown 2 1O 6 18
Chimps
2. Parental Raising and
Characteristics of 4 6 2 12
Young Chimps

3. Physical Features
and Characteristics 2 4 2 1O 18
of Grown Chimps ~

4. References to Scien- .
tists or Zoologists 4 6 6 16
(Observations)

5. Comparisons and
Interaction Between 4 4 8 16
Chimps and Humans

6. Adapting to and
Shaping the Habitat 12 6 2 20
to Meet Basic Needs

Percentage of Items for 0 00
Each Learning Objective 2“ 36 20 2 1

58

 

TABLE 3.3 Two-Way Table of Specifications for an
Achievement Test on Cliff Village Indians

 

 

LEARNING OBJECTIVES BASED ON QUESTIONS

 

Passage Content Picture Content

 

Each Content Category

 

Categories Categories g
«S
l l 3 D m
.55 .2 2 as: 3 a. s
0.4 hoarse gunman rau:s «P
d+aua sasgqa a:ac: 1:04: :4
h.a::ga *1 .p -H filo lo\\c>s
End 'Ur4 d 'Ur4 I: 'undh: 4:
30.5.3 538:3 5” 3’5“ °
:mo :3
«who ppaa -wmd -H so 0
F4C§0S= m:1;:m m:1::§’ zinc» .4 g)
I-IHQH acct: hem «401394
31.2 3252 sgsH asses 2
TEST°°NTENT .2253: sees sees geese 3
CATEGORIES , , , , g
H N e-I N D:
1. Roles and Responsi-
bil1ties of V1llage 4 8 6 2 20

Members for Fulfil-
ling Basic Needs

2. References to Scien-
tists or Archaeolo- 6 12 - 2 20
gists (Observations)

3. Basic Design and

Construction of Vil-
lages (Dimensions/' h 2 2 8 16
Materials)
4. Cliff Village Kivas
(Basic Construction 4 4 8 16

and Living Purposes)

5. Natural and Man-Made '
Features Near the
Village (Cliffs “ l‘ 2 t: 1“
Foctholes. etc.)

6. Indian Handicrafts

and Artifacts (Bas- 2 6 6 14
kets. Pottery. etc.)
Percentage of Items for 24 35 24 15 100

Each Learning Objective

59

tables is to define the scope and emphasis of the tests and
to relate the objectives to the content. The tables add
support to the content validity and parallel structure of
the two tests by reflecting the percentage balance between
corresponding categories. For example. the bottom row of
- figures in each table shows that both tests have very sim-
ilar item percentages for each learning objective. These
rows are particularly useful for comparing the balance be-
tween the two tests. (Note that the first two objectives
total 60 percent because three-fifths of the items are
concerned with passage content.)

The last column in each table lists the percentage
of items for each content category. For the purpose of
comparing the balance between the two tests. the last col-
umn in each table is not as meaningful as the bottom row
in each table. This is due to the fact that the columns
reflect different content (i.e.. Chimps and Indians).
whereas the rows are based on an identical set of objec-
tives. The percentage of items within the matrix indi-
cates a greater variation. For example. a few cells have
a zero percent of items. Sometimes it is wise to leave a
few empty cells since the pictures or passages may not
provide worthy test items for those particular cells.

Stanley (1971) argues that the best guarantee of
parallelism for two test forms is based on a complete and

detailed set of specifications. which includes the dis-

6O

tribution of items in regard to objectives and content are-
as. “If each test form is then built to conform to the out-
line. while at the same time care is taken to avoid identity
or detailed overlapping of content. the two resulting test
forms should be truly comparable” (p. 405).

As the tables indicate. each test was divided into
two dependent variables: namely. picture and passage con-
tent. These variables were largely independent of each oth-
er: i.e.. the passage questions could not be answered on the
basis of picture retention and vice versa. This is not to
say that these two variables were isolated from each other:
obviously. the picture-passage pairings had an important
role in reinforcing each other. There were three reasons
for designing a test containing two dependent variables: (1)
The researcher wanted to separate the picture and passage
content in order to test the effectiveness of each one.
There was a possibility that the two variables might not
prove to be equally effective for each of the methods: (2)
The researcher found that he could include and categorize
most of the important concepts under picture or passage con-
tent: and (3) It would have been difficult to design a suf-
ficient and unambiguous number of interdependent items which
required a knowledge of both dependent variables. (See Ap-
pendix A for a copy of each posttest.)

2. Student Attitude Questionnaire. The achieve-

ment posttest provided performance data but no information

61

concerning the student's feelings toward the treatments.

It was felt that questionnaires could provide some valuable
insight into the posttest results by surveying student
preferences. The researcher designed three brief question-
naires to find out how the students felt about the methods
and topics. Form A compared the booklet to a stationary
board: Form B compared the booklet to a manipulative board:
and Form C compared the stationary board to a manipulative
board.

The questionnaires were administered to three class-
rooms involving a total of 80 students. The questionnaires
were administered after the posttests and before the post-
test results were returned to avoid any interaction between
scores and treatment preferences. One third of the stu-
dents were given Form A because they had worked on a book-
let and a stationary board (half of them started with the
booklet and the other half started with the stationary
board). Another third of the students were given Form B
since they had worked on a booklet and a manipulative board.
The final third of the students were given Form C because
their treatments involved the stationary and manipulative
boards.

Obviously. to administer the questionnaires. each
student had to be given two treatments (two methods). two
topics. and two posttests. To prevent multiple treatment

interference. the researcher did not include the second

62

posttest scores in the statistical analyses (MANOVA and
ANOVA models). While the second posttest was not subjected
to the statistical models. the 80 students were given the
second test to avoid student bias toward a certain method
or topic. For example. if the students had been only test-
ed for one method and topic. this may have biased their
questionnaire responses to the second method and topic.

(Appendix A includes an example of each questionnaire.)

Independent Variables

This study consisted of two independent variables:
one based on methods of instruction and a second based on
lesson topics. The methods of instruction were based on
three formats: booklets. stationary. and manipulative
boards. The lesson topics were based on Wild Chimps and
Cave Indians. There was a booklet. stationary. and manip-
ulative board for each tepic: i.e.. there was a set of
three method formats for each topic.

1. Independent Variable: Methods. Each set of
instructional methods contained an identical set of pic-
tures and passages: i.e.. they conformed to the same con-
tent and dimensions. For example. there was a booklet.
stationary. and manipulative board with identical pictures
and passages for each topic. The rationale for standard-
izing or equating the sets of pictures and passages across
the method formats was based on the need to provide an un-

biased comparison of the three methods. Since the most

63

important research hypothesis concerned the comparative
effectiveness of the three methods. it was essential to
control this independent variable by standardizing the pic-
tures and passages for each topic across all three method
formats.

At this point. it is appropriate to say a word
about the potential for ”weak experimental treatments.”
The researcher was aware that there was a real possibility
that the results could be weakened by testing identical
sets of pictures-passages for each topic and across each
set of method treatments. However. it was considered a
worthy risk for the sake of establishing a more valid and
unbiased comparison of the method treatments. It was as-
sumed that if the null hypotheses could not be rejected.
then there would appear to be no particular advantage in
using multiple-image boards as apposed to more convention-
al style booklets.

Each booklet. one on Wild Chimps and one on Cave
Indians. contained a set of 12 pictures and 12 passages.
The passages were placed immediately adjacent to the pic-
tures to facilitate convenience and association. Each
passage was between six and seven lines and contained an
average of 90 words. If an important concept appeared in
the passage. it was underlined and defined. (The pictures
and passages are reproduced in Appendix C.)

The stationary and manipulative boards. like the

64

booklets. each contained a set of 12 pictures and 12 pas--
sages. The passages were located right beneath their cor-
responding pictures. There were two stationary and two
manipulative boards to accommodate two topics. The lesson
boards were designed to stand on table taps and had iden-
tical measurements. The pictures and passages were affixed
to the surface of the stationary boards. The manipulative
boards. in contrast. had picture and passage holders which
allowed the student to locate and place the materials on
the board surface. The student had to "manipulate” or ar-
range the materials in order to relate the pictures with
the passages. (Figure 3.1 shows the lesson board design.)

The booklets. stationary and manipulative boards
were specifically designed by the researcher for this stud-
y. While the booklets resembled a more traditional format
than the boards. they did not constitute a control varia-
ble. The researcher began constructing and using display
boards for use with his own students several years prior
to the experiment.*

The stationary and manipulative boards were de-
signed to present composite and stimulating displays which

would fall well within the parameters of the visual field.

 

*The manipulative board format led to an United
States Patent No. 4115930 on September 20. 1978. The patent
process called for an extended board surface for attaching
and releasing a set of pictures and passages. The claims
called for a single set or a plurality of subsets of infor-
mational material of a two or three dimensional nature.

65

=.s\n m x s \n m and AH new .m .: masseuse ..a x .m\m m use «A use .n .N «coupons
..;\H A x .~\a : one on use .m .n meanness ..m x .m\s m one m one .s .d meanness

handyman: o>apmasnasa2 cam Spacedvdvm you mscamsos«n can smdmon canon seamed

a.m mmWWMW:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

HR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sustau u: .82

 

 

 

1/4' poster board

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-/

J

[a
H
[

 

 

 

 

 

 

66

as defined by Gibson (1950). (Figures 3.2 and 3.3 illus-
trate the lateral and vertical dimensions of the visual
field vis-a-vis the display boards.)

2. Independent Variable: Topics. The purpose in
testing two topics. as opposed to one. was fourfold: (1) To
determine whether a topic of higher interest would produce
a higher degree of learning than a topic of lower interest
for all three methods: (2) To determine whether an interac-
tion might exist between a particular tOpic and method.

For example. the higher or lower topic might be more effec-
tive with a particular method: (3) To provide more assur-
ance that any demonstrated effects would not be attributa-
ble to the characteristics of a single topic. By testing
two topics as opposed to one. there was a greater chance of
detecting and confirming any significant differences between
two method formats: and (4) To broaden the generalizability
of the study to higher and lower interest topics.

A ”Fry Readability Graph" (Fry. 1977) was used to
determine the reading level of each topic. A reading spe-
cialist determined that the passages were between a fifth
and sixth grade level for both topics. The researcher de-
cided to conduct the experiment with fifth grade students
for two reasons: (1) The passages provided a smaller amount
of reading material than the ordinary textbook assignment:
and (2) The students would have sufficient time to read and

reread the passages during the treatment time. They were

6?

    
  

FIGURE 3 . 2

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YE,
,F l.
Lateral Visual Field (Peripheral Angle with Head and Eyes
Held Stationary). Lateral Board Area (100 Degrees) Falls
Within Lateral Visual Field (180 Degrees).

 

 

75 6O

/ L
FIGURE 3.3

 

 

\/

ll
\\

PM

Vertical Visual Field (Peripheral Angle with Head and Eyes
Held Stationary). Vertical Board Area (120 Degrees) Falls
Within Vertical Visual Field (150 Degrees).

 

68

also encouraged to seek assistance with difficult words.

3. Question Sheets. There was a question sheet
(lesson assignment) to accompany each of the three methods
and two topics. The question sheet took about 45 minutes
to complete depending on the speed and ability of the stu-
dent. Each question sheet had a total of 16 questions di-
vided into three parts: (A) Locating and Completing Passage
Information: (B) Comparing Pictures and Choosing Titles:
and (C) Creative Thinking Skills. Parts A and B were de-
signed to sensitize the student to the passage and picture
content. (The posttests also followed this passage and
picture sequence.) Part C was based on open-ended respon-
ses (hypothetical problem solving and creative solutions)
and the answers. for the most part. were not derived from
the pictures or passages. None of the posttest items was
derived from Part C: therefore. even though some of the
students failed to complete this final part of the ques-
tion sheet. they were not at a disadvantage when they took
the posttest. Part C provided some flexibility in admin-
istering the treatment without biasing the instrument da-
ta. While all of the students were encouraged and given
sufficient time to complete Parts A and B. the students
were not required to finish Part C.

In the case of the booklet. the question sheet
appeared at the end of the booklet. This procedure was
designed to resemble the standard textbook procedure. In

69

regard to the stationary and manipulative boards. the
question sheets were placed directly in front of the les-
son boards. Regardless of whether the question sheet ap-
peared in the back of a booklet or in front of a lesson
board. each question sheet began by instructing the stu-
dent to read the passages carefully before proceeding to
answer the questions on paper. Since the location of the
question sheet might have influenced the effectiveness of
the treatments. this variable will be examined in the final
chapter.

The booklets and stationary boards had an identi-
cal set of questions. The manipulative boards. unlike the
booklets and stationary boards. began by asking the student
to "Read each passage carefully and decide which picture
goes above it” and then "place all 12 pictures above their
passages.” The student then checked an answer key to find
out if the pictures were in their correct positions. Since
all three methods instructed the students to begin by read-
ing the passages carefully. the selection and placement of
pictures on the manipulative board took about five addi-
tional minutes. To compensate for this additional proced-
ure. the manipulative board question sheet had one less
creative thinking question at the end of the assignment.
Since these creative thinking questions were not included
on the posttest. the deletion of one of these questions

should not have been a disadvantage for the students who

70

were assigned to manipulative boards. (Appendix C has a
complete set of treatment materials. including pictures.

passages. and question sheets for both topics.)

Resulte of the Pilot Studies

The pilot studies served two major purposes: (1)
They provided data for assessing the validity of the in-
struments: and (2) They subjected the treatments to a tri-
al run for the purpose of identifying any special problems.
The experimental materials were subjected to two pilot
studies: 28 and 27 fifth grade students from two different
classrooms in a Lansing elementary school.

1. Instrument Velidation. The pretest data from
the first pilot study revealed that the mean chance score
for the Chimp passage content was 7.2 and 8.0 for the In-
dian passage content.* Since these scores were very close
to the expected chance score of 7.5. this indicated that
any prior knowledge of Wild Chimps or Cave Indians did not
appear to influence the results. These chance scores also
indicated that the test items were not too easy. However.
the posttest mean scores. administered after the pilot
study treatments. indicated that both tests were too dif-

ficult. For the posttest on Wild Chimps. the mean score

 

*The pilot study pretest did not include the pic—
ture content because it would have been meaningless to ask
students to recall and compare pictures which they had
never seen. However. previous knowledge on Wild Chimps or
Cave Indians could have influenced the passage results.

71

(passage and picture content combined) for 14 subjects was
53 percent. For the posttest on Cave Indians. 14 subjects
had a mean score of 48 percent. After examining the test
results the following changes were made: (1) Ten items of
poor discrimination were deleted from each posttest: and
(2) Several items were revised for purposes of clarifica-
tion and precision. These changes resulted from an item
analysis of each test and the observation that some stu-
dents expressed dissatisfaction over the length of the
posttest. (The original posttests had 60 multiple-choice
items each and the revised tests had 50 items each.)

The data from the second pilot study is given in
Figure 3.4. The expectations column gives projected data
while the observations column cites actual data based on
the second pilot study pretests (chance scores) and post-
tests (mean scores). The data from the second pilot study
resulted in a Chimp mean score (passage and picture con-
tent combined) of 61 percent and an Indian mean score of
57 percent. These scores are quite close to the expected
mean score of 64 percent. Since Figure 3.4 lists the pas-
sage and picture content separately. the scores must be
combined to derive the total percentages.

In summary. the data in Figure 3.4 indicates that
the expected and observed scores for the two achievement
tests were quite similar. Since the tests were designed

along parallel specifications. as outlined in Table 3.1.

EXPECTATIONS

3O Passage
Content Items

(Four Alternatives)

Mean
Score

Chance
Score

—1’

30 T
25 ~-

20-

————>- 18.75

15 --

10 -

7.5
5 4.

 

o l.

20 Picture
Content Items

(Three Alternatives)

Mean
Score

Chance
Score

 

72

OBSERVATIONS

3O Passage
Content Items
(Four Alternatives)

—

_

 

30-1
25-4
20.-
Posttest
Mean
Scores
15-
10-
Pretest

Chance
Scores <

-

17090 (ChimpS)
16.80 (Indians)

-

b

7.8 (Chimps)
7.2 (Indians)

 

0.1

b

20 Picture
Content Items
(Three Alternatives)

r

 

12.84 (Chimps)
11.64 (Indians)

:—

i—

 

20 HP 20'—

15 -- Posttest 15 ‘
13.34 Mean

Scores

10 -— 10 -

5 v' 15‘

0“ 0-
FIGURE 3.4

Expectations and Observations for Two Achievement Tests
(Based On the Revised Tests of 50 Multiple-Chalce Items)

73

the data in this figure adds support to the reliability of
the instruments. However. it should be noted that the
scores listed under the observation column were based on a
small pilot study sample (14 tests on Wild Chimps and 13
tests on Cave Indians). In regard to the higher Chimp
mean. this result will be discussed in the next chapter.
Chapter four will also provide a detailed analysis of the
instruments based on 80 subjects. A set of tables will
provide a complete item-by-item analysis as well as Kuder-
Richardson reliability coefficients.

2. Experimental Procedures. The following set of
basic procedures was used to conduct the pilot study.*

The researcher held a brief orientation meeting for
the fifth grade teachers about two weeks prior to the
study. It was pointed out that the researcher would as-
sume full responsibility for administering the treatments
and correcting the assignment sheets and posttests. The
teachers were very cooperative and agreed to refrain from
discussing the methods and topics with the students until
the experiment was completed. After introducing the ma-
terials and basic procedures. the following schedule was
arranged: (1) On Friday. meet with the first class for a

brief introductory meeting and pretest: (2) On the follow-

 

*The same set of basic procedures was used to con-
duct the main experiment. However. unlike the pilot stud-
ies. the main experiment did not include a pretest. The
rationale for this decision is discussed in the next part.

74

ing Tuesday. administer the treatments to groups of six
subjects at a time: (3) On Thursday. two days after the
treatment. administer a posttest: and (4) Repeat the same
procedure for the next class.

First. the researcher conducted a brief introduc-
tory meeting with each class prior to the treatments.
These meetings were designed to establish some rapport be-
tween the students and the researcher. The students were
told that they would be working with a variety of materials
and that they would be randomly assigned as they entered
the room. In order to minimize student bias. they were
told that it would not matter which materials they were
assigned because the same topics were repeated in several
formats. Furthermore. they were told that the researcher
would introduce all of the materials after the lesson was
completed. The researcher did not mention the topics or
methods by name. In the case of the pilot studies. pre-
tests based on the passage content were given at the end
of this introductory meeting.

Second. on the day of the treatment. the students
were sent to the experimental room in groups of six. As
they entered the room. they were told to ”Work carefully
because you will be tested in two days to see how much you
can remember about the pictures and passages. Raise your
hand if you need help with certain words or directions.”

Each student then drew a number to determine the assigned

75

treatment: ones were assigned to booklets. twos were as-
signed to stationary boards. and threes were assigned to
manipulative boards. Two color codings represented the
topics: green for Chimps and brown for Indians. If the
student had taken a pretest on Chimps. he/she was asked to
select a brown card (Indians). There were several reasons
for reversing the topics: (1) The primary purpose of the
pretest had been to determine whether or not the scores
would come close to the chance level: (2) The purpose was
not to measure the gain score between the pre- and post-
test: (3) This would minimize the possibility of an "in-
teraction effect” between the test and treatment: and (4)
It had already been decided that the actual experiment
would be based on a posttest only design.

The treatments were placed at opposite ends of
three long tables. The positions of the upright boards.
standing at dihedral angles. made it difficult for the
students to observe each others' treatments. For the pur-
poses of conformity and privacy. an upright board with a
blank surface. was placed in front of each booklet. Fur-
thermore. the tepics were alternated along the same table
ends to prevent the same topic from being placed side-by-
side. For example. if two Chimp boards had been placed
at the same ends of two parallel tables. the student at
the manipulative board might have received a picture

placement cue from the stationary board. Since the boards

76

tended to shelter the topics and methods. plus the fact
that the tables were situated about 15 feet apart. there
was little opportunity for one treatment to interfere with
or contaminate an adjacent treatment. Finally. the stu-
dents were instructed not to visit or assist other stu—
dents in the room.

Each student had a question (assignment) sheet
with a set of simply worded directions. Since the treat-
ments were basically self-contained and self-explanatory.
there were a limited number of questions during the treat—
ment period. The researcher helped when there was a ques-
tion concerning the directions or the pronunciation of a
word. but he did not provide any direct answers to the
questions on the sheet. All the questions. in parts A and
B. provided citations to particular passages and pictures.
thus minimizing the need to ask questions. For the most
part. the researcher sat some distance away from the tab-
les. The researcher used a chart to tabulate the number
of assistance requests and the average treatment time for
for each method. After having processed 55 subjects. from
two pilot studies. he found that the questions were almost
evenly distributed among the treatments. There was an
average of one question per subject. There was little
variation in the amount of time required to complete each
treatment. For example. the booklets required a mean time

of 43 minutes while the boards required a mean time of 45

77

minutes. The researcher was flexible in terms of the time
allotment and no effort was made to pressure the students.
The atmosphere was quiet and relaxed and the students were
exceedingly cooperative. As each student completed his
treatment. he was asked to avoid discussing the treatment
with other classmates until everyone had had a chance to
complete the treatment. Since each class had between 27
and 28 students. it took five consecutive treatments to
complete a class. The treatments began in the morning and
ended about midway through the afternoon.

Third. two days after the treatments had been ad-
ministered. the whole class was given a posttest. Natural-
ly. if a student's treatment had been based on Indians. his
posttest was based on the same topic. The students were
given a simple set of directions and asked to work indepen-
dently. They were told "to do the best you can and try to
answer every question.” They were instructed to ”make your
best guess rather than skip a question." The researcher
chose not to apply a correction for guessing formula to the
results. This decision was based on two considerations
provided by Ebel (1979): (1) "Scores corrected for guessing
will usually rank students in about the same relative Posi-
tions as do uncorrected scores:” and (2) "Students' ration-
al guesses can provide useful information on their general

level of achievement" (pp. 194. 196).

Selection of a Posttest-Only Desigp

78

A posttest-only design was chosen over a pretest-
posttest design after weighing the possible advantages and
disadvantages of not administering a pretest. The decision
was based on three arguments.

First. it was felt that a pretest based on the pas-
sage content could easily weaken the external validity of
the study by risking an interaction between the pretest and
the treatment. This appeared to be a likely occurrence
since the test items were required to focus on passages
which were condensed and restricted by their very defini-
tion. If the pretest items had been drawn from a larger
body of information. there probably would have been less
likelihood of an "interaction effect."

Second. it was felt that any pretest data gathered
from the instruments would not prove very useful in con-
trolling for ”initial differences" for two reasons: (1) The
pretest would have to be limited to passage content. as was
the case in the pilot studies. which only constituted 60
percent of the posttest. It would have seemed rather mean-
ingless to pretest the students on a set of pictures they
had never seen before. However. they may have some know-
ledge of the passage content. albeit limited. based on some
prior encounter with either topic. Nevertheless. a pretest
based on 60 percent of the total test would have had seri-
ous limitations: and (2) The pilot study pretest indicated

that most of the students scored very close to the chance

79

level. Therefore. the pretest data would have Provided

very little assistance in recognizing or controlling for
initial differences. The very small variance on the pre-
test would also have made it difficult to match students.

Third. it was felt that initial differences could
be controlled most effectively by two techniques: (1) By
conducting a random assignment of subjects to the treat-
ments as they entered the room: and (2) By selecting each
group of six subjects on the basis of homogeneous reading
levels.

The researcher felt that the second technique was
particularly appropriate and effective. To begin with.
each teacher composed a list of student groupings just be-
fore the experiment. Each group was based on a homogene-
ous reading level: such as all high readers. all average
readers. and all low readers. These groupings were not
discussed with the students. This homogeneous grouping
added more precision to the random assignment process
since it provided reasonable assurance that each treatment
would receive a balance of students based on reading abil-
ity levels. Finally. it should be noted that after the
ability groupings were formed. each group was randomly as-
signed to the treatments upon entering the room.

Finally. it may be argued that a posttest-only de-
sign was more appr0priate for this study since a rather

large sample (180 subjects) was involved. Borg and Gall

80

(1971) report that "...random assignment is most effective
in equating groups when large numbers of subjects are in-

volved" (p. 388).

Vepiables and Desigp Validity
Design validity will be discussed in terms of the

guidelines established by Campbell and Stanley (1963).

1. Internal Validity. This study was designed to
control for the following extraneous variables: (1) Matura-
tion and experimental mortality were inconsequential since
each class was processed within a span of two days. from
treatment to posttest: (2) Testing and instrumentation were
irrelevant considerations since this study excluded a pre-
test: (3) Statistical regression was also inapplicable
since the subjects were not tested and retested: and (4)
Differential selection was inoperable to this study since
there was no control group.

There was some internal weakness in terms of the
history variable. Since there was a time lapse between the
treatment and the posttest. a socialization factor may have
influenced the results. As previously noted. the subjects
were asked not to discuss the treatments with other class-
mates until after the experiment.

In summary. it may be concluded that this experi-
ment had strong internal validity with the exception of the
history variable (i.e.. the socialization factor).

2. External Validity. This study controlled for

81

the following extraneous variables: (1) The absence of a
pretest eliminated any “reactive or interaction effect of
testing:" and (2) The factor of ”multiple treatment inter-
ference" was inoperable due to the fact that each subject
was assigned to only one treatment.

There were two extraneous variables which limited
the generalizability of the findings.

First. there was the interaction of the experimen-
tal treatment with particular student characteristics.
measuring instruments. and the time of the study. For ex-
ample. strictly speaking. the results of this study can
only be generalized to fifth grade students who come from
a school district which resembles the one in this study.
Furthermore. the results were based strictly on a multi-
ple-choice test and cannot be generalized to other measur-
ing instruments.

Second. there was the "...possible artificiality
of the experimental treatment and the students' knowledge
that they are involved in an experiment" (Borg and Gall.
1971. p. 370). Since the students were aware that they
were working with some novel materials. especially in the
case of the display boards. this may have caused a change
in their behavior. The novel situation may have caused a
"Hawthorne effect." While the researcher can never ade-
quately measure these effects. two observations based on

the pilot studies are noteworthy: (1) Since the students

82

worked independently and did not receive special instruc-
tions or attention. this probably helped to offset the nov-
elty of the situation: and (2) The students appeared very
comfortable and relaxed while working with their treat-
ments. This may have been due to two factors: (1) The in-
troductory meeting probably helped to alleviate apprehen-
sions and initial confusion: and (2) The upright boards
partitioned the students and appeared to promote a sense

of security.

Finally. two other considerations may have helped
to offset the "Hawthorne effect:” (1) Identical topics
were presented across all three methods: and (2) All three
methods presented some degree of novelty since there was
no control group.

3. Potential Confounding Variables. There were at
least two additional factors. not included in the Campbell
and Stanley Tables. which might have weakened the validity
of this study. They included student and experimenter bias.

First. there was always the chance that student
bias toward a treatment might have influenced behavior.
Based on the pilot studies. three observations relate to
this factor: (1) The researcher did not observe any verbal
or visible opposition to the assignments: (2) The parti-
tioning of treatments appeared to reduce subject awareness
of different formats: and (3) The introductory meeting as-

sured the students that they would have an Opportunity.

83

after the treatments and posttests were completed. to view
each topic and method.

Second. whenever a researcher conducts an experi-
ment based on his own materials. there is a real danger of
experimenter bias and contamination. As a matter of logis-
tics. the researcher found it difficult to locate and train
an assistant who would be able to devote the many hours and
weeks required to gather the necessary data. In the case
of the pilot studies. at least two conditions probably
helped to alleviate experimenter contamination: (1) Because
of the self-contained nature of the treatments. there was a
minimal amount of subject/researcher interaction. When a
question did arise. the researcher attempted to provide a
brief encounter and clarification: and (2) The researcher
was able to remain more neutral and detached by sitting

some distance away from the treatments.

Statistical Models of Analyses

The primary statistical tool used in this study was
a multivariate analysis of variance. A multivariate F-test
was used to combine the passage and picture posttest scores.
Univariate F-tests. based on analysis of variance models.
were used to determine whether the passages and/or pictures
were significant. Both the MANOVA and ANOVA models were
tested at an alpha level of .05. Each statistical model
included two Helmert planned comparisons for contrasting

the methods.

at.

Two-Way Multivariate Analyeis of Variance

A two-way MANOVA was administered since the post-
tests had been broken into two dependent variables: i.e..
passage and picture scores. The two-way MANOVA provided
a powerful tool for pooling and weighting the dependent
variables to detect the level of significance. This was
accomplished without dividing the alpha level. The two-
way MANOVA was an appropriate tool since both dependent
variables were based on the same underlying concept: name-
ly. obtained knowledge.

Table 3.4 illustrates the layout of data for the
3 X 2 two-factor and two-way MANOVA. The independent var-
iables (methods and topics) were regarded as fixed factors
since they were drawn from target populations. It was a
balanced design in the sense that each cell had an equal
number of observations. The factors or main effects were
crossed since every level of one of the factors appeared
with every level of the other factor. The notation V1
stood for the first dependent variable (passage content)
and V2 represented the second dependent variable (picture
content). Each dependent variable had 30 observations.

It was assumed that the population sampled was
normally distributed based on the Central Limit Theorem.
which applies to sample of 30 subjects or more. It was
believed that the homogeneity of variances of the compar-

ison groups would remain approximately the same due to

85

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Factor B (Main Effect)
Independent Variable (Topics)
Factor A B1 Level 32 Level
(Main EffGCt) Wild Chimpanzees - Cave Indians
Independent
Variable V1 V2 V1 V2
(Methods) Passages Pictures Passages Pictures
A1 Level
Lesson n = 30 n = 30 6O
Booklets
A2 Level
Stationary n = 30 n = 30 6°
Boards
A3 Level
Manipulative n = 30 n = 30 6°
Boards
90 90: 180
Table 3.4

Layout of Data in a X 2 Two—Factor MANOVA (Multivariate
Analysis of Variance Design with 30 Observations Per Cell
random assignment. The assumption of independence was met
by assigning each subject to a single treatment (a combi-
nation of one method and one topic). Finally. the depen-
dent measures provided continuous data and equal intervals
on the poettest scale. It was concluded by the researcher
that the assumptions for the MANOVA had been fulfilled.

It should be noted that these assumptions also applied to
the two-way ANOVA.

Two-Way Analysis of Variance

 

86

Since the MANOVA results led to the rejection of
two null hypotheses. univariate F-tests. using two-way
ANOVA models. were conducted to determine whether the pas-
sage and/or picture scores were significant. Since the
two-way ANOVA was designed to test a single dependent var-
iable. two ANOVA models were applied to this study: one
for the passage variable and one for the picture variable.

The two-way MANOVA and ANOVA models included two
Helmert planned comparisons based on the first two hypoth-
eses. The first planned comparison tested the booklet
group versus the stationary and manipulative board groups.
The second planned comparison tested the stationary board

group versus the manipulative board group.

Statistical Hypotheses
This study was based on three statistical hypothe—

ses. For the purpose of testing. they were stated in the
null form.

1. There would be no difference in the means of
the booklet group versus the stationary and manipulative
board groups in regard to the dependent variables: passage
and picture content.

2. There would be no difference in the means of
the stationary board group versus the manipulative board
group in regard to the dependent variables: passage and
picture content.

3. There would be no difference in the means of

37

the two topic groups (Chimps versus Indians) in regard to

the dependent variables: passage and picture content.

Summepy
A sample of 180 fifth grade students were randomly

assigned to six balanced groups: three methods (booklets.
stationary. and manipulative boards) and two topics (Chim-
panzees and Indians). Each student was assigned to a sin-
gle method and topic. The question sheets for each method
and topic paralleled each other in regard to the number
and type of questions.

Achievement posttests were the primary instruments
used in this study. Each posttest had 50 multiple-choice
items divided into 30 passage content items and 20 picture
content items. Both tests conformed to the same structur-
al specifications for establishing their parallel nature.
For example. both tests had the same set of learning ob-
jectives and reading levels.

Two pilot studies were conducted to test the va-
lidity of the instruments and treatment procedures. Some
of the more difficult items were revised after the first
pilot study. The second pilot study indicated that the
expected and observed scores for the two achievement tests
were quite similar.

Based on the guidelines established by Campbell
and Stanley (1963). this study had strong internal valid-
ity with the exception of the history variable (i.e.. the

88

socialization factor). Two extraneous variables posed
threats to the external validity. First. there was the
interaction of the experimental treatment with particular
student characteristics. measuring instruments. and time
of the study. Second. there was the possibility that the
students' awareness of the experimental treatment might
produce a contrived response.

The major statistical model was a two-way MANOVA.
The dependent variables (passage and picture posttest
scores) were combined as a multivariate. Univariate F-
tests. using two-way ANOVA models. were conducted to de-
termine whether the passage and/or picture scores were
significant. The two-way MANOVA and ANOVA models includ-
ed two Helmert planned comparisons based on the methods.
Each statistical model was tested at an alpha level of
.05.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

This chapter includes the following topics: Pur-
poses of the Study: Research and Test Hypotheses: and
Findings of the Study. These findings are used to test
the null hypotheses. An interpretation of these findings

and conclusions will be presented in Chapter V.

Purposes of the Study
This study had three purposes. First. the study

attempted to find out whether a simultaneous presentation
of pictures and passages. as exemplified by the station-
ary and manipulative boards. would be more conducive to
learning than a successive presentation of pictures and
passages. as exemplified by the booklets. Second. the
study attempted to find out whether the manipulative
boards. which required the students to position the pic-
tures above their appropriate passages. would be more
conducive to learning than the stationary boards. which
presented the pictures already mounted above their appro-
priate passages. Third. the study attempted to find out
whether a topic of higher student interest would be more

conducive to learning than a topic of lower student in-

89

9O

terest for each of the treatments: booklets. stationary.

and manipulative boards.

Reeearch and Test Hypotheses

Three research hypotheses were derived from the
purposes of the study and a review of the relevant litera-
ture. The first two hypotheses were based on the methods
and the third hypothesis was based on the topics.

First. the mean scores associated with the sta-
tionary board group and the manipulative board group were
each expected to exceed the mean score associated with the
booklet group. This expectation applied to both dependent
variables: passage and picture content.

Second. the mean score associated with the manipu-
lative board group was expected to exceed the one associa-
ted with the stationary board group. This expectation ap-
plied to both dependent variables: passage and picture
content.

Third. the mean score associated with the tapic of
higher interest (Chimps) was expected to exceed the one
associated with the topic of lower interest (Indians) for
each of the methods., This expectation applied to both de-
pendent variables: passage and picture content.

Three test hypotheses were used with the multivar-
iate analysis of variance. The hypotheses were expressed
in the null and alternate forms.

The first null hypothesis stated that there would

91

be no difference in the mean of the booklet group (T1) to
those of the stationary board group (T2) and the manipula-
tive board group (T3).

“T2 * “T3
Ho1 I HT1 I

 

2
The first alternate hypothesis stated that the
means of the stationary board group (T2) and the manipula-
tive board group (T3) would exceed that of the booklet
group (T1).

“r2 * ”T3
2

 

Ha1 = InT1 <

The second null hypothesis stated that there would
be no difference in the means of the stationary board group

(T2) and the manipulative board group (T3).
Ho2 = “T2 = “T3

The second alternate hypothesis stated that the
mean of the manipulative board group (T3) would exceed that

of the stationary board group (T2).

Ha2 = “r2 < “T3

The third null hypothesis stated that there would
be no difference in the means of the higher-interest topic
(Chimps) group and the lower-interest topic (Indians) group.
H03 = #11 = “12 (Note: I1 = Chimps. 12 = Indians)

The third alternate hypothesis stated that the mean

of the higher-interest topic (Chimps) group would exceed

92

that of the lower-interest topic (Indians) group.
Ha3 = “11 > “12

For the multivariate test of significance. the
alpha level was set at .05. To reject a null hypothesis.
the test required a significant difference for at least

one of the dependent variables: passage and/or picture

content.

Findipgs of phe Study

The findings for this study were based on a conven-
ient sample of 180 fifth grade students. In the case of
the two-way MANOVA and two-way ANOVA's. the subjects were

randomly assigned to six balanced groups: 30 subjects each.

Tye-Way Multivariate Analysie of Variance
A two-way MANOVA was performed on the posttest data

from 180 subjects. The dependent variables (passage and
picture posttest scores) were combined as a multivariate.
The two independent variables included three methods (book-
lets. stationary. and manipulative boards) and two topics
(Chimps and Indians).

Table 4.1 reveals that the null hypothesis for in-
teraction was not rejected. Factor A (Methods) was broken
down into two planned comparisons. The null hypothesis
(H01) for methods was rejected since there was a signifi-
cant difference between the booklets versus the stationary

and manipulative boards. According to the significance of

93

.somflummsoo some now no. em uoswmsoa anna<

esp ops“ oesowvapumn one:

.msomHHmASOO uossmam phosaox
Amcosvmsv 4 novomm nous: Eouoonm he assumes one .ovoz

 

 

own
man assess
0mm. mam. mum. 0mm. : nuance an muonpmz
an x <V soapomuopsH
moo. mmm.m 5mm. :mm. N msaausH can mooscmmswno
Amownoav m nopomm
mom. mom.H «an.: HNH.H N condom o>apma
:smasss .m> Shadowvmpm
Hoe. sm.s mma.a mme.- m aeaaem e>assasaasaz ass
hnmsoapmpm .m> mpoaxoom
mnemahmnsoo cossmHm 038
Amconpozv 4 povomm
m .mfim m .xoaga< ousvowm ommmmmm mu sowvmahm> mo connom
mensweammooo soapocsm

peasasaseean sashesaesapm

 

 

Acmsflnsoo psopsoo manpoam use owmmmmmv mpmoe:m
evaahs>apasz so eeeam Assesses seesaw «>024: saz-esa H.s eases

 

94

the F value. the alternate hypothesis (Hal) for methods
was significant at .001. The null hypothesis (H02) for
methods (stationary vs. manipulative boards) was not re-
jected. The null hypothesis (H03) for topics was reject-
ed. The alternate hypothesis (Ha3) for topics was signif-
icant at the .003 level.

Tye-Way Analysis of Variance
Since the MANOVA results led to the acceptance of

two alternate hypotheses (Hal and Ha3). univariate F-tests
were conducted to determine whether the passage and/or pic-
ture scores were significant. Tables 4.2 and 4.3 examine
the significance between groups on the passage and picture
content scores. Both two-way ANOVA's include two Helmert
planned comparisons based on the methods hypotheses.

Table 4.2 reveals that there was a significant dif-
ference between the topics in terms of the passage scores
at a significance level of .001. The univariate planned
comparisons indicate that the methods had a nonsignificant
effect in terms of passage content. However. it is worth
noting that if the alpha level had been set at .10. there
would have been a significant difference between the boards.

Table 4.3 reveals that there was also a significant
difference between the topic groups in terms of the picture
scores. The first planned comparison indicates that there
was a significant difference between the booklet group vs.

the stationary and manipulative board groups.

95

.somfiumgsoo some you mo. vs sesamSou mama< .msomwnsmsoo cesssam phosamm
as» ops“ cocoavapnmn one; Antonymsv < novomm nous: Eouoonm mo moohMoc one .opoz

 

 

 

:~«.o: :aH.~mHm on”
Ho.mm s.maee ssh eases;
ash. sen. Nua.ma ssm.om m messes an escape:
Am x <v soapomuopsH
Loo. mmo.aa ana.o~e ana.o~e H essaesa .e> maessaaeaso
Amownoav m nopomm
mmo. omm.~ an.~HH mmH.NHH H condom o>wpma
:smwsms .m> humsoapmvm
new. mma. mam.m mam.m a season a>apaasaasas ass
hnmsoavmpm .m> mpoaxoom
msomaummsoo sandman 039
Amoonpmsv ¢ novomm
m .wam m .xondn< m2 mm mu scavanm> no oopsom

 

 

ovaum>flsa so

psopsoo owmmmmm new mpmoe:m
nommm Ampoommm cesamv <>oz¢ zmzuoza «.3 magma

 

96

.somaumnsoo some pom no. as vosflmson mama< .msomanmmsoo umssdam Phosamm
03p case cocoavanmn one: Ansonposv < hovomm nous: Eocooum Ho moouwoc one .0902

 

 

 

mas.a mfifi.m:sa msfi
mma.m o.mmma and canvas
ms. mam. mne.~ ms~.m m mosses an messes:
Am x «v sowwomumpsH
use. emm.n emm.nm omm.mm a essaesH .e> aeessaQEAso
Amoanoav m novomm
man. now. mum.a mum.fi H mcnmom o>wpma
:snasmz .m> humCOHPMPm
moo. oma.m moo.Hm moo.am a messes e>apaasaasss ass
. hhmsoapmpm .m> mpoaxoom
msomanmnsoo cossmam 039
Ammonvozv 4 nopomm
m .mfim m .xonmm4 m2 mm mu soapmfihm> mo cousom

 

 

Pcopsoo shavedm pom mvmoa:m
assasa>as= so semen Ampeemmm eexasv <>oz< sas-oss m.s eases

97

Tables 4.4 and 4.5 reveal which methods and topics
had the highest mean scores for passages and pictures.
(Note that the mean scores were lower in Table 4.5 since
there were 20 picture items compared to 30 passage items
in Table 4.4) A comparison of the two tables indicates
that the subjects did better on the passage items than on
the picture items. For example. the expected mean score
for 30 passage items was 18.75. A look at the column
means in Table 4.4 shows that the Chimps scored (20.22)
above the expected mean while the Indians scored (17.17)
below the expected mean. The expected mean score for 20
picture items was 13.34. A look at the column means in
Table 4.5 shows that the Chimps (11.77) and Indians
(10.68) scored below the expected mean.

A The row and column means provide some essential
data for interpreting the MANOVA and ANOVA results. If we
compare the row means in Table 4.5. we learn that the sub-
jects scored higher on the boards than on the booklets in
terms of picture content. The column means in both tables
show that the Chimps outscored the Indians in both passage
and picture content. A discussion of these results and
some conclusions are presented in Chapter V.

Figures 4.1 and 4.2 provide a graphic representa-
tion of the passage scores recorded in Table 4.4. Figure
4.1 shows that the stationary and manipulative boards were

nearly parallel across the tapics. thus minimizing the in-

98

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4.4 Cell. Row. and Column Means and Standard
Deviations for 30 Passage Items Based on
30 Observations Per Cell
Wild Cave M22:
Chimpanzees Indians S.D.
Mean = 19.9 Mean = 18.0 18.95
B°°klet3 S.D. = 7.227 S.D. = 5.395 6.311
Stationary Mean = 21.4 Mean = 17.667 19.534
Boards S.D. = 6.5 S.D. = 5.274 5.887
Manipulative Mean = 19.367 Mean = 15.833 17.6
Boards S.D. = 6.856 S.D. = 5.446 6.151
Column
Mean 20.222 17.167
S.D. 6.861 5.372
Table 4.5 Cell. Row. and Column Means and Standard
Deviations for 20 Picture Items Based on
30 Observations Per Cell
Wild Cave MR°W
Chimpanzees Indians Sag”
Mean = 10.567 Mean = 9.867 10.217
B°°klet5 S.D. = 3.36 S.D. = 3.037 3.199
Stationary Mean = 12.367 Mean = 11.333 11.85
Boards S.D. = 2.735 S.D. = 3.304 3.02
Manipulative Mean - 12.367 Mean = 10.833 11.6
Boards S.D. = 2.846 S.D. = 2.817 2.832
Column
Mean 11.767 10.678
S.D. 20980 3'053

 

 

 

 

99

 

 

 

 

22 f Booklet
-—— -—— -—— Stationary

21 .. \ — — — — Manipulative
o ‘\\
3
o 20 —
a:
a: 19 b
8
m 18 -
s
a.

1 1..
5 '7
Q)
53 16 -

15 -

J I
Chimps Indians

FIGURE 4.1

Graphic Representation of the Mean Passage Scores
for Three Methods of Presentation on Two Topics

22 - Chimps
- -— — — Indians

 

21 -
zo —
19 -
18
17 - \

16 _ “ \.

Mean Passage Score

15-

 

 

1 1 :
Booklet Stationary Manipulative

FIGURE 4.2

Graphic Representation of the Mean Passage Scores
for Two Topics on Three Methods of Presentation

100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Booklet
Stationary
— — — — Manipulative
13 -
Q)
s ~~
o 12 :— §‘T *---.. N
U) I.‘ ‘ ‘ x \ x
a 11 p 7‘ -.._‘ ‘_
s R
*8 10 - i
..-:
a.
5 9 '
OJ
.2 1 1
Chimps Indians
FIGURE 4.3

Graphic Representation of the Mean Picture Scores
for Three Methods of Presentation on Two Topics

 

 

 

 

Chimps
—-———Indians
e13-
S...
o
‘3 12 p
§11- //‘~~Iy~
.p /
§9~
Q)
E: 1 1 1
Booklet Stationary Manipulative

FIGURE 4.4

Graphic Representation of the Mean Picture Scores
for Two Topics on Three Methods of Presentation

101

teraction between these two methods and the topics. Fig-
ure 4.1 depicts some disordinal interaction (a crossing
between the booklets and the stationary boards). Figure
4.2 shows that the mean passage scores for the Chimps were
consistently and significantly higher than those for the
Indians across all three methods. It also shows that the
mean scores for the Chimps peaked on the stationary boards.

Figures 4.3 and 4.4 provide a graphic representa-
tion of the mean picture scores recorded in Table 4.5.
Figure 4.3 shows that the stationary boards and the book-
lets were nearly parallel across the topics. thus minimiz-
ing the interaction between these two methods and the top-
ics. It also shows that the mean scores for the station-
ary and manipulative boards were very similar and signifi-
cantly higher than those for the booklets across both top-
ics. Figure 4.4 shows that the mean picture scores for
the Chimps were consistently and significantly higher than
those for the Indians across all three methods.

In summary. the four figures indicate why the null
hypothesis (H03) for interaction could not be rejected.
While all four figures showed some ordinal interaction
(nonparallel lines tending to merge). it was not signifi-

cant.

Student Questionnaire Data
Tables 4.6. 4.7. and 4.8 present the response data

for the student attitude questionnaires. A total of 80

102

 

Table 4.6 Responses of 27 Students to an Attitude
Questionnaire (Form A: Comparing a Booklet
to a Stationary Board)

 

 

ad

 

 

e E
— u/gm

ll

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l\
(’1

 

 

 

Lesson Booklet 1 ———————Stationary Board
Student

Question Options Responses

1. (a) Preferred the booklet the most 9
(b) Preferred the stationary board the most 16

(c) Did not prefer one style more than the other 2

2. (a) Preferred to see the pictures page-by-page 10
(b) Preferred to see all the pictures at one time 15

(c) Did not prefer one layout over the other 2

3. (a) Found the booklet directions easier 9
(b) Found the stationary board directions easier 9

(c) Did not find one set of directions any easier 9

4. (a) Enjoyed the Wild Chimpanzees the most 15
(b) Enjoyed the Cave Indians the most 9

(c) Did not enjoy one topic more than the other 3

 

103

 

Table 4.7 Responses of 26 Students to an Attitude
Questionnaire (Form B: Comparing a Booklet

to a Manipulative Board)

.1; g ‘ E

—— Q
—. |__|

Manipulative Board

 

 

 

d

\D
ID

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

El
E

 

 

 

 

A

Student
Question Options Responses
1. (a) Preferred the booklet the most 8
(b) Preferred the manipulative board the most 18
(c) Did not prefer one style more than the other 0
2. (a) Preferred to see the pictures page-by-page 10
(b) Preferred to see all the pictures at one time 16
(c) Did not prefer one layout over the other 0
3. (a) Found the booklet directions easier - 8
(b) Found the manipulative board directions easier 10
(c) Did not find one set of directions any easier 8
4. (a) Enjoyed the Wild Chimpanzees the most 16
(b) Enjoyed the Cave Indians the most 8

(c) Did not enjoy one tapic more than the other 2

 

104

 

: scape oz» cans once canes one acqso no: can on
0 Pros map msmwcsa o>mo one uohnnsm.hnv
ma pmos 0:» moonsmmsano was: on» cohofism Adv .m
o prawns and usedpooawo Ho won one scam was can on
HH noamwo msoapoohau spoon o>dpsasmwsss on» ussom ADV
oH gramme usedvoonwc canon hhddoapmpm on» couch Adv .N
2 sense can snap ones sysop one Mommas so: can on
ma cases one so monspoan on» ocean op counouonm Any
w pa :0 avocado monspodn one an“: canon on» counomoum Adv .a
3 3.33m

U
H
.fl

/-

 

E El
17am

[:1

 

 

fiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

171]
[JD]
1:111

ll

 

\\
m

 

 

 

 

Acumen o>wpwasnwssz a on housedpspm a wsanmmsoo .o shomv

endoscoapmosa ouspdvvd so as mpsoospm pm we momsonmom

m.s oases

 

105

students were each given two treatments (two methods) and
both topics. In order to avoid multiple-treatment inter-
ference. the data from the second treatment was excluded
from the MANOVA and ANOVA models.

If we combine the student's responses for question
one in Tables 4.6 and 4.7. we find that the respondents pre—
ferred the stationary and manipulative boards to the book-
lets by 64% to 32%. (For example. the booklets received a
total of 17 responses to 34 for the boards.) The remaining
4% of the respondents expressed no preference for either
the booklets or boards. If we combine the student's respon-
ses for question two. we find that the respondents pre-
ferred to see a simultaneous picture format (i.e.. the
boards) to a successive picture format (i.e.. the booklets)
by 58% to 38%. The remaining 4% of the respondents ex-
pressed no preference for a particular picture presenta-
tion. There were 53 responses to each question.

The data from question one in Table 4.8 shows that
the respondents preferred the manipulative over the sta-
tionary set of pictures by 63% to 22%. The remaining 15%
of the respondents expressed no preference for either board
format. There were a total of 27 responses.

If we combine the students' responses for question
three in Tables 4.6 and 4.7. we find the respondents were
more evenly divided on the question of which method provid-

ed the easiest directions to follow. The combined data

106

shows that 36% chose the boards. 32% the booklets. and 32%
did not find one set of directions any easier than the
other. There were 53 responses to each question.

The data from question two in Table 4.8 shows that
the respondents found the manipulative boards easier to
understand than the stationary boards by 41% to 37%. The
remaining 22% did not find one board format any easier to
understand than the other. There were 27 responses.

The final question on all three questionnaires
asked the students if they preferred one topic more than
the other. If we combine the student's responses for all
three tables. we find that 60% preferred the Chimps. 29%
chose the Indians. and 11% did not prefer one topic more
than the other. Since all 80 students responded to the
last question. the results would tend to be more reliable
than the preceeding questions.

The students were given the option of stating a
reason. on the back of the questionnaires. for preferring
one topic over the other. For those respondents who chose
the Chimps. the three most common reasons were as follows:
(1) Chimps are interesting and intelligent: (2) The Chimp
pictures were very interesting: and (3) It would be fun to
live with Chimps and teach them tricks.

While only half as many respondents preferred the
Indians. the two most common reasons were as follows: (1)

It would be fun to explore a village cave: and (2) We

107

should learn about Indians because they were the first

Americans.

Poettest-Questionnaire Data Analysis

The data from the posttest scores and the student
attitude questionnaires was analyzed to determine whether
.any relationship might be detected. For example. did re-
spondents with high posttest scores tend to prefer a cer-
tain method and topic? Since the posttests and question-
naires relied on different forms of data (continuous
scores as Opposed to attitude categories) the researcher
could not apply an established correlation procedure to
the instruments. Furthermore. this posttest-questionnaire
analysis was limited to the 80 subjects who took two meth-
ods (treatments) and both tOpics.

To conduct this analysis. the researcher began by
recording the subjects' posttest scores on their question-
naires. The questionnaires were then divided into three
piles: one based on high posttest scores: a second based
on average posttest scores: and a third pile based on low
posttest scores. Each group was tallied in terms of meth-
od and topic preferences. (The percentage results are
given in Tables 4.9. 4.10. 4.11. and 4.12.)

In Table 4.9. it should be noted that respondents
who received average or low posttest scores preferred the
stationary boards to the booklets by a three-to-one mar—

gin. Respondents with high posttest scores indicated a

108

 

Table 4.9 Relationship Between Posttest Scores and
Method Preferences (Booklets Versus Sta-
tionary Boards) Based on 27 Respondents

 

 

 

 

 

 

Methods
>’ 118 :3
m M 0:: d
4" £1 £0) +3
5'40 $400) +39 ‘3
ca ode om Hm
Posttest Levels “3"; “3+; g 2'; 3 a
‘40 h+=o 0:4 c)”
91“: 0.01:1: zn. as.
High Posttest Scores 0 0
(Upper Third) 56% 48% 0% 1 07
Average Posttest Scores ‘
(Middle Third) 22% 67% 11% 100%
Low Posttest Scores
(Lower Third) 22% 67% 11% 100%

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4.10 Relationship Between Posttest Scores and
Method Preferences (Booklets Versus Manip-
ulative Boards) Based on 26 Respondents

 

 

 

 

 

 

Methods
0
:>
23 138 it
w m c>s a
+3 H .c: a: +1
L: a: $4310 +33... :3
as as” 2.2 s 8
Posttest Levels :1: o o 5 H o 4.. 3,.
s:o n o 0:. c c
mm mam zm am
Hi h Posttest Scores
(nger Third) 22% 78% 0% 100%
Average Posttest Scores
(Middle Third) 44% 56% 0% 100%
Low Posttest Score
(Lower Third) S 25% 75% 0% 100%

 

 

 

 

 

109

 

Table 4.11 Relationship Between Posttest Scores and
Method Preferences (Stationary Versus Ma-
nipulative Boards) Based on 27 Respondents

 

 

 

 

 

 

Methods
Q)
3. o o
i’ a so to
m a c:: s
2 r4 5:0 .9
now 34:30) PH C
din-1'6 09:6 00 H0
“.1132 m 2'3 32
Posttest Levels 1.420 ngo o ‘4 o a,
mmm msm zm am
High Posttest Scores
(Upper Third) 33% 67% 0% 100%
Average Posttest Scores
(Middle Third) 11% 78% 11% 100%
Low Posttest Scores 22% “5% 33% 100%

(Lower Third)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4.12 Relationship Between Posttest Scores and
Topic Preferences (Chimps Versus Indians)
Based on 80 Respondents

 

 

 

 

 

 

Topics
Q) Q)
o 8 3.9
m e10 +a
L.m i.§ can 2
0 p. Q) , O o H 0
$15 end 54%: at:
0*! 015 o 19:.
Posttest Levels 3: g 3: E. g .f: E9. 3
High Posttest Scores
(Upper Third) 70% 15% 15% 100%
Average Posttest Scores
(Middle Third) 67% 30% 3% 100%
Low Posttest Scores ”2% 46% 12% 100%

(Lower Third)

 

 

 

 

 

110

slight preference for the booklets.

In Table 4.10. respondents who received high or
low posttest scores preferred the manipulative boards to
the booklets by more than a three-to-one margin. Respond-
ents with average posttest scores indicated a small pref-
erence for the manipulative boards. If we combine the
data from Tables 4.9 and 4.10. we find that low posttest
respondents consistently endorsed the boards over the
booklets by a three-to-one margin.

Table 4.11 shows that the respondents at all three
posttest levels decisively preferred the manipulative
boards to the stationary boards. While respondents in the
high and low posttest levels preferred the manipulative
boards by a two-to-one margin. average posttest respond-
ents chose the manipulative boards by a seven-to-one mar-
gin.

It should be noted that Tables 4.9. 4.10. and 4.11
were based on samples of 27. 26. and 27 respondents. Each
one of these samples was divided into three posttest lev-
els. It should be noted that smaller samples tend to be
less reliable than larger samples.

Table 4.12 was based on 80 respondents or a com-
bined total of the three previous tables. Respondents
with high and average posttest scores preferred the Chimps
to the Indians by margins of better than four-to-one and

two-to-one. Low posttest respondents were almost evenly

111

split between the topics. with a slight edge given to the

Indians.

Posttest Item Analysis

Item analysis helps to determine the reliability
of test items by examining the indices of difficulty and
discrimination for each item. Davis (1952) states that
“The construction of solid and reliable tests requires
consideration of quantitative information regarding the
difficulty and discriminating power of each test exercise.
or item. that is proposed for use. Such information is
provided by item analysis data” (p. 97).

Tables 4.13 and 4.14 present the item analysis
data for the passage and picture items on the Chimp post—
test. Tables 4.15 and 4.16 present the item analysis data
for the passage and picture items on the Indian posttest.
The data for each posttest was based on a sample of 40
subjects. The researcher chose the 12 highest scores for
the upper group and the 12 lowest scores for the lower
group. Each group amounted to 30 percent of the total
sample.

When we compare Tables 4.13 and 4.15. we find that
the 30 passage items on the Chimp posttest had a mean in-
dex of discrimination of .51 to .42 for the Indian post-
test. If we compare Tables 4.14 and 4.16. we find that
the 20 picture items on the Chimp posttest had a mean in-

dex of discrimination of .43 to .40 for the Indian post-

112

 

Ag: use o:.v msopa coow ano> .Amm. op on.v msopfi poem handsommom .mmsapsm soapmcasauomwa
Ace. on o:. Psonmv mama“ smash canvas .hpaaanmnamon avasoammfln

an. n msovH on now soavmswswaoman mo soosH sum:
as. u esopH on son spflsoamoaa mo soasH ado:

 

mm. we. on mm. mm. ma
on. mm. mu on. we. as
on. me. mm as. an. an
mm. mm. AN mm. mm. «a
mm. am. pm mm. so. as
mm. «a. mm as. am. an
mm. mm. su mm. mm. a
so. mm. mm as. as. m
on. so. mw on. on. s
on. mm. «N mm. mm. e
on. mu. em on. mm. m
2.. as. 2 so. as. a
mm. we. ma so. an. m
mm. on. As mm. on. m
on. mm. on mm. mm. a
soaensasanooan seasoaoean noossz soapnsasanooaa spasoamman noossz
no KoosH mo NooQH EopH mo KocsH no NovcH EopH

 

 

moousmnsano cad: so pmowvmom a Scam vsovsoo omdmmsm on» so venom msoPH
on you soapmsasanomao and hpasowwm«n mo moowcsH no woman damn mamhassd ETVH mH.: manna

113

 

.Aan. 0» on.v named scam handsomsom .Aam. op o~.v
how. 09 0:. psonmv msopa o

Ans was o:.v msopa coon huo>

n:. u msoPH om mom soavssaswuomaa no KoccH one:

me. n esopH on non spasoamcan mo noesH noes

uses“ Hangman: .mwsapmm soavssdsdAomaa
mean oases: _seaaapaeaoon spasoaaoan

 

an. we. on mm. ms. o:
on. em. as as. or. an
as. as. as He. so. an
as. we. as mm. an. mm
mm. on. o: as. we. on
He. mm. m: mm. mm. mm
me. an. as as. an. an
mm. mm. m: on. so. mm
mm. om. we on. on. mm
on. mm. as as. as. an
convmsasauoman avasoamman popssz soapssaswuoman haa:owmma9 sonssz
mo KoccH no NocsH EopH mo KonsH Ho xmcsH EopH

 

 

moossmnsfino can: so vmovpmom a scam psopsoo cussedm can so venom msoPH
on new soapmsfisauomaa can hPH50aHMfiQ no mooHosH so comma span mamhamsd soPH

3a.: canoe

114

 

Ans was 0:.v msopa coow aho>
.Amm. op om.v msopa coow handsommom .AmN. op 0N.v msopa Hangman: .mmsapmm Soapmsasanomaa
Ace. op ca. psonmv macaw smash canvas .hpaaapmnamoa hpasoammwn
N2. u msovH on you Soapssasauoman no NocsH sue:
«a. n esopH on new spasoaaean no xoesH sees

 

mN. «N. on mm. on. ma
as. an. em as. am. an
on. Na. mm mm. on. mH
mm. mN. 5N «a. 0:. NH
on. mm. mm mm. on. an
on. mm. mm mm. NH. ed
on. me. am on. «a. a
mm. mm. mN mm. Ne. w
as. mN. NN as. no. u
«3. mm. ”N mm. Na. 0
Ha. mm. cm as. me. n
«a. mm. m« mm. on. a
on. on. ma as. on. n
so. on. RH mm. mm. N
”2. mm. ea mm. N2. H
soapmsfisfihoman hPHSOAMMHQ nonssz soapmswsfiuoman th30HHMHQ honssz
no xocsH no socsH EopH mo woosH Ho NovsH SmPH

 

 

nonwosH ommaaa> unwao so amopvmom a scam 9:09:00 ommmmmm on» so venom msoPH
on you soapmsasaquAQ can hpasoammfin we mooaosa so venom span mfimhass< EopH m«.: manna

115

 

Am: can 0:.v msopd coow aho>
.Amm. ow on.v msopd coow handsomMom .AmN. op ON.V msopw Hangman: .mmsapmm couvmsasanoman
Ace. on as. psooav osoea oases oases: .seaaaoaoaoon spasoaeoan

 

as. u msopH 0N pom soavmsasaaomaa Mo KocsH sacs
no. u esopH on son spasoamman no noesH ado:
mm. «a. on mm. on. on
as. no. as mm. ms. mm
mm. an. we mm. an. mm
nm. em. as mm. nw. am
so. on. o: mm. mm. on
so. om. me as. am. mm
on. mm. as as. mm. on
ma. Hm. ms on. an. mm
as. es. «s mm. mm. mm
on. em. as as. me. an
soavmsasanomdn NPHsONHHHQ honssz sowpmsasfiuomua measoammwn ponssz
mo KocsH mo xenon EopH Ho woosH mo soosH EovH

 

 

usuacsu ommaaa> mudao so vmoppmom a Scam psopsoo chapoam on» no woman msovH
on son soaaasasanooaa ass seasoammao no nooaesH so eooom open oaosaas< sopH oa.s oases

116

test. Based on this data. it would appear that the pas-
sage items had a somewhat higher test reliability than the
picture items on both posttests.

If we combine the passage and picture items for
each posttest. we find that the 50 items on the Chimp post-
test had a mean index of discrimination of .48 to .41 for
the Indian posttest. Ebel (1979) states that "or two tests
otherwise alike. the one in which the average index of item
discrimination is the highest will always be the better.
that is. the more reliable" (p. 267). Based on this cri-
terion. the posttest on Chimps appears to have a somewhat
higher reliability than the posttest on Indians. However.
a spread of seven points between the Chimp and Indian mean
discrimination scores calls for a cautious interpretation.
As Mehrens and Lehmann (1978) suggest. "Item-analysis data
should be interpreted with caution. Discriminating power
is not analogous to item validity: the discrimination index
is not always related to the quality of the item: and item-
analysis data are very tentative" (p. 331).

The mean indices of discrimination for Tables 4.13.
4.14. 4.15. and 4.16 ranged from .40 to .51. Generally. a
mean index of discrimination of .40 or above is considered
very good (Ebel. 1979. p. 267).

If we combine the passage and picture items for
each posttest. we find that the 50 items on the Chimp post-
test had a mean index of difficulty of .42 to .44 for the

117

Indians. Items of average difficulty tend to maximize dis-
crimination and test reliability. Items of middle diffi-
culty should be favored in the construction of'achievement'

tests (Ebel. 1979. p. 267).

Posttest Reliability Coefficients

, The Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 is used to estimate
the reliability of a single test that is based on interitem
consistency and requires only a single administration (Ku-'
der 2 Richardson. 1937). The K-RZO was appropriate for
this study because it is designed for unspeeded tests and
for items that are scored dichotomously. It requires in-
formation based on the number of items in the test. the
variation of the total test. and the preportion of exami-
nees passing each item.

Tables 4.17. 4.18. 4.19. and 4.20 present data for
calculating reliability coefficients for the passage and
picture content in each posttest. The first two columns
show the distribution of scores and frequencies (F). The
total frequency (n = 40) equals the number of students.

The next four columns show the proportion of right (R) and
wrong (W) answers for the 40 students. These preportions
are given in fractions and decimals. To the right of the
response proportions. a frequency (F) column indicates the
number of items for each proportion. The column of item
variances (pq) is computed by multiplying the proportion

of right answers p(R) times the proportion of wrong an-

 

mean." u XN

118

 

. e
um. u memm. : «H ”.le u a 3375 mém u WWWN : Illmmem H n Nm 0: u was .1.wa
have u s... mm . a h. a
dam. a man. man. o:\s~ oa\nfi m a

mum. H no. mm. os\o~ o:\:« a on
mas. n mm. me. oe\- oa\na a an
ass. m mum. was. os\a~ oa\ma m an
m. m m. m. oa\o~ o:\o~ a an
mam. m was. man. o:\mH o:\«~ H ma
saw. a was. new. os\sa oa\n~ n on
as. a a. . o. Sea 3}... a 2
men. n mam. mum. os\w« os\w~ a as
mum. H mm. me. o:\:« os\o~ a om
ans. m man. was. os\ma oa\s~ m am
so. a m. s. os\~a os\n~ a «N
we”. a ma. ms. o:\oa o:\em n as
man. u man. was. oa\m o:\an N mm
an. N N. m. os\m oa\~n n ow
sea. a msa. mum. oe\s o:\nn n am
mun. a ma. mm. es\o os\sm a mm

on n Lava Lava 3 m a ohoom

moosmaum> Scam msowpnononm oncommom

soapsndnvmwn onoom

 

 

mooussnsano cad: so pmoupmom a scam vsovsoo owsmmmm can so venom msoPH

on so Lem «Hashes sooonasowmunoessv saaaasoaaom on» wswpaasoaoo new swan sa.s oases

 

anm u New

H o:
O I ¢ o.“ ' CON '- - O u N 8 o u
s - H 2 8 .. e as s as 2 was new... as

119

 

o.e
mm: u an

owns a son” mm a s .mw u s

Hm. H s. a. os\m~ oa\~H n m
was. H me. an. oe\o~ oe\aH a o
enn. H mum. mam. oa\w~ oa\wH m A
sea. H man. “we. os\n~ o;\sH N m
mam. H mm. ms. ea\- es\nH a a
mas. m man. was. oa\H~ os\mH m oH

m. N m. m. os\o~ os\o~ a HH
mas. m was. mum. os\aH oa\H~ : NH
saw. H mus. mam. o:\sH o:\m~ m «H
as. m s. o. os\oH oa\a~ m 2H
smm. H mum. mmo. os\mH oa\w~ n mH
new. n mm. no. es\sH o:\o~ H oH
eaH. H new. mus. oa\HH oa\m~ H sH
mmH. H nu. ma. o;\eH oa\on N mH
an a Have Have 3 m a enoom

moosmHHm> EoPH msoHPHonoum omsonmom

Soapsnaupman ouoom

 

 

momsswgswnu van: :0 amovvmom a scam vsopsoo ouspOHm on» so venom msovH

oN no HON sassuom concussoamunocsxv zPHHHDmHHom on» msHpmasoasc you upon NH.: manna

CC 4:: rCC (r1111...

 

120

 

s. . 11.1mm“ - : NH .. .. 22.5 ms .. s a
o: Hnde u wa. H m
améN n .NummN .. Wm? u Nn non n an M HHH“
Hm.w N UQN pm. .1. x M NH
HN. H s. n. oa\NN o:\NH N NH
is. H o. a. 3}“... 23H N “H
ssN. H man. mNs. os\mN oa\NH N oH
mas. m mm. ms. oa\NN oa\NH m NH
NsN. H mNn. ass. os\HN oe\mH m NH
NsN.H m mNs. mNm. oa\aH oa\HN N mH
mas. n mNs. mam. o:\sH oa\NN N oN
NN. m s. o. oo\oH oa\sN N HN
and. N mNn. mNo. oa\mH es\wN m NN
moo. n mm. mo. os\sH os\oN N mN
ens. N NNn. new. o;\nH oa\sN N eN
meH. H mNN. mNN. os\HH os\NN H mN
mam. N mN. ms. o:\oH oa\on N oN
mmN. N mH. mm. o:\o oa\sn H NN
.sa a Have Have 3 m a onoom

moosmflum> sopH msoapuoaoum uncommon soapsnanpmwn ouoom

 

 

msmdcsH MMHHU no pmoppmom a Scam 9:09:00 owmmmmm on» so comma msoPH

on no HeN aHssuom sooonosonunoossv HHHHHooHHom one musaHsoHao son dean mH.s oHooe

121

 

 

moonwaum> EovH

msOHvuomopm masomwom

Cowpsnduvmdn ouoom

. o
mo.uHmHNHm.mm-H.H1w.mu:oNa$ oe.HHu.M.mHN~N-mmeu
NNlHuxw
me a

. N . a saw. oN u
:mmqw m: x N. m. o;\NN o:\NH m o
smN. H mNo.. men. oa\nN o:\wH m N

NN. m o. s. o:\:N os\oH m N
awe. N mnm. mNs. oa\mN os\NH H N
NeN. H mNm. use. oa\HN oa\mH o oH
mas. N use. mNm. oa\aH es\HN m HH
NsN. H ms. mm. os\NH os\NN N NH
ems. N mNs. mam. oa\NH oa\NN s NH

as. N a. o. oa\oH oa\aN n eH
NNN. H man. mNo. os\wH oa\NN N mH
one. N mNm. new. o;\nH oa\NN N oH
oNH. H mN. ms. oa\oH os\on H NH
23H. H mNH. mNN. o:\N o:\nn H NH

an m Asvd Amvn. 3 m m ohoom

 

 

mssHusH mmHHo so vmovvmom a scam psopsoo ouspoam ass :0 venom msovH

0N Ho HoN aHssnom sooenasonunoossv spHHHnoHHoN on» wsHpaHsoHoo Noe span

0N.3 wands

SVI‘

it

122

swers q(W) times the frequency (F) of items. The sum of
item variances (qu) is given at the bottom of the column.
The column sums. along with the sum of squares and sum of
squares squared. are entered into the K-RZO at the bottom
of each table.

By comparing Tables 4.17 and h.19. we find that
the 30 passage items on the Chimp posttest had a reliabil-
ity coefficient of .87 to .78 for the Indian posttest. A
comparison of Tables “.18 and 4.20 shows that the 20 pic-
ture items on the Chimp posttest had a reliability coeffie
cient of .68 to .63 for the Indian posttest. Based on a
comparison of the reliability coefficients. it is evident
that the Chimp posttest had more reliability than the In-
dian posttest. It is also evident that the passage con—
tent in each posttest had higher reliability than the pic-
ture content. Chapter V will include a discussion based

on the K-RZO results.

Treatment 0b§ervation§

The researcher used a treatment chart to record
the amount of time required by each student to complete a
treatment. The number of minutes were recorded from the
time the student began his treatment until he turned in
the question sheet. The researcher also recorded the num-
ber of requests for assistance required by each student.
Table n.21 shows the mean treatment time and mean requests

for assistance for each method and tepic. Each of the 12

123

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4.21 Treatment Time and Requests for Assistance
Means and Standard Deviations Based on 30
Observations Per Cell
Wild Cave Row
Chimpanzees Indians Means
Treatment Mean = 42.84 Mean = 43.18 43.01
Time S.D. = 2085 S.D. = 2092
Booklets
Requests for Mean = 1.51 Mean = 1.38 1.45
Assistance S.D. = 1.28 S.D. = 1.22
Treatment Mean = 44.50 Mean = 43.48 43.99
Boards Requests for Mean = 1.44 Mean = 1.54 1.49
ABSiStance S.D. = 1032 SOD. = 1030
Treatment Mean = 44.92 Mean = 45.0 44.96
Manipulative Tlme S.D. = 2.01 S.D. = 2.88
Boards Requests for Mean = 1.62 Mean = 1.56 1.59
Assistance S.D. = 1.37 S.D. = 1.34
'Column Means
Treatment Time 44.09 43.89
Requests for Assistance 1.52 1.49

 

 

 

 

cells was based on 30 observations.

If we compare the treatment time cells for each

method. we find that the booklets. stationary and manipula-

tive boards were remarkably similar in the amount of time

each one required.

By comparing the row means for the

treatment times. we find that the booklets took 43.01 min-

utes. the stationary boards required 43.99 minutes. and the

manipulative boards required 44.96 minutes.

The stationary

boards required almost a minute more than the booklets. and

the manipulative boards required almost a minute more than

the stationary boards.

124

If we compare the treatment time cells for each
topic. we find that the Chimps and Indians were remarkably
similar in the amount of time each one required. By com-
paring the column means for the treatment times. we find
that the Chimps required 44.09 minutes and the Indians
43.89 minutes.

When we compare the requests for assistance cells.
shown in Table 4.21, we find very little variation among
the methods or between the topics. By comparing the row
means for the requests for assistance. we find that the
booklets required 1.45 requests for assistance. the sta-
tionary boards 1.49. and the manipulative boards 1.59. By
comparing the column means for the requests for assistance.
we find that the Chimps required 1.52 requests for assis-
tance and the Indians 1.49. These decimals indicate that
each method and topic required approximately 1% requests

for assistance.

Question Sheet Analysis

Since the question sheets occupied a large portion
of the treatment time, we may assume that they influenced
the posttest results. Thus. it was important to construct
each method and topic question form to the same structural
specifications. While the Chimp and Indian question sheets
were different in content. they were identical in length.
form, and readability. For example. each question sheet

had eight sentence completion questions based on passage

(I)

125

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4.22 Question Sheet Means and Standard Devia-
tions Based on 30 Observations Per Cell
Wild Cave Row
Chimpanzees Indians Means
Passage Mean = 7.13 Mean = 5.8 6.47
Content S.D. = 1.14’ S.D. = 1.63
Booklets
Picture Mean = 2.8 Mean = 2.4 2.6
Content S.D. = .89 S.D. = 1.07
Passage Mean = 7.47 Mean = 6.47 6.97
Stationary Content S.D. = 1033 S.D. = 1031
Boards Picture Mean = 3.3 Mean = 2.9 3.1
Content S.D. = 096 S.D. = 088
Passage Mean = 7.37 Mean = 6.43 6.9
Manipulative Content S.D. = 101 S.D. = 107)"
Boards Picture Mean = 3.1 Mean = 3.0 3.05
Content S.D. = .99 S.D. = .95
Passages 7.32 6.23
Column Means Pictures 3.07 2.77

 

 

 

 

 

content and four multiple-choice questions based on pic-‘

ture content.
tion sheets.)
the question sheets were between the fifth and sixth grade

(See Appendix C for examples of the ques-

According to the ”Fry Readability Graph,”

reading levels.

Table 4.22 shows the question sheet means and

standard deviations based on the number of correct answers

to the eight passage and four picture questions.

It

should be noted that the passage content means are sub-

stantially larger than the picture content means because

there were twice as many passage questions.

126

When we compare the row means for the passage con-
tent. we find that there were 6.47 correct answers for the
booklets. 6.97 for the stationary boards. and 6.9 for the
manipulative boards. In terms of percentages. the book-
lets averaged 81%. the stationary boards 87%. and the ma-
nipulative boards 86%.

When we compare the column means for the passage
content. we find that there were 7.32 correct answers for
the Chimps and 6.23 for the Indians. In terms of percen-
tages. the Chimps averaged 92% and the Indians 78%.

When we compare the row means for the picture con-
tent. we find that there were 2.6 correct answers for the
booklets. 3.1 for the stationary boards. and 3.05 for the
manipulative boards. In terms of percentages. the book-
lets averaged 65%. the stationary boards 78%. and the ma-
nipulative boards 76%.

When we compare the column means for the picture
content. we find that there were 3.07 correct answers for
the Chimps and 2.77 for the Indians. In terms of percen-
tages. the Chimps averaged 77% and the Indians 69%.

Several trends emerge from the data in Table 4.22.
First. the stationary and manipulative boards were higher
than the booklets in both passage and picture scores. es-
pecially in the picture category. Second. there was a
rather small difference between the boards in both passage

and picture scores. Third. the Chimps were higher than

127

the Indians in passage and picture scores. especially in
the passage category.

It should be noted that the question sheet trends
for the methods and topics were similar to the posttest
trends recorded in Tables 4.4 and 4.5. The one noticeable
exception being that the posttest passage score for the

booklets was higher than that for the manipulative boards.

Summary

A two-way MANOVA was performed on the posttest data
from 180 subjects. The dependent variables (passage and
picture posttest scores) were combined as a multivariate.
The two independent variables included three methods and
two topics.

The null hypothesis for interaction (methods by
topics) was not rejected. There were two null hypotheses
based on the methods and tested as two planned comparisons.
The first null hypothesis for methods (booklets vs. sta-
tionary and manipulative boards) was rejected. The second
null hypothesis for methods (stationary vs. manipulative
boards) was not rejected. A null hypothesis based on the
topics (Chimps vs. Indians) was rejected.

Since the MANOVA results led to the rejection of
two null hypotheses. univariate F-tests. using two-way
ANOVA models. were conducted to determine whether the pas-
sage and/or picture scores were significant. The first al-

ternate hypothesis for methods (booklets vs. stationary

128

and manipulative boards) was significant for the picture
scores only. An alternate hypothesis based on the topics
was significant for the passage and picture scores.

A look at the mean scores indicated that each board
outscored the booklet on picture content. The mean scores
also indicated that the Chimps outscored the Indians on
passage and picture content.

The student questionnaire data showed that the
boards were preferred to the booklets by a two-to—one mar-
gin. The manipulative boards were preferred to the sta-
tionary boards by a three-to-one margin. The Chimps were
preferred to the Indians by a two-to-one margin.

An analysis of the data indicated that both post-
tests had high mean indices of discrimination (item analy-
sis) and reliability coefficients (Kuder-Richardson Formula
20). Furthermore. both posttests had similar picture and
passage reliability coefficients.

The treatment observation data indicated that the
methods and topics were remarkably similar in the amount of
time each one required. The requests for assistance were
remarkably similar for the methods and the topics.

The question sheet data showed that the boards pro-
duced higher mean scores than the booklets in both passage
and picture content. The Chimps also scored higher than
the Indians in both passage and picture content. These

question sheet scores resembled the posttest scores.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

This chapter begins with a summary of the findings
from the previous chapters. It also includes the follow-
ing topics: Conclusions of the Study: Discussion of the

Findings; and Implications for Future Research.

Summary

Statement of the Problem

The problem of this study focused on three ques-
tions. First. the study attempted to find out whether a
simultaneous presentation of pictures and passages. as
exemplified by the stationary and manipulative boards.
would be more conducive to learning than a successive
presentation of pictures and passages. as exemplified by
the booklets. Second. the study attempted to find out
whether the manipulative boards. which required the stu-
dents to position the pictures above their appropriate
passages. would be more conducive to learning than the
stationary boards. which presented the pictures already
mounted above their appropriate passages. Third. the
study attempted to find out whether a tOpic of higher

student interest would be more conducive to learning than

129

130

a tOpic of lower student interest for each of the treat-

ments: booklets. stationary. and manipulative boards.

Need fog thg Study

The researcher was unable to locate any studies
which attempted to compare the instructional effectiveness
of a simultaneous presentation of pictures and passages to
that of a successive presentation of pictures and passages.
The researcher was unable to find any studies which at-
tempted to compare the instructional effectiveness of a
simultaneous and stationary set of pictures to that of a
simultaneous and manipulative set of pictures. Finally.
there was a need to examine whether higher versus lower
student interest topics would influence the amount of
learning associated with a successive and/or simultaneous

presentation of pictures and passages.

Review of the Literaturg

A review of the literature indicated that a varie-
ty of learning principles. including simultaneity. proxim-
ity. and repetition among others. appeared to support a
simultaneous format as opposed to a successive format of
pictures and passages. While the instructional effective-
ness of visual-tactual formats designed for upper elemen-
tary has not been determined. child developmental theory
appeared to encourage multisensory learning. For example.

Piagetian theory argued that as the child grows older. the

131

ability to coordinate and combine information from differ-
ent sensory modalities also matures. Research on child-
ren's reading preferences has shown that animal topics are
consistently more popular than topics based on people or

cultures of long ago for all elementary grades.

Mgthodology and Design
The sample for this study consisted of 180 fifth

grade students from two elementary schools in the Lansing
School District of Michigan. The subjects were randomly
assigned to six balanced groups: three methods (booklets.
stationary. and manipulative boards) and two topics
(Chimps and Indians).

The major research instruments were two 50 item
multiple-choice posttests divided into 30 passage content
items and 20 picture content items. The administration of
the instruments was based on cued recall. written and de-
layed (two days after the treatments) responses. Half of
the subjects were tested on Chimps and the other half were
tested on Indians. A ”Student Attitude Questionnaire” was
also used to survey the preferences and reactions of the
subjects to the methods and topics.

The major statistical model was a two-way MANOVA.
The dependent variables (passage and picture posttest
scores) were combined as a multivariate. Univariate F-
tests. using two-way ANOVA models. were conducted to de-

termine whether the passage and/or picture scores were

132

significant. The two-way MANOVA and ANOVAs included two
Helmert planned comparisons based on the treatments.

The first null hypothesis stated that there would
be no difference in the mean of the booklet group to each
of the means associated with the stationary and manipula-
tive board groups. The second null hypothesis stated that
there would be no difference in the means associated with
the stationary and manipulative board groups. The third
null hypothesis stated that there would be no difference
in the means associated with the higher-interest topic
(Chimps) group and the lower-interest topic (Indians)
group. For the test of significance. the alpha level was
set at .05. To reject a null hypothesis. the test re-
quired a significant difference for at least one of the

dependent variables: passage and/or picture content.

Analysis of the Data
The null hypothesis for interaction (methods by

topics) was not rejected. The first null hypothesis for
methods (booklets versus stationary and manipulative
boards) was rejected. The first alternate hypothesis was
significant for the picture scores only. A look at the
mean scores revealed that each board outscored the book-
let on picture content. The second null hypothesis for
methods (stationary versus manipulative boards) was not
rejected. A null hypothesis based on the topics (Chimps

versus Indians) was rejected. The mean scores indicated

133

that the Chimps outscored the Indians on both dependent
variables: passage and picture posttest scores.

The student questionnaire data revealed that the
boards were preferred to the booklets by a two-to-one mar-
gin. The manipulative boards were preferred to the sta-
tionary boards by a three-to-one margin. The Chimps were

preferred to the Indians by a two-to-one margin.

Conclusions of the Study

The conclusions in this section were derived from
the results of the two-way MANOVA and ANOVA tests for sig-
nificance. Each of the alternate hypotheses will be exam-
ined in turn.

The first alternate hypothesis (Hal) stated that
the means of the stationary and manipulative board groups
would each exceed that of the booklet group. The two-way
MANOVA found this hypothesis significant at .001. Subse-
quently. the two-way ANOVA models found this hypothesis
nonsignificant for the passage variable but significant
for the picture variable at .002. Since .002 was well be-
low the assigned alpha level of .05. the researcher made
the following observation. In regard to the picture post-
test scores. each of the stationary and manipulative board
groups was clearly superior to the booklet group. Thus.
the conclusion was drawn that the simultaneous presenta-
tions of pictures and passages. as exemplified by the sta-

tionary and manipulative boards. were more conducive to

134

picture learning than the successive presentation of pic-
tures and passages. as exemplified by the booklets.

It should be noted that the preceding conclusion
applied to both topics (Chimps and Indians). Both topics
scored significantly higher on the boards than on the
booklets in terms of the picture content. Thus. the con-
clusion was drawn that the simultaneous presentations of
pictures and passages. as exemplified by the stationary
and manipulative boards. were more conducive to learning a
higher and lower interest topic. in terms of the picture
content. than the successive presentation of pictures and
passages. as exemplified by the booklets.

The second alternate hypothesis (Ha2) stated that
the mean of the manipulative board group would exceed that
of the stationary board group. This hypothesis was not
supported by the two-way MANOVA. Since .209 was well a-
bove the assigned alpha level of .05. the researcher made
the following observation. In terms of the passage and
picture posttest scores. there was no significant differ-
ence between the manipulative board group and the station-
ary board group. Thus. the conclusion was drawn that the
manipulative boards. which required the students to posi-
tion the pictures above their appropriate passages. were

not more conducive to picture or passage learning than the
stationary boards. which presented the pictures already po-

sitioned above their appropriate passages.

135

It should be noted that the preceding conclusion
applied to both topics (Chimps and Indians). Neither top-
ic scored significantly higher on the manipulative boards
than on the stationary boards in terms of picture or pas-
sage learning. Thus. the conclusion was drawn that the
manipulative boards. which required the students to posi-
tion the pictures above their appropriate passages. were
not more conducive to learning a higher or lower interest
topic. in terms of picture or passage content. than the
stationary boards. which presented the pictures already
positioned above their appropriate passages.

The third alternate hypothesis (Ha3) stated that
the mean of the higher interest topic (Chimps) group would
exceed that of the lower interest topic (Indians) group.
The two-way MANOVA found this hypothesis significant at
.003. Subsequently. the two-way ANOVA tests found this
hypothesis significant for the passage variable at .001
and at .017 for the picture variable. Since these signif-
icance levels were well below the assigned alpha level of
.05. the researcher made the following observation. In
regard to the passage and picture posttest scores. the
higher interest topic (Chimps) group was clearly superior
to the lower interest topic (Indians) group. Thus. the
conclusion was drawn that the topic of higher student in-
terest. as exemplified by the Chimps. was more conducive

to passage and picture learning than the topic of lower

136

student interest. as exemplified by the Indians.

It should be noted that the preceding conclusion
applied to all three methods (booklets. stationary. and
manipulative boards). All three methods scored signifi—
cantly higher on the topic of higher interest than the
topic of lower interest in terms of picture and passage
learning. Thus. the conclusion was drawn that the topic
of higher student interest. as exemplified by the Chimps.
was more conducive to picture and passage learning. for
each of the three methods. than the topic of lower student

interest. as exemplified by the Indians.

Discussion of the Findings

The discussion of the findings is divided into two
subtopics. First. there is an assessment of the variables
which may have accounted for the statistical results.
Second. there is a discussion of the findings and their

implications for educators and instructional designers.

Assessment of the Variables

In regard to the first alternate hypothesis. there
were several variables which provide some tentative expla-
nations as to why the picture means of the stationary and
manipulative board groups exceeded that of the booklet
group. First. the simultaneous presentation of pictures
should have made it easier to analyze the visual content.

Second. the attractive appearance of the stationary and

13?

manipulative boards may have created greater motivation
than the booklets. Third. the position of the question
sheets. immediately in front of the boards. may have facil-
itated the location of picture information. The question
sheets used with the boards did record higher picture
scores. as reported in Table 4.22. than the question sheets
associated with the booklets. Fourth. the novelty of the
board treatments may have created a "Hawthorne Effect.”

For example. if the study had extended over a longer period
of time. the students' preference for the boards may have
increased. remained constant. or diminished in relation to
the booklets.

The superior picture means of the board groups were
consistent with the preferences expressed on the student
questionnaires. For example. the stationary and manipula-
tive boards were preferred by 67% to 33% over the booklets.
The respondents also preferred to see all the pictures sim-
ultaneously rather than successively by 61% to 31%. These
percentages indicate that the boards may have been more
motivational than the booklets.

While the picture means of the board groups were
significantly higher than that of the booklet group. the
passage means proved to be nonsignificant. The simultane-
ous displays may have created a competitive atmosphere be-
tween the pictures and passages: that is to say. the pic—

tures may have distracted the students' attention away from

138

the passages. Even if this competitive factor did influ-
ence the simultaneous displays. the passage means for the
simultaneous presentations were still comparable to that
of the successive presentation.

In regard to the second research hypothesis. there
were several variables which provide some tentative expla-
nations as to why the picture and passage means of the ma-
nipulative board group failed to exceed those of the sta-
tionary board group. First. the selecting and positioning
of pictures above their appropriate passages may have dis-
tracted the students from the task of studying the picture
and passage information. For example. to match the pic-
tures and passages. the students had to look for particular
cues. In the process of identifying the matching cues. the
students may have skimmed over some important concepts.
Second. the absence of any pretraining may have been an ob-
stacle. This was the first time these students had worked
with these visual-tactual materials. Third. since the po-
sitioning of the pictures was possibly the most motivation-
al part of the lesson. the students may have approached the
question sheets with less enthusiasm. Fourth. the instru-
mentation was not specifically designed to measure tactual
learning. For example. none of the multiple-choice items
asked the students to recall the positions of certain pic-
tures or matching cues.

The nonsignificance of the picture and passage

139

means between the two board groups appeared inconsistent
with the preferences expressed on the student question- .
naires. For example. the students preferred to manipulate
the pictures rather than work with stationary pictures by
74% to 26%. While these percentages indicate that the ma-
nipulative boards were probably more motivational than the
stationary boards. the manipulative treatment was not
strong enough to make a significant difference.

In regard to the third research hypothesis. there
were several variables which provide some tentative expla-
nations as to why the picture and passage means of the
higher interest topic (Chimps) exceeded those of the lower
interest topic (Indians). First. the literature indicated
that children are more motivated by animal topics than ear-
ly people topics. Also. recent studies have shown that
students obtain more knowledge from higher than lower in-
terest topics. Second. the pictures and passages associa-
ted with the Chimps might have been easier to organize and
integrate. This may have been a result of the students'
interest in the topical content and/or the possibility that
the Chimps might have been more conducive to principles of
visual perception and organization. Third. the literature
indicated that children prefer eventful pictures with dis-
tinctive centers of interest. On the whole. the Chimps
probably fulfilled these criteria more than the Indians.

The superior picture and passage means of the high-

140

er interest topic were consistent with the preferences ex—
pressed on the student questionnaires. For example. the
Chimps were preferred by 68% to 32% over the Indians. The
percentages suggest that the Chimps were probably more mo-
tivational than the Indians.

In assessing the variables which may have influ-
enced the results of the research hypotheses. the validity
of the instruments and treatments must be weighed. Both
posttests conformed to the same structural specifications:
that is. both tests had the same number of items. set of
learning objectives. and reading levels. In addition to
their parallel specifications. the validity of the tests
was strengthened by their high and similar reliability co-
efficients and mean indices of discrimination. Therefore.
it seems improbable that the lower scores associated with
the Indian posttest were a result of structural inequali-
ties between the two tests. It seems more probable that
the lower scores were. in large part. a result of the low-
er topic interest.

In assessing the parallel nature of the treat-
ments. the researcher recorded the amount of time required
by each treatment. If one treatment had required substan-
tially more time than the others. this increased exposure
time might have influenced the posttest results and. sub-
sequently. the conclusions drawn from the data. In Table

4.21. we found that each treatment required nearly the

141

same amount of time and requests for assistance. This da-
ta helped to substantiate the uniformity between the
treatments in terms of difficulty and length.

Since the picture variable figured prominantly in
the conclusions drawn from the first and third research
hypotheses. a brief discussion of this dependent variable
is in order. The analysis of the data. in Chapter IV. in-
dicated that the picture variable had a lower reliability
coefficient than the passage variable on both tests. In
spite of the data. the reliability coefficients associated
with the picture variable were high enough (68% for the
Chimps and 63% for the Indians) to provide dependable
group measurements. According to Mehrens and Lehmann
(1978). "For group decisions. a reliability coefficient of
about .65 may suffice” (p. 107).

Since the passage variable had 50% more items than
the picture variable. this would tend to increase the re-
liability of the passage variable. Ebel (1979) observes
that "Typically the reliability coefficient will be great-
er for scores from a longer test than a shorter test..."
(p. 288). In summary. while the passage variable was more
reliable than the picture variable. the latter had a high
enough coefficient to justify conclusions based on group
scores.

It should be noted that the discussion of the par-
allel structure of the posttests. while highly relevant to

142

the third research hypothesis. has little relevance to the
first and second research hypotheses. In these tests. each
posttest was measured across all three methods but not in
relation to each other. Thus. the two posttests could have
been unequal in structure while still providing meaningful

data on the different methods.

Implications for Educators and Instructional Designers

This study provides some significant findings for
educators and instructional designers. The conclusions
suggest that a simultaneous presentation of pictures and
passages may provide a significant supplement to the usual
textbook presentation. The study provides support for Per-
rin's (1969) theory of multiple-image communication. It
states "...that for making contrasts and comparisons. and
for learning relationships. simultaneous images reduce the
task of memory and enable the viewer to make immediate com-
parisons” (p. 376). Thus. if an educator wants to teach
pictorial concepts. one should understand some basic per-
ceptual and organizational principles for presenting simul-
taneous sets of pictures and passages.

The findings suggest that students need to be
taught how to locate and analyze picture and passage infor-
mation. If students are to be taught how to analyze letter
sounds. why not teach them to analyze picture information?
Fleming (1979) suggests that "Through much exposure to pic-

tures. people not only become literate in reading pictures.

143

but in the process their way of thinking may be modified"
(p- 243).

The findings of this study suggest that educators
should identify students who are visually oriented and pro-
vide them with simultaneous picture-passage formats. Low
verbal learners might also benefit from this technique. A
simultaneous format might help to develop spatial and con-
ceptual relationships. proportions. and visual perspective.

Educators should note that the students expressed a
strong preference for the tactual materials. and that the
manipulative boards did outscore the booklets in terms of
picture content. For students who express an interest or a
need for tactual and spatial development (eye-hand coordi-
nation). these materials could prove to be very beneficial.

This study suggests that educators might benefit by
using simultaneous displays for topics of higher and lower
interest. especially if the objective is to develop picto-
rial knowledge. Educators and instructional designers
should try to select pictures which facilitate visual per-
ception. organization. and conceptual comparisons. Since a
tOpic of higher interest will probably outscore a topic of
lower interest. it is important to be acquainted with the
literature on children's topical interests and picture
preferences. For example. this study wouldseem to suggest
that children are attracted to anthropomorphic themes: that

is. animals with human-like characteristics.

144

Implications for Future Research

Future visual research should investigate a vari—
ety of questions raised by simultaneous presentations of
pictures and passages. In the case of the passages. there
is a need to determine the optimum number. length. and
difficulty of the passages. For example. at which point
does the number. length. and difficulty of the passages
begin to detract from their ability to convey information?
Also. more research is needed for designing optimum verbal
cues (referents) which link the passage to the picture.
For example. the number and location of the passage cues
need 'h: be investigated. In the case of the pictures.
how does the number. size. sequence. and complexity of the
pictures contribute to learning?

Future researchers should explore which pictorial
cues are relevant for different subject matter and which
pictorial elements attract optimum attention. For exam-
ple. the recording of eye movements from passages to pic—
tures would help to determine the effectiveness of the eu-
ing devices. These eye-span patterns and electromyograph-
ic recordings could provide insight into the child's di-
rect information processing of simultaneous presentations
of pictures and passages. Fleming (1969) states that ”In
sum. it does appear that the line-of-sight recording can
become a very useful tool for research and practice in in-

structional media. EM (eye movement) data might be useful

11:5

in evaluating the designer's judgments and in testing the
researcher's hypotheses" (p. 396).

Future research should examine the effectiveness
of simultaneous displays using samples with various char-
acteristics: such as. age. sex. socioeconomic groups.
ability levels. and types of disabilities. For example.
children with weak verbal skills might benefit from a vis-
ually-directed approach. like two of the formats used in
this study. Levin. Divine-Hawkins. Kerst. and Guttmann
(1974) found that subjects who learn relatively well from
pictures but relatively poorly from words functioned like
good learners when pictures were stressed. More pictorial
and neurological testing could be used to identify stu-
dents with high visual acuity. Future studies could be
designed to test these students using visually-directed
treatments.

The limitations of the study. in Chapter I. dis-
cussed the restricted nature of the instrumentation. For
example. the posttests restricted the students to verbal
choices (multiple-choice items). Future studies need to
provide instruments for measuring visual responses. such
as identifying and locating pictorial elements in a non-
verbal format. For students who lack verbal skills. their
visual recollections could be more accurately measured by
visual identification tasks. The instruments were also

restricted to cued. written. and delayed responses of two

n),- It'llll'lll 01'." {III (1| III 1' ‘ll'l‘l

 

 

146

days after the treatments. In future studies. the tests
should include free. oral. and various response intervals:
such as. immediate. a few days. a week. etc.

The discussion of the posttest instruments. in
Chapter III. indicated that the picture and passage items
were largely independent of each other. This meant that
the picture questions could not be answered on the basis
of passage retention or vice versa. While this made it
easier to separate the dependent variables for purposes of
measurement. this approach left out an important variable:
namely. items based on picture-passage interdependence.
Since the mutual cuing of pictures and passages was an im-
portant feature of the overall design. future instrumenta-
tion should experiment with items which require a combined
knowledge of picture and passage content.

The instrumentation was based on cued (imposed)
recall of information presented during the treatments. An
induced strategy might lead to higher levels of picture
and/or passage retention. This strategy calls for instruc-
ting the students to generate their own creative sets of im-
ages. Since the methods in this study imposed a set of pie—
tures on the student. an induced strategy would instruct
the student to construct some original images to serve as
mediators for the existing pictures. Children could be in-
structed to use an interactive imagery strategy during en—

coding and reminded to use the mediators at testing. A

 

\ 'l'l'l"
‘1‘"?
‘l

 

 

147

control group would not be given any imagery instructions.
Pressley and Levin (1980) found that first and sixth grad-
ers did better when they were instructed to create internal
interactive images than the children who were given no spe-
cial instructions. However. it should be noted that the
researchers began by showing the children words and not
pictures. To ask children to induce pictures from an im-
posed set of simultaneous pictures would represent an un-
tested strategy.

While the tactual dimension (manipulative board)
did not outscore the visual dimension (stationary board).
more research is needed to determine the merit of visual-
tactual learning. The student characteristics and measur-
ing instruments limited the generalizability of this study.
For example. if the instruments had allowed for tactual
measurements. the results may have been different. If the
population had been composed of disabled or tactually-ori-
ented children. the manipulative boards may have been more
beneficial. Raskin and Baker (1975) state that ”It appears
that research is needed to determine whether young learning
disabled children function more efficiently through vision.
active touch. or the integration of both touch and vision”
(1» 53).

While this study included some creative thinking at
the end of each question sheet (see Appendix C). the post-

tests were based. to a large extent. on the recall of pic-

148

ture and passage information. While the posttests also in-
cluded analytic (comparing images) and synthetic (inferring
generalizations) thinking. future instrumentation could be
designed to measure more divergent and creative thinking.
The design recommendations in Chapter II would seem
to suggest that researchers should examine: (1) Pretraining
sessions for introducing students to simultaneous formats:
and (2) An extended period of time and set of simultaneous
formats for assessing student achievement and interest.
Both of these procedures could train students on how to lo—
cate relevant features within and cues between the pictures
and passages. Egeth and Wall (1972) found that pretraining
and practice improved the retention span of multiple image
displays. They used stimulus cards. with dots and letter
patterns. to test parallel and simultaneous processing.
After several days of practice. the classification of stim-
ulus elements as numbers or letters could be carried out
simultaneously and independently on up to six characters.
In summary. this study indicates that educators and
instructional designers should probably devote more atten-
tion to the use of simultaneous presentations of visuals.
Since the study appears to have drawn some significant con-
clusions and broken some new ground. further research is

needed to corroborate and to enlarge upon these findings.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A
THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS

Achievement Posttests
Student Attitude Questionnaires

Note: The materials in this appendix are 74% of the original
size.

1u9

 

 

NAME

 

DATE

 

HOMEROOM
TEACHER

 

TEST ON THE LIVING HABITS 0P WILD CHIMPANZEES

Directiong: Choose the best answer to each question.
Then draw a circle around the letter in front of your
answer. Try to answer every question.

Sample Question:

Scientists consider wild chimps to be
a. Less intelligent than many animals
b. As intelligent as most animals

©0ne of the most intelligent animals
d. As intelligent as human beings

 

 

1¢50

 

1. Wild chimps live in a park in

a. Upper Africa
b. Lower Africa
c. Central Africa
d. Coastal Africa

2.

How long did the lady scientist
have to wait before she could
get close enough to the chimps
to feed them?

a. Several days

b. Several weeks

c. Several months

d. About one year

 

When chimps get excited. they
usually

a. Slap the ground and rush about

b. Wave sticks and chase each
other

c. Jump up and down and wave their
arms

d. Climb trees and swing from
branches

4. A chimp's language consists

mainly of

a. A few simple words

b. Drawings on the ground

c. Imitations of other animals
d. Low hoots and grunts

 

Chimps like to steal cloth from
tents to

a. Keep them warm and dry
b. Chew and suck on
c. Use as a rope

d. Make their tree nests

6.

In the jungle. how would a chimp
usually act around a strange
person?

a. He gets excited and runs about
b. He does not pay much attention

c. He would be afraid to come
close

d. If you have food. he will come
close

 

 

7.

Wild chimps are called gggggg
because they

a. Prefer to live in small groups

b. Travel about with no permanent
home

c. Remain peaceful and seldom get
angry

d. Prefer to live in the jungle

If a chimp travels very far in
search of food. he usually hunts

a. Alone (by himself)

b. With one other friend
c. In a small group

d. In a large group

 

 

151

 

9. A newborn chimp is

a. Able to climb in about a month

b. Almost strong enough to stand

uP

c. Much stranger than a human
baby

d. Relpless for several months

10.

Which of these statements is true
of baby chimps? They

b.

Cry just like human babies
Are raised on their mother's
milk

c. Do not suck their thumbs

d. Are born with a set of teeth

 

11.

Newborn chimps sleep with their
mothers for about

a. Three months
b. Six months
c. One year

d. Three years

12.

Baby chimps hang on to their
mothers by

a. Gripping their hair

b. Hanging on to their tails
c. Holding on to their necks
d. Riding on their shoulders

 

13.

Raising a baby chimp is usually
a. The mother's responsibility
b. The father's responsibility
c. Shared by both parents

d. Shared by several mothers

14.

The word ggyiggy means
a. Trying to protect animals

b. Raving died out
c. Having a strong desire
d. Having a special ability

 

15.

Wild chimps are mostly hippiygzggg.
This means they

Eat almost anything they find

Eat a balance of plants and
meat

b.

c. Feed mostly on meat

d. Feed mostly on plants

16.

When chimps walk upright. it is
often because they want to

a. Give their hands a rest
b. Hold something in their hands
c. Scare each other away

d. Pretend that they are humans

 

 

17.

Scientists think chimps clean each
other because they like to

a. Stay very clean and healthy
b. Show affection for each other
c. Look very attractive

d. Keep their hands busy

18.

The word gocigligation describes

a. How chimps learn to cooperate
b. How chimps behave like humans
c. Why chimps are so intelligent

d. Why scientists study chimps

 

 

1n52

 

 

 

 

 

 

19. Scientists are very interested in 20. The average life span of a chimp
chimps because they is about
a. Are fun to watch a. 20 years
b. Can teach us many skills b. 45 years
c. Can walk like humans c. 65 years
d. Help us to understand early man d. 90 years
21. Scientists think chimps perform 22. What do male chimps do during
rain dances because they their rain dance?
a. Like to scream and wave branches a. Beat branches on the ground
b. Like to climb and run down hills b. Chase each other with branches
c. Are scared of loud noises c. Wave branches at the females
d. Are trying to entertain each d. Run down hills and climb trees
other
23. What do female chimps do during 24. The main interest of a ggglggigy
a thunderstorm? is to study
a. Swing from branch-to-branch a. Row animals live in the jungle
b. Sit on branches and scream b. The behavior of the ape family
c. Throw things from trees c. How animals live in the zoo
d. Cover their eyes and ears d. The living habits of animals
25. The lady scientist wanted to live 26. Chimps poke stems into termite
with chimps to mounds because they are trying to
a. Teach them some special skills a. Scare and surprise the termites
b. Find out if they are friendly b. Find out how deep the holes are
c. Learn how to live in the jungle c. Get the termites to craw on the
d. Observe and record their daily stems
behavior d. §;;p the termites from getting
27. Chimps catch termites on stems 28. A chimp makes a sleeping nest by

because they

a. Tying several branches together
a. Like the taste of them

b. Spreading grass over the

b. Like to tease them branches
c. Want to play with them c. Bending and interweaving
branches

d. Want to look at them
d. Making a frame from broken
branches

 

 

153

 

29. How long does it take a chimp to

construct a tree nest?
a. One minute

b. Few minutes

c. Ten minutes

d. Twenty minutes

30.

The word gggpg means to
a. Be very skillful at climbing

b. Be very skillful at making
tools

c. Add a new child to the family

d. Adjust your behavior to the
environment

 

Directions: All of the following questions are based on the 12 pictures in

the lesson.

Try to remember the picture content as you answer each question.
Draw a circle around the correct letter.

Try to answer every question.

4:

 

 

 

 

31. One picture shows a lady and a 32. Based on the same picture. it
chimp standing beside each other. looks like a full grown chimp
It looks like the
a. Is about as tall as a woman
a. Lady and chimp are both
holding some bananas b. Can stand as straight as a woman
b. Chimp is holding the c. Has longer arms than a woman
bananas by himself
c. Lady is holding the
bananas by herself
33. Another picture shows a chimp 34. In the same picture. the people in
walking away from a tent on all front of the tent seem to be
fours. It looks like he bends his
a. Trying to scare the chimp away
a. Legs more than his arms
b. Watching the chimp walk away
b. Arms more than his legs
c. Offering food to the chimp
c. Arms and legs about the same
35. Based on several pictures. we 36. One picture shows a lady watching
could say that a chimp's four chimps on a branch
a. Legs are longer than his arms a. Play with each other
b. Arms are longer than his legs b. Clean each other
c. Arms and legs are the same c. Follow each other
length
37. In the same picture. the lady is 38. Based on several pictures. it

watching the chimps through

a. A telescope (one tube)

b. Binoculars (two tubes)

c. A camera (taking photographs)

looks like chimps have very
a. Short necks
b. Large foreheads

c. Small heads

 

 

154

 

 

 

 

 

 

two chimps are standing on a
branch and

a. They seem to be hugging each
other

b. They seem to be playing a
game

c. One seems to be cleaning the
other

39. One picture shows a child hanging 40. Based on several pictures. it
to its mother. The child is looks like chimps have small
‘ hanging from the mother's
a. Legs compared to humans
£e Side
b. Arms compared to humans
b. Front
c. Hands and feet compared to
c. Back humans
41. The upper part of the chimp's 42. How is a chimp's face different
body. from the waist up. is from a human face?
a. Small compared to a human a. His whole face is much flatter
b. Large compared to a human b. The lower part sticks out
farther
c. About the same as a human
c. The upper part sticks out
farther
43. One picture shows six chimps on 44. One picture shows a close-up of a
the ground. What are they doing? chimp seated on the ground with a
hand full of bananas. Re is also
a. Eating grass and bananas
a. Eating one of the bananas
b. Playing with several children
b. Resting his arm on his knee
c. Cleaning and holding each other
c. Resting his chin on his hand
45. In the same picture. the chimp 46. In another picture. a chimp is
seems to be looking at touc the lady scientist. It
looks l e he is touching her
a. The banana in his hand
a. Hand
b. The camera in front of him
b. Arm
c. Something in the distance
c. Neck
47. Next to the lady and the chimp. 48. One picture shows three chimps

poking stems into termite
mounds. In the picture.

a. One chimp is using both hands
to hold his stem

b. Two chimps are using both
hands to hold their stems

c. All three chimps are using
both hands to hold their stems

 

 

155

 

 

49. The chimps are sitting next to 50. Another picture shows three
a termite mound. The mound chimps relaxing on branches.
looks The chimps are resting
a. Much smaller than the chimps a. On their backs
b. About as tall as the chimps b. On their stomachs
c. Much taller than the chimps c. In several positions

 

Impogtant: Before you turn in this test. make sure
you circled one letter answer for every question.

 

 

156

 

 

NAME

 

DATE

 

HOMEROOM
TEACHER

 

TEST ON CLIFF VILLAGE INDIANS OP EARLY AMERICA

Digections: Choose the best answer to each question.
Then draw a circle around the letter in front of your
answer. Try to answer every question.

Sample Question:

Indians of early America
built cliff villages about

a. 200 years ago
b. 400 years ago

700 years ago
d. 1400 years ago

 

 

157

 

'1.

The Indian caves are located on
the sides of cliffs with a

a. Plateau above and a plain below
b. Plateau above and a valley below
c. Lake above and a valley below
d. Lake above and a plain below

2.

The large cliffs are made from
a. Granite

b. Marble

c. Limestone

d. Sandstone

 

3.

The word pggnigggyig means the
time before

a. Man lived on the earth

b. The earth was made

c. Man made written records

d. Scientists began exploring caves

4.

A 31y; was a round room used as a
a. Workshop and religious room
b. Workshop and storage room

c. Meeting place and religious
room

d. Meeting place and storage room

 

5.

Some kivas were used to bury dead
persons along with tools and

a. Pots of food
b. Pots of gold
c. Jewelry

d. Dead animals

Indians climbed from their cave
gill es to the top of the cliff
y us

a. Steps carved in the rocks

b. Ladders tied to the rocks

c. Ropes tied to the rocks

d. Footholes carved in the rocks

 

7. To supply water to grow their

food. the Cave Indians designed
a. A system of pumps
b. Irrigation ditches
c. Water wheels

d. Clay pipes

One caption describes a deer hunt.
The deer hunters are using

a. Spears and rocks
b. Spears and slingshots
c. Arrows and rocks

d. Arrows and slingshots

 

 

9.

The hole in the floor of the kiva
was suppose to
a. Lead to another room

b. Lead to the spirit world

c. Be used to store tools

d. Be used for building fires

10.

The smoke inside the kiva was
suppose to

a. Attract friendly spirits
b. Keep out evil spirits
c. Carry prayers to heaven

d. Send messages between spirits

 

 

158

 

 

 

 

 

11. How did the Cave Indians use deer 12. Scientists think the main reason
sinews (fiber tissue)? They were the Indians lived in caves was to
a. Wrapped together to make ropes a. Protect themselves from enemies
b. Woven together to make clothes b. Provide protection from the
weather
c. Used as thread and bowstrings
c. Ride from their enemies
d. Used to tie ladders together
d. Store their supplies of food
and water
13. The Indians probably moved out 14. c o o are scientists who
of these caves because are y terested in
a. Of a shortage of food and water a. Studying villages inside
arches and caves
b. It was dangerous to climb the
cliffs b. Studying prehistoric Indians
c. Most of the Indians died from c. Studying the life and culture
disease of early peoples
d. The villages became too crowded d. Collecting artifacts for their
art value
15. By studying human skeletons. 16. The main reason the scientists
scientists have learned that studied the logs was to determine
Cave Indians
a. Where the wood came from
a. Were as tall as modern man
b. What kind of wood was used
b. Suffered from bone diseases
c. How the rooms were built
c. Lived to be about 60 years old
d. The age of the village
d. Were stronger than modern man
1?. The word 233213 refers to houses 18. Before these Indians moved in-

built

a. Inside large caves
b. With a round shape
c. On top of each other
d. With many ladders

side caves. scientists think
they lived

a. On mountain tops
b. On the flat plains
c. In forest valleys
d. In lake regions

 

 

159

 

19. Ladders were often used instead
of steps and doors because they

b.

Ce

d.

Were easier to construct than
steps

Were very useful in case of
fires

Could be moved from one house
to another

Could be pulled up if the enemy
attacked

20.

To an archaeologist. the word
33222212 mtflna *0

a. Uncover objects by digging

b. Build at a higher elevation
c. Rebuild old settlements

d. Bury objects with the dead

 

21.

Why did the Cave Indians spread

ears of corn on rooftops?

22.

The pictures of early Cave
Indians come from

 

 

 

a. To protect them from mice a. Photographs taken long ago
b. As an offering to the gods b. Photographs of clay models
c. To dry them ha the sun c. Paintings by early Indians
d. To decorate their villages d. Paintings by modern artists
23. To make their clay pots strong. 24. Why are scientists especially '
Indians added interested in artifacts? They
want to
a. Sand and plant stems
a. Collect facts about Indian life
b. Sand and crushed rocks
b. Learn to recognize old objects
c. Glue and crushed rocks
c. Learn about early cultures
d. Glue and plant stems
d. Learn how old handicrafts were
e
25. Which one of these choices is 26. In making an Indian belt. why are
true about making baskets? the threads wrapped around five
They pegs?
a. Required some simple tools a. To stretch and separate them

b.

Ce

d.

Required two Indians helping
each other

Were made by the cave women

Were made in a day or two

b. To weave them together
c. To measure their length
d. To divide them into five parts

 

 

160

 

27. Early Indians hung their shoes

(moccasins) from the ceiling to

a. Keep them from getting dirty
b. Prevent children from playing
with them

c. Provide more space to work

on crafts

d. Protect them from mice

28. To say that Cave Indians were
igyggdgpgnden . means

b.

c.

d.

They had different responsi-
bilities

Only village members could
enter the cave

Each Indian was free and
independent

They needed and helped each
other

 

29. The population of a large cave

village was about

30. The lesson described how young
children helped their

 

a. 200 Indians a. Mothers make pottery

b. 400 Indians b. Mothers collect water

c. 800 Indians c. Fathers make baskets

d. 1000 Indians d. Fathers grow food
Directions: All of the following uestions are based on the 12 pictures in

the lesson.
Draw a circle around the correct letter.

Try to remember the p cture content as you answer each question.
Try to answer every question.

 

31. One picture shows two women tour-

ists exploring a cave village.
It looks like most of the

a. Walls are still standing
b. Upper walls are missing
c. Walls are piled on the ground

32.

Based on the same picture. about
how many feet is it from the
village to the top of the cliff?
a. About fifty feet

b. Several hundred feet

c. About one thousand feet

 

 

 

33. On the ceiling of the cave. you 34. One picture looks down into a
can see kiva. We can see that the walls
are made of
a. Drawings of Indians
a. Bricks made from clay
b. Drawings of animals
b. Stones stuck together
c. Black stripes
c. Logs stacked on each other
35. Two pictures show the floor of a 36. Based on the paintings. it looks

kiva. The floor is made of

a. Flat stones
b. Flat boards

c. Smooth clay

like cave women

a. Liked to wear necklaces

b. Wore very little jewelry

c. Painted parts of their bodies

 

 

1(51

 

 

37-

Based on several pictures. it
looks like the village walls
were made of mostly

a. Bricks and stones

b. Bricks and logs

c. Bricks. stones. and logs

38.

One picture shows two women
climbing to the top of the
cliff. As they approach the top.

a. One is on a narrow trail and
the other is using footholes

b. They are both walking along
the narrow trail

c. They are both climbing the
footholes

 

In the same picture. how are the
women carrying their pots?

a. In their hands
b. On their heads

c. One by hand and one on
the head

40.

Based on several pictures. it
looks like the scientists decided
to

a. Rebuild many parts of the
village

b. Rebuild almost all of the
village

c. Leave the village the way they
found it

 

41.

One painting shows two men working
inside a kiva with a woman on a
ladder. The ladder stands

a. Close to the wall of the kiva

b. Straight up in the middle of
the room

c. At an angle near the middle of

42.

The wall of the round kiva has
a series of

a. Tunnels at the floor level

b. Clay shelves shaped like
windows

c. Wood shelves for holding
pottery

 

the room
43. One paint shows a hunter bring- 44. In the same painting. an old
ing a deer to a cave. How is he lady with white hair is

transporting the deer?

a. By carrying the deer on his back
b. By dragging the deer by the leg
c. By carrying the deer on a pole

a. Holding a cup in her hands
b. Stirring a pot over a fire
c. Wrapping herself in a blanket

 

1:5.

One large painting shows many
Indians working inside a cave.
Most of the Indians are working
a. In front of the houses

b. While standing on ladders

c. While standing on rooftops

46. The same painting shows that most

of the buildings

a. Were one story high
b. Had flat rooftops

c. Did not have windows

 

 

162

 

 

47. Based on the same painting. it 48. One picture shows a modern Indian
appears that the cliff village woman making bread and pottery.
What is she wearing?
a. Did not have any round
shaped towers a. Traditional Indian clothes
b. Rad at least one round b. Cloth wrapped around her legs
shaped tower
c. Indian bracelets on her arms
c. Had many round shaped
towers
49. One picture shows many examples 50. One picture shows modern Indian

of painted pottery. Cave
Indians usually painted

Just the outside of the
pottery

Pictures of animals and
Indians

Black lines on white
backgrounds

b.

c.

man making handicrafts. What
are the two men wearing on
their heads?

a. Cloth headbands

b. Feather headbands

c. Cowboy style hats

 

 

Impogganf: Before you turn in this test. make sure
you c c ed one letter answer for every question.

 

 

163

 

 

Name

 

STUDENT ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You have just completed two lessons. In one lesson. you used a book with

12 pictures and captions. In the other lesson. you used a board with 12
pictures and captions.

1. Did you like one style better than the other? (Check one of the three
boxes below)

I liked the I liked the I did not like
book style board style [:1 one style more
the most the most than the other

2. Did you like one picture style better than the other? (Check one of
the three boxes below)

I like to see I like to see I don't prefer
the pictures all the pictures [:1 one style over
page-by-page in front of me the other

.3. Did you find one style had easier directions to understand than the
other? (Check one of the three boxes below)

I found the I found the I didn't think
book easier board easier l::] one style was
to understand to understand any easier

4. Did you find one subject (Chimps or Indians) more interesting than the
other? (Check one of the three boxes below)

I enjoyed the I enjoyed the I didn't enjoy
wild chimps Cave Indians [:3 one subject more
the most the most than the other

If you can think of a reason(s) for choosing chimps or Indians. please
write it on the back of this paper.

 

 

164

 

 

Name

 

STUDENT ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRE

(PORHM//

 

F/

 

 

 

// /L/

7/H

:
)5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lesson Book

._J _

You have just completed two lessons. In one lesson. you used a book with
12 pictures and captions. In the other lesson. you used a board with 12
pictures and captions. You had to place the pictures on the board.

1. Did you like one style better than the other? (Check one of the three
boxes below)

I liked the I liked the I did not like
book style board style one style more
the most the most than the other

2. Did you like one picture style better than the other? (Check one of
the three boxes below)

I like to see I like to see I don't prefer
the pictures all the pictures [:1 one style over
page-by-page in front of me the other

3. Did you find one style had easier directions to understand than the
other? (Check one of the boxes below)

I found the I found the I didn't think
book easier board easier I] one style was
to understand to understand any easier

4. Did you find one subject (chimps or Indians) more interesting than the
other? (Check one of the three boxes below)

I enjoyed the I enjoyed the I didn't enjoy
[:1 wild chimps Cave Indians [:1 one subject more
the most the most than the other

If you can think of a reason(s) for choosing Chimps or Indians. please
wrie it on the back of this paper.

 

 

165

 

 

Name

 

STUDENT ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRE
(roam c)

Q;
a.

Lesson Board

I

\
W
m
57/

\x:
N

I

\U
L/[
)7)

 

 

 

7
fl/

D
\Y’

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MT
/_

Lesson Board

You have just completed two lessons. In one lesson. you used a board
with pictures already on it. In the other lesson. you had to place the
pictures on the board. Both lessons had 12 pictures and captions.

1. Did you like one board style better than the other? (Check one of the
three boxes below)

I prefer the board I prefer to place I didn't prefer
with the pictures the pictures on I: one board more
already on it the board than the other

2. Did you find that one board had easier directions to understand than
the other? (Check one of the three boxes below)

I found the board I found that put- I didn't find

with the pictures ting the pictures [:1 one board easier
already on it eas- D on the board was to understand
ier to understand easier to under- than the other

stand

3. Did you find one subject (Chimps or Indians) more interesting than the
other? (Check one of the three boxes below)

I enjoyed the I enjoyed the I didn't enjoy
Wild Chimps Cave Indians [:1 one subject more
the most the most than the other

If you can think of a reason(s) for choosing Chimps or Indians. please
write it on the back of this paper.

 

 

APPENDIX B
ITEM IDENTIFICATION TABLES

Distribution of Posttest Items
Item Answer and Reference Keys

Note: The materials in this appendix are 74% of the original
size.

166

 

 

 

TABLE A.1 Two—Way Distribution of Items for an
Achievement Test on Wild Chimpanzees

 

 

LEARNING OBJECTIVES BASED ON QUESTIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caption Content Picture Content a
Categories Categories 8.
me»
I I 4: 0 58
IE I O I'UH 0 0 ‘PU
430 H C HOP-0 0 ‘10 H0
8'3». 2.223 3.233 ”3833’ a:
“gas :1": 2...": °>31 °°
2 so some fish man a»
c.4H: ssau :GhO : s 1::
AHHO PH-du-i flaw-OM ed :0 .00
F1:*OS: e:a::s m:a::g :.::o .4 $4:
'3“°" 2828 282... 2:22:27: :8
TEST CONTENT 0—4138 use: Eco 3+:va to
08:0 flO-HO 0-H: OHGIO H
CATEGORIES Gait-O DOUG DDFO 03flfl¢ 8%
.1 N .3 a} 3:3

1. Individual and Group 18 g. 5 “3. “5
Behavior of Crown . 22 9
Chimps 23

2. Parental Raising and 9. 11 10. 12 39
Characteristics of 13 6
Young Chimps

3. Physical Features 20 4. 16 44 33. 33
and Characteristics 38. 9
of Crown Chimps 49

4. References to Scien- 2. 24 17. 21 i6. 37 8
tists or Zoologists 25 6
(Observations)

5. Comparisons and 6. 19 31. 34 2. 40 8
Interaction Between 1. 42
Chimps and Humans

6. Adapting to and 1. 7 26. 27 50
Shaping the Habitat 14. 15 28 10
to Meet Basic Needs 29. 30

Total Number of Items for

Each Learning Objective 12 18 1° 1° 50

 

 

 

 

 

The test item numbers are given in each cell. A description of the
underlying concepts for each item is found on the following pages.

 

 

167

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE.A.2 Two-Way Distribution of Items for an
Achievement Test on Cliff Village Indians

LEARNING OBJECTIVES BASED ON QUESTIONS

H

Caption Content Picture Content a

Categories Categories 8
can
m as.
:: .'. m Ace... ‘6 8 3%
PO H C HOH 0 H0 H0
0-0-0 U060 U000 ”1h: 43
sum sass—c cacao no»? a...
~§ss :1 I :1": °>21 °°
2°53. 538.3 533. 25": 32
~4th vane—1 +3pr H :0 no
.4::o:: e::::s m:a::s £.:«o .4 5.»
Hand Need some sawed s
31.5 3252 :25" 35:33 =°
TESTCONTENT “'5" so... :oH: cm... H"
as a aovu move ozmnm s:
CATEGORIES . . , , :3
ed N .-: N Bill

1. Roles and Responsi- 8. 28 11. 21 43. 44 39
bilities of Village 27. 30 48 10
Members for Fulfil-
ling Basic Needs

2. References to Scien- 3. 14 12. 13 4O
tists or Archaeolo- 20 15. 16 10
gists (Observations) 18. 24

3. Basic Design and 17. 29 19 31 7. 45
Construction of Vil- 6. 47 8
lages (Dimensions/

Materials)

4. Cliff Village Kivas 4. 5 9. 10 R4. 35
(Basic Construction 1. 2 8
and Living Purposes)

5. Natural and Man-Made 1. 2 6. 7 33 32. 38
Features Near the 7
Village (Cliffs.

Footholes. etc.)

6. Indian Handicrafts 23 22. 25 36. 49
and Artifacts (Bas- 26 50 7
kets. Pottery. etc.)

Total Number of Items for

Each Learning Objective 12 18 12 8 5°

 

 

 

 

 

 

A description of the underlying concepts for each item is found on

the following pages.

 

 

168

 

 

 

 

 

Table A.3 Item Answer and Reference Key for a Posttest on Wild
Chimpanzees
Question Letter Caption Question Letter Picture
Number Answer Reference Number Answer Reference
1 C 1 31 A 1
2 C 1 32 C 1
3 A 3 33 A 3
4 D 3 34 B 3
5 B 3 35 B Several
6 c 3 36 c 2
7 B 2 37 B 2
8 C 2 38 A Several
9 D 4 39 A 6
10 B 4 40 A Several
11 D 4 41 B Several
12 A 6 42 B Several
13 A 6 43 c 9
14 B 6 44 B 8
15 D 5 45 c 8
16 B 5 46 c 10
17 B 9 47 C 10
18 A 9 48 A 12
19 D 8 49 B 12
20 B 8 50 c 11
21 C 7
22 A 7
23 B 7
24 D 10
25 D 10
26 C 12
27 A 12
28 C 11
29 B 11
30 D 11

 

 

 

169

 

 

 

 

 

Table A.4 Item Answer and Reference Key for a Posttest on Cliff
Village Indians
Question Letter Caption Question Letter Picture
Number Answer Reference Number Answer Reference
1 B 1 31 B 1
2 D 1 32 B 1
3 C 1 33 C 1
4 A 3 34 A 3
5 A 3 35 C 3. 4
6 D '2 36 B Several
7 B 2 37 A Several
8 C 2 38 A 2
9 B 4 39 C 2
10 B 4 40 A Several
11 C 6 41 C 4
12 A 6 42 B 4
13 A 6 43 A 6
14 C 5 44 A 6
15 B 5 45 c 8. 9
16 D 5 46 B 8. 9
17 C 9 47 B 8! 9
18 B 9 48 B 7
19 D 9 49 C 10
20 A 8 50 A 12
21 C 8
22 D 8
23 B 10
24 C 10
25 A 12
26 A 12
27 D 12
28 D 11
29 B 11
30 A 11

 

 

 

APPENDIX C
THE TREATMENT MATERIALS

Pictures and Captions
Question Sheets

Note: The pictures in this appendix have been reduced to 86%
of their original size. The original pictures used in
the study were in color and they provided much more de-
tail than these black-and-white. high contrast photocop—

ies. The written passages in this appendix are 74% of
the original size.

170

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 1. Wild chimpanzees live in central Africa. Chimps have

been living here for thousands of years. even before caveman first
lived on earth. Scientists have decided that apes are man's clos—
est relatives in the animal world. We know that the earliest cave-
man looked very much like these apes. This lady went to Africa to
study the behavior of wild chimps. She had to be very patient for
several months before they let her get close enough to feed them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.uou>s:en nsoum manna usu>uenpo a“ head saga .sasoum emsszo Add: masnno sea a .sosuvesom .nezo
:ssaa some can execs use adores Heme mesa .aonao some wees museum gauze ses: .ueaaesm use moon
we :oaees :« hauseussoo asens e>os use use: assasshea o: o>sn on: sussass no mosses one mouse:
.shoussz unease: ens mesa ass or .voeu uo season a“ soossuuao msoa He>sua has» eocam .uhso to»
e no shoe: sou e sou heavoMov use: has hens .easoum Hausa :H ooou new use: use He>sha ea oxHH
heme .veehcu cash Headache e :u shenas> use census museum so» so e>an sasdzo cad: .N :cauaso

 

 

171

 

 

 

 

 

172

 

 

.sassam one mace: Mcaossos sod use .aceseuaoxe we essence used .sehsvmem she
use one: sevsaosd uncommon Lassa .axoavs msawmsao vsons mush one .vssoam on»
some .uxooa rouge hone .oouuexe one home sen: .usus wooden mu: no oessoeo use

.nuemssu osooen as: e: .eehsom no oouuoxo mesooon oeussasago a nu .mcdaoz he he

nave some use: on new Hoodoo zone .uassass «succeed adders: ens assume .zucao
so zoom use rose on exau mesa .aceu s scum cacao so soon esom Assam cu ms“
:5h0 mu nsdzo saga .mcsasn ocsohs has hae> adders: one masazo odd: .n :oaaaso

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

173

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 4. A newborn chimp is as helpless as a human baby and

never leaves its mother for the first four months. Small chimps
sleep with their mothers until they are about three years old.

Like human babies. chimps are raised on their mother's milk and
they suck their thumbs until they develop teeth. These parents
are expressing their love and protection for their baby. Grown-
up chimps like to play games and tickle their young children.

 

 

 

 

.maseu Has no as Hue: as a: msHossam ages :so eaane ass» aroma casuOHa one .Hds use :meuusss:
ass chance saw use Add: 0: .mssmcsn eEom :oaoum ass“ mm: azmuh can :0 define one .mepmshup :e>o
use .um a .mhexsos Hausa oxHH .uses osom use on assume .Amassaa segue use woman so hauodmo wsH
-oeouv soao>Hnu : nausea one hemp has or .nassaa use season: heap eosam .mass use .xasn .mseam
.ssommoao .noeoa .uo>eou .mausau uo haaasm Assesses one so msuusoaoe has a sH meHHs so» me aces
as Ho>suu has hens .vocu msuuse use msHusooH has some muse: acme ocean meouconsdnu .n compose

 

 

 

 

 

174

 

  

5 my

  

 

171‘

J”
‘1... u
'5.

. “I"
, .

 
 

W
I
I:

It.

 

 

175

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 6. It is chiefly the mother's responsibility to raise
the baby since the father does not spend very much time with the
family. Like in this picture. babies hang on to their mothers
by gripping their hair. By the time they are two years old. they
can swing from branch-to-branch by themselves. The government of
Africa has made a large park (game reserve) to protect chimpan-
zees from becoming extinct (the dying out of a certain species).

 

 

 

 

176

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 7. Chimps do not like loud noises. They get very excited
and nervous during a thunderstorm. The males perform a strange
rain dance. As they run down a hill. they wave and drag branches.
slap the ground. and hit tree trunks. The males will climb back
up to the top of the hill and run down many times. The females
and young children sit on branches and scream during the light-
ning and thunder. The rain dance may last as long as 30 minutes.

 

 

 

 

1??

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 8. Chimpanzees are one of the smartest animals on earth.
They have brains that are similar to humans but they do not have
the ability to speak. Since the chimp resembles man in many ways.
scientists have studied their behavior in many experiments. This
chimp sits in a relaxed position. He is about 4Q feet in height
and weighs about 130 pounds. His average life span will be about
45 years. He is strong enough to snap a thick branch in one hand.

 

 

 

178

 

 

5230 some new 25: non» seasons as» some on asses hogs—.3 3:9 :52 at;
130 nose no are use: use .083 .mueem on», 93:03 on 9500.3 m2» 5 amino
we noon» one .3295 deacon on» 0 uses: 5.5.30 23. uses op case.— massH—B no

0:95.: :02: he smooch.“ 3 codes «deacon sense nu wag: macaw eiudheaouoo
no success mama. 5.3..” deacon .523 no when 955.395 so on 95.39% maze .ae
uses some 3530?»! wad—3:0 use a mason ass... ocean ca on: 2320 .m sedan—so

 

 

 

 

. .
.cMeo’fl. . ‘fi.

 

 

 

179

 

.Amassass «o asuHos: Houses: on» use .uo«>ssen HsHooe on» .eeasusou Hsonaza
emu seasons oz: anuvceuos s. mmdumdmmfl moossu s a“ new .uoH>s:oo passe veouoo
lea one huusueuso hue> some ee>aeeno ezm .ue: mosoa case: has» cuckoo sauces
hoes you ensues suds oe>HH vuea one so used eza .s:o>ue: one some see: segue
nose mom on sand huusuoeame hens .usqmm x was .xosn on» so segue muse moavusa
.mvss: undone: .henuo nose Usumusg an m «Heeu hues» some sasazo .o« sequaso

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

180

 

 

“the w My;

4‘ .31.: :1

 

 

 

 

Caption 11. In the late afternoon. each chimp makes a sleeping
nest in the fork branches of a tree. It takes only a few minutes
to bend and interweave the branches into a nest. He holds the
branches with his feet and puts leafy twigs under him for a pil-
low. This nest will protect him from the wet forest floor. This
ability to construct nests shows that chimps can adapt (change
their behavior to adjust to the environment) to forest living.

 

 

 

181

 

 

.mon Houses e snowmen ca ooswumoo asesshamsa can: use: e ma Hoe» < .msoaeo: msausss haueaoeame
.eHocu Heundaxe sues ones se3e>ee .uoaea .uaooa :30 human case muesdse rem hae> .spsoaea uHesv

usuaeaasa use wsHsoaes an sou>eseo muse speed assume Essex .msoum «seam me some .muoofipo Hes:
less we «so mace» axes ca swsose «seam eke assume uesv msosm hem>eson mass .«uo nu axeeun sauce
esa .vsep mosooen seam emu ses: .eeanshea use He ease» on» oxHa eaEHso ass .sseaospas one hose

ses: asses es» ea usage neuasAea use .eosses causes» ousH Essa oxen use esoau uses» use mm a»
exev mesa .ooou ususoaeo you mace» euasum hue> axes o» to: mosses“ o>es assume odd: .NH.soHa eo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

182

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 1. This large cave village is located on the side of a
steep cliff with a plateau above and a valley below. Prehistoric
(the time before man made written records) Indians of early Amer-
ica built these villages about 700 years ago. These sandstone
cliffs are located in the State of Colorado in the Western United
States. Tourists visit these caves in Mesa Verde National Park.
The ceiling stripes were made by mineral deposits from rainwater.

 

 

 

183

 

 

.aeves usdxsaao sou ease» emesoue anusn use ooou msHsosm sou eesoude soHueMHuuH msoa use eseaesm
aaaee eeesa .eeuos ueuessaea su even heuo aHesu AHHH and: seso: esa .uuaao es» unansuao sou
eeuosuoou Hmese esp eee see so» .usMHA esu so .euuase sane seem use eaeoseom asses eous» ms“

:uees eae assess: esa .evsHoa esoue s» s excuse seeeos use execs saHs nees es» HHHA on use Add:

hose .«uuuo e no ence esv so keep e me asap e>es spouses .uued esa so manusaea es» sH .aeues he

uses» use .eaeao scum .euesHse use: on ee>eo enema e>ene beads on as: eseuesu «wage .m seaaaeo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

184

 

 

.eoeHAeuHH e we uees me: seen one no senses esp sH odes ens .e>«x es» euHeuso
souu has seesu «o soda e ueuH>eua sous: ase> e ops“ mstooH ea undeseuom ease
.huon ueeu es» no aduuam one son uecu no even use euoop ueHssn hens .sveeu new
-ue eNHH e s« ue>eaaen eseweaua> «HHHU .esoeaea ueeu hues on pudu sad: ueHHHu
one: eseou eeesu .eesmvesom .eeHaHseu Heae>em he ueaese es: eso case use ee>
lax uses us: eweHHH> uuumo seem .Eoou msoamaues use nosmxuos e me use: me: 9H
emseeen asevaoasu ase> me: an .e>Hx e ueaaeo me: Been ussoa muss .n soauaeo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

185

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 4. This Indian family is working inside a kiva which
does not have a door. The woman on the ladder is entering this
round room through a hole in the ceiling. She is holding a bas-
ket of corn while a man is spinning cotton next to a weaving
loom. The yucca cords on the loom will be made into a blanket.
The other man is chipping an arrowhead. The floor has a hole
leading to the spirit world. The smoke keeps out evil spirits.

 

 

 

 

186

 

 

.ses sueuos sesv goddess one: use .eseea hunch asooe ue>HH .eemeeewu eson .sueev seen us: use
:HusH huuee aesv uesheeu e>es mes» .esovenexe sees: wsmausam an .m ca uHo one s« mmsah space»
esa msuassoo he emeHHH> muse no ewe esp esHsheaeu sec esa .IHMflmmdmumqmmm ueaaeo one meaaoea

hasee no essuuso use euHH esa muses on: eoeuvseHom .ewesmsea seuvuu: e e>eea nos uHu eseHu
:sH e>eo es» eeseoen aaasueaeo evoenoc eeesa esasexe HHH: hose .eueenoo uesuo use .eaoo» .huev
:aca .eesoo .esoos uHo sou wsasoueee use wsumwau one easvoua was» s« eueHaseHoe esa .n soHvaeo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

187

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 6. Members of this cliff village are cooking their eve-
ning meal of corn broth while a hunter enters the cave carrying
a deer. The skin will be used for clothing. the bones will pro-
vide tools. and the sinews will become bowstrings and thread.

These Indians probably lived in caves for protection from their
enemies. Later. they moved out of these cliffs because the wea-
ther became too hot and there was a shortage of food and water.

 

 

 

188

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 7. Before these Indians moved into caves. they lived on
the flat plains in stone—and-adobe houses. Later. they designed
these pugblgs (flat-roofed. adobe homes built on top of each oth-
er. as n th 3 picture). They used ladders instead of doors and
steps. The ladders could be pulled up in case of an enemy attack.
On the left. two men are repairing a wall made of clay and rock.
At the tower. other men are lifting building materials on a rope.

 

 

 

189

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 8. A modern artist painted this picture based on infor-
mation gathered by scientists. Scientists egcavate (or uncover
by digging) old settlements to discover valuable objects made by
early man. In this picture. the Indians are spreading ears of

corn on rooftops. They are cutting the squash in rings and hang-
ing it on sticks to dry. It will be necessary to store this food
for the winter. The food is grown on the plateau above the cave.

 

 

 

190

 

.aos esa sous: soaseso ance e sea: uees ses :0 «H haseo “AH: esm .use: heme
esv exes ca esdu seac se se>o cu oxen HA 3 one .smaeeu esp eusdea esm heuu<
.euses me: sad: uenese ese scan: was mean e sausues eH use .usmHn one so .eHu
luau» as: wsuxoae e so eusooee sew e sou uexen Hess sseo sash sues m« «H .seaea
:eses e exam pH muHou esm .euuuusm eoeaaesqu ses seam ueeso saga usHHeea ea ese
.uuen ecu so .hueuvon use usesn cues mseuusu e>eo es» so: so» wsasosm mu see
no: senusu sheuos ease .haeaaoa es» eues use msdxooo es» uau sesox .m soHvaev

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

191

 

 

.eeusuaso useHose vsooe ence speed ea e: nae: eaoeuause eeess .oue .msmsaouo
.hsevvoa .euoo» me some .mmmmmdmmm ueHHeo one muses sees: an sues euoenoo uao
.mseaae 0H exes o» heao one o» execs ueseeso use usee ueuue eseHusH .eussosw
:xoeo evuss so esmHeeu seeds sad: ueusuea seams me: haeupom .easoo use .euos
Usaxooo .esesovaa .emss msaxsusu uses eues eseuusH uuaau esa asesuemo» Eesu

uesfim use hsepuoa «o museswesu ases uese>ooeuu e>es manuasenom .oH soauseo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

192

 

 

 

 

 

Caption 11. The families in a cave village were interde endent
(they depended on each other for help). About 400 IndIans lIved
together in a large cave village. Here a mother is covering a
bowl with a layer of white clay while her daughter is mixing the
clay with water. In the background. the grandmother is baking
the finished bowls while her grandson gathers firewood. Large
jars were used for storing water during the long and dry summer.

 

 

 

 

193

 

 

.eous scan Essa «sevens op mss: one Ameosmv msameooos esa .hnu ca msHHHeo es» anh mses maauso
we: uez .EoOH s so seguemou mueehsv esp e>ee3 add: e: .sepen .mmea e>nu ussche ueessa Ho shades
esv meaeseaem use mesouesum es .pmsam .uHen e msuxes ma unmas one so see one .0“ epeaaeoo cu
ease: or» asone oxen Han: um .vexmen esp nodes ow msaepm easeueme> ems Add: e: .useHn ersm e
scam aoxmen ueHHoo e mswxes mu whee on» so see one .msoumeose pass» on heHAEam zue> muospes msaes
somehouuses msdxes one msewusm sseuos omens .muses use He em: AsuHHme use evapoesa ehasues seas:
maoenno oaumuose eusaosm mamesoausez .msedusH e>eo es» ow assasossfi use: mauesoause: .NH sowpaeo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

194

 

 

Name

 

QUESTIONS ON THE LIVING HABITS OF WILD CHIMPANZEES

Directions: FirstI it is vepy important for you to read all 12 captions

c ful b ore ou om t th ent nce below.

Part A: Locatipg and Completipg Information

1. Since they (chimps) travel long distances in search of food. we say they

 

are hunters. (The answer is in Caption 2.)
marathon nomadic energetic

2. Small chimps sleep with their mothers until they are about
. (The answer is in Caption 4.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

six months old one year old three years old
3. Since chimps usually eat . we say they are mostly
herbivorous (hfir biv'er as). (The answer is in Caption 5.)
plants . meat
4. By the time they are . they (chimps) can
swing from branch-to-branch. (The answer is in Caption 6.)
one year old two years old four years old
5. A chimp's life span will be about .
(The answer is in Caption 8.)
20 years 45 years 65 years
6. The process of group living is called
socialization (sé'shel i zi'shon). (The answer is in Caption 9.)
independent co-operative
7. It takes only a few minutes to the
branches into a nest. (The answer is in Caption 11.)
bend and interweave tie and connect

8. Chimps are smart enough to make tools out of natural objects. such as
. (The answer is in Caption 12.)

 

tree branches plant stems

 

 

195

 

 

Part B: Com ar Pictur s and Choosin Titles

Directions: Choos the b st titl to describ ach s t of ictur 8. Try to

9.

11.

dec do what all three p ctures have common. Then dpaw a
aro d the t r for the bpgp tI lg.

Look carefully at the pictures 10. Look carefully at the pictures
above captions l. 3. and 2. above captions 2 6 and 11.
a. Chimps Holding Bananas a. Using Tree Branches

b. Chimps Walking and Standing b. Following Each Other

c. Chimps Running Downhill c. Hanging From Branches
Look carefully at the pictures 12. Look carefully at the pictures
above captions 4. 2. Egg l0. above captions 5, 8| gpd 1 .
a. .Taking Care of Children a. Chimps Eating Bananas

b. Cleaning Each Other b. Chimps Using Their Hands
c. Touching Each Other c. Resting Arm on Knee

t C: C eative Think Ski

Di c ion : W it com 1 e nt nce for your answers to the problems
below. ou n ed mo e 3 ac u th bac of th .

13.‘

14.

15.

16.

In the picture above caption 8. you can see that a chimp's big toe is
split apart from his other toes (the same is true of his thumb).
Think of two pgasons why this special feature is useful to chimps.

 

 

Although chimps cannot speak or write like humans. we know they are

very intelligent. Describe two simple egpepimgntg you could try to
test a chimp's intell gence.

 

 

Think of two rgagong why chimps would probably prefer living in a
park instead of a zoo. Why do you think this lady scientist chose
to study chimps in a national park instead of a zoo? ggplpl_.

 

 

Pretend that you want to make friends with some wild chimps. but you
find they are afraid of you. If you could teach them some skills.
they would probably admire you. Describe two skills you will teach
the chimps (consider their physical features and personalities).

 

 

 

 

196

 

 

Name

 

QUESTIONS ON THE LIVING HABITS OF WILD CHIMPANZEES

Part A: Locat Pictures and Com let Information

1. Rgad each caption cgpggplly and decide which picture goes above it.

After you placg gll 12 pictures above their captiong. ask the teacher
for the lppwep Kgy to find out if the pictures are in their correct
positions. Leave the pictures on the board until you have finished
answering all of the questions.

2. Small chimps sleep with their mothers until they are about

 

. (The answer is in Caption 4.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

six months old one year old three years old
3. Since chimps usually eat . we say they are mostly
herbivorous (hfir biv'er as). (The answer is in Caption 5.)
plants _ meat
4. By the time they are . they (chimps) can
swing from branch-to-branch. (The answer is in Caption 6.)
one year old two years old four years old
5. A chimp's life span will be about .
(The answer is in Caption 8.)
20 years 45 years 65 years
6. The process of group living is called
.socialization (sé'shel i zi'shen). (The answer is in ggpplpp_9.)
independent co-operative
7. It takes only a few minutes to the
branches into a nest. (The answer is in Caption 11.)
bend and interweave tie and connect

8. Chimps are smart enough to make tools out of natural objects. such as
. (The answer is in Caption 12.)

 

tree branches plant stems

 

 

197

 

 

9. Since they (chimps) travel long distances in search of food. we say they

 

are hunters. (The answer is in Ca tion 2.)
marathon nomadic energetic
P : Com 1 Pictures and Choos T t s

Qipgctions: Choose thg bgst title to describe each set of pictures. Try to

decide what all three pictures have In common. Then draw
a c rcl oun th tt for the best titlg.

10. Look carefully at the pictures 11. Look carefully at the pictures
above captions 1. 3. and z. . above captions 2 6 and 11.
a. Chimps Holding Bananas a. Using Tree Branches
b. Chimps Walking and Standing b. Following Each Other
c. Chimps Running Downhill c. Hanging From Branches

12. Look carefully at the pictures 13. Look carefully at the pictures
above captions 4I 2. and 1 . above captions 5, 8I and 1 .
a. Taking Care of Children a. Chimps Eating Bananas
b. Cleaning Each Other b. Chimps Using Their Hands
c. Touching Each Other c. Resting Arm on Knee

Part C: Creative Thinking Skill;

Directions: Write complete sentences for your answers to the problems
below. If you need more spaceI use the back of the papgr.

14. In the picture above caption 8. you can see that a chimp's big toe is
split apart from his other toes (the same is true of his thumb).
Think of two reasons why this special feature is useful to chimps.

 

 

15. Although chimps cannot speak or write like humans. we know they are

very intelligent. Descpibe two simplg egperiments you could try to
test a chimp's intell gence.

 

 

16. Think of two reasons why chimps would probably prefer living in a
park {Estead of a zoo. Why do you think this lady scientist chose
to study chimps in a national park instead of a zoo? Egplain.

 

 

 

 

198

 

 

Name

 

ANSWER SHEET FOR THE LIVING HABITS OF WILD CHIMPANZEES

Directions: First. read thg lesson carefully beforp you angwer thg gues-

tions at thg 3nd of the booklgt. Write your answgpp on phig
22222-

Part A: Locatipg and Complgtlpg Infoppgtion

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.
marathon I nomadic A energetic

2.

six months old one year old three years old
3. A

one year old two years old four years old
4.

plants meat
5.

independent co-operative
6.

20 years 45 years 65 years
7.

tree branches plant stems
8.

 

bend and interweave tie and connect

 

 

199

 

 

Part : Com ar Pictures and Choos Titles

Directions: Choose the best titlg to describe each sgt of picturps. Try to
dec de what all three pictures have common. Then dpaw a
cir e ound th tt r for the bes tItl .

9. Look carefully at the pictures 10. Look carefully at the pictures

above captions 1. 3, gpd 2- above captions 2I 6I and l .
a. Chimps Holding Bananas a. Using Tree Branches
b. Chimps Walking and Standing ' b. Following Each Other
c. Chimps Running Downhill c. Hanging From Branches

11. Look carefully at the pictures 12. Look carefully at the pictures
above captions 4I 2. gpg 1 . above captions 5, 8I and 1 .
a. Taking Care of Children a. Chimps Eating Bananas .
b. Cleaning Each Other b. Chimps Using Their Hands
c. Touching Each Other c. Resting Arm on Knee

23;; C: Crgative Thinking Skills

Qipections: Write complete sentencgs for your answers. If you need more
gpacgI use thg back of thg papgr.

13.

 

 

 

14.

 

 

 

15.

 

 

 

16.

 

 

 

 

 

2CH)

 

 

Name

 

QUESTIONS ON CLIFF VILLAGE INDIANS 0F EARLY AMERICA

Dirgctions: FirstI it is vepy important for you to read all 12 captions

ef b for ou com lets the ntence below.

ng3 A: Locating and Completing Information

1. Prehistoric means the time before man
(The answer is in Caption 1.)

 

lived on the earth made written records

2. Each cliff village had many kivas and each one was shared by
. (The answer is in Caption 3.)

 

a single family two families several families

3. The (kiva) floor has a hole leading to
(The answer is in Caption 4.)

 

the spirit world _ another room

4. Scientists who study the life and culture of are
called archaeologists (ar'ki ol'e jists).
(The answer is in ggpplpp_j.)

prehistoric Indians early peoples

5. Pueblos were flat-roofed villages built
(The answer is in Caption z.)

 

inside large caves . on top of each other

6. Scientists excavate (eks'ke vit') old settlements to
. (The answer is in Caption 8.)

 

 

rebuild them discover objects clean them up

7. The bread was made from corn meal and baked
. (The answer is in Caption 9.)

on a hot griddle over a pit inside a clay oven

 

 

8. Artifacts (ar'te fakts') help us to learn more about
. (The answer is in Caption 10.)

 

 

early (ancient) cultures modern cultures

 

 

201

 

 

Part B: Comparlpg Pictppgp and Choosing Titles

Directions: Choose the best title to describe ach s t of icture . Try to
decide what all three pIctures have I5 common. Then dpaw
a cipcle gpound thg lgtpgp for the bgst tItle.

9. Look carefully at the pictures 10. Look carefully at the pictures

above captions 1. 3. ang 5. above captions 2I Z: and 8.
a. Stripes on Cave Ceiling a. Hunters in the Snow
b. Walls of Bricks and Stones b. Climbing Trails and Footholes
c. Shelves Inside Kiva c. Cave Indians at Work

11. Look carefully at the pictures 12. Look carefully at the pictures
above captions 4 6 and 11. above captions 9. 10. and 12.
a. Hunter Carrying Deer a. Bowls and Handicrafts
b. Members Help Each Other b. Legs Wrapped in Cloth
c. Ladder in Middle of Room c. Scientists Examining Pottery

Part C: Creative Thinking Skill;
Directions: Write complete sentences for your answers to the problems
below. f you need more gpacg. use the back of the paper.

13.’ Six of the pictures on this board are paintings and not photographs.

Give the six caption numbers for these paintings. Why don't we have
photographs of these Cave Indians?

 

 

14. Pretend that you are the leader of a tribe of Cave Indians. You know
that it is dangerous and takes too long to carry food and water to the
cave each day. Describe two ways you might solve this problem.

 

 

15. Pretend that you are visiting these old caves with a friend. Your
friend thinks these caves would be a great place to live. Think of
phpee pgapong why these caves could have been a dangerous place to live.

 

 

16., Pretend that you can go back in time and live with some Cave Indian

children about your age. Describe two helpful things you could teach
them and two thlpgs they could teach you.

 

 

 

 

 

ZHDZ

 

 

Name

 

QUESTIONS ON CLIFF VILLAGE INDIANS 0F EARLY AMERICA

Part A: Locating Pictures and Completlpg Information

1. ggad pach caption carggplly and decide which picture goes above it.
After you plgce all 12 pictppgg abovg thpip captionp. ask the teacher

for the Apgypp_§py to find out if the pictures are in their correct
positions. Leave the pictures on the board until you have finished
answering all of the questions.

2. Each cliff village had many kivas and each one was shared by
. (The answer is in Caption 3.)

a single family two families several families

 

3. The (kiva) floor has a hole leading to
(The answer is in Caption 4.)

 

the spirit world another room

4. Scientists who study the life and culture of are
rcalled archaeologists (ar'ki ol'e jists).
(The answer is in Caption 5.)

prehistoric Indians early peoples

5. Pueblos were flat-roofed villages built
(The answer is in Caption z.)

 

inside large caves on top of each other

6. Scientists excavate (eks'ke vit') old settlements to
. (The answer is in Caption 8.)

 

 

rebuild them discover objects clean them up

7. The bread was made from corn meal and baked
. (The answer is in Caption 2.)

 

 

on a hot griddle over a pit inside a clay oven

8. Artifacts (ar'te fakts') help us to learn more about
. (The answer is in Caption 10.)

 

 

early (ancient) cultures modern cultures

 

 

203

 

 

9. Prehistoric means the time before man
(The answer is in Caption 1.)

 

lived on the earth made written records
Part B: Com Pictu s and Choos it s

Dlpgctipnp: Chooge the begt title 30 dgscribg each set of pictupes. Try to
dec do what all three p ctures have In common. Then draw

a gipclg ppoung the lgttgp for the bggt titlE.

10. Look carefully at the pictures 11. Look carefully at the pictures
above captions ly_3y_gpg_5. above captions 2I Z: and 8.
a. Stripes on Cave Ceiling . a. Hunters in the Snow .
b. Walls of Bricks and Stones b. Climbing Trails and Footholes
c. Shelves Inside Kiva c. Cave Indians at Work

12. Look carefully at the pictures 13. Look carefully at the pictures
above captions 4I 6, and l . above captions 9, 10, and 1 .
a. Hunter Carrying Deer a. Bowls and Handicrafts
b. Members Help Each Other b. Legs Wrapped in Cloth
c. Ladder in Middle of Room c. Scientists Examining Pottery

Par: C: Creativg Thinkipg Skills

Dipections: Write completg sentences for your answers to the problems
below. If you nged morg spacg. use the back of thg paper.

14. Six of the pictures on this board are paintings and not photographs.

Give the six caption numbers for these paintings. Why don't we have
photographs of these Cave Indians?

 

 

15. Pretend that you are the leader of a tribe of Cave Indians. You know
that it is dangerous and takes too long to carry food and water to the
cave each day. Describe two way; you might solve this problem.

 

 

16. Pretend that you are visiting these old caves with a friend. Your
friend thinks these caves would be a great place to live. Think of
thrgg rgasong why these caves could have been a dangerous place to live.

 

 

 

 

 

204

 

 

Name

 

ANSWER SHEET FOR CLIFF VILLAGE INDIANS OF EARLY AMERICA

Directions: Figst. rgad the lesson cgpefully bgfore you answer thg gues-
tions at the end of the booklet. Write your answers on this

3.

2823?.

Part A: Locating and Completipg Information

 

lived on the earth

made written records

 

a single family

two families

several families

 

the spirit world

another room

 

prehistoric Indians

early peoples

 

inside large caves

on top of each other

 

rebuild them

discover objects

clean them up

 

on a hot griddle

over a pit

inside a clay oven

 

early (ancient) cultures

modern cultures

 

 

ZCLS

 

 

Part B: Comparipg Plcturgg and Choosing Titles

Directions: Choose the best title to describe each set of picturgs. Try to
decide what all three p ctures have common. Then draw

a cipcle around thg lgppgr for the bggt-IIIIZ.
9. Look carefully at the pictures 10. Look carefully at the pictures

above captions 1. 3. and 5. above captions 2I Z: and 8.
a. Stripes on Cave Ceiling a. Hunters in the Snow
b. Walls of Bricks and Stones b. Climbing Trails and Footholes
c. Shelves Inside Kiva c. Cave Indians at Work

11. Look carefully at the pictures 12. Look carefully at the pictures
above captions 4I 6I and 11. above captions 9. 10. and 12.
a. Hunter Carrying Deer a. Bowls and Handicrafts
b. Members Help Each Other b. Legs Wrapped in Cloth
c. Ladder in Middle of Room c. Scientists Examining Pottery

Part C: Crgative Thinking Skill;

Dipgctions: Write completg sentences for your answers. If you need more
spacgI use thg back of the papgr.

13.

 

 

 

14.

 

 

 

15.

 

 

 

16.

 

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allen. William H. Intellectual abilities and instructional
media design. Audio-Visual Communication Review.
1975: 2.1! 139-170-

Anderson. Rita E. Short-term retention of the where and
when of pictures and words. gourngl of Expgrimen-
tal Ps cholo : General. 1976. 105. 37 - 02.

Asher. Steven R. Influence of topic interest on black
children's and white children's readin comprehen-

sion. Child ngglopmgn . 1979. 59. 68 -690.

Asher. S.. Hymel. S.. & Wigfield. A. Influence of topic
interest on children's reading comprehension.

Journal of Reading Behavior. 1978. lg. 35-47.

Ashley. L. F. Children's reading interests and individual-
izeg reading. Elem nt En li h. 1970. 41. 1088-
109 .

Baumeister. Alfred A. Thematic elaboration and proximity
in children's recall. organization. and long-term
retention of pictorial materials. Journal of Ex-

rimental Child Ps cholo . 1979. g§. 132-148.

Beta Upsilon Chapter. Children's reading interests clas-

sified by age level. Reading Teacher. 1974. pg,
694-700.

Bissell. T.. White. S.. & Zivin. G. Sensory modalities in
children's learning. In Gerald S. Lesser (Ed.).

Psychology and educationgl practice. Glenview.
Illinois: Scott. Foresman and Company. 1971.
Bloom. Benjamin S.. & Krathwohl. David R. Taxonomy of
educational ob'ectiv s: Handbook 1 the co itive
domain. New York: David McKay. 1956.
Borg. Walter R.. & Gall. Meredith D. Educational research:
An introduction. New York: Longman Inc.. 1971.

Bruner. J. 8.. Oliver. R. R.. & Greenfield. P. M. Studies
in cogpitive growth. New York: John Wiley. 1966.

206

20?

Campbell. Donald T.. & Stanley. Julian C. Experimental
and quasi-experimental designs for research on

teaching. In N. L. Gage (Ed.). Handbook of res arch
on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally. 1963.
Davis. Frederick. Item analysis in relation to educational

and psychological testing. Ps cholo ical Bull tin.
1952: O 97.1210

Derevensky. Jeffrey L. Modal preferences and strengths:
Implications for reading research. Journal of

Readlpg thavior. 1978, lg, 7-23.

Duchastel. P. Illustrating instructional texts. Educa-

pional Tgchnology. 1978. l8. 36-39.
Ebel. Robert L. Essintials of educational meapurgment.
Englewood Cl ffs. N.J.: Prentice-Hall Inc.. 1979.
Egeth. H.. Jonides. I.. & Wall. S. Parallel processing of

multi-element displays. Co itive Ps cholo .
1972. 3. 674-698.

Fleming. Malcolm. Eye movement indices of cognitive be-
havior. Audio-Visual Communication Review. 1969.
‘8__'‘‘‘"““‘"“_“_“"“““’

l2! 383-39 0

Fleming. Malcolm. The picture in your mind. Audio-Vigual
Communication R view. 1977. g5. 43-62.

Fleming. Malcolm. On pictures in educational research.
Instru tional Science. 1979. 8. 235-251.

Fleming. Malcolm. & Levie. Howard. Instructional messgge
d si : Princi les from the behavior sciences.
Englewood Cliffs. N.J.: Educational Technology
Publications. 1978.

Ford. M. P. Auditory-visual and tactual-visual integration
in relation to reading ability. Perceptual Motor
Skill . 1967. pp. 831-841.

Forgus. R. H. Perce tion. New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company. 1966.

Fry. Edward. Fry's readability graph: Clarifications. va-
lidity. and extension to level 17. Journal of
Readi ’ 1977. .2—1-5' 2’42‘2520

Gayne. Robert. & Rohwer. William. Instructional psycholo-

gy. In P. Mussen (Ed.). Annual review of psycholo-
gy. 1969. pp, 381-418.

208

Gibson. J. J. The erce tion of the visual world. Boston:
Houghton-Mifflin. I950. .

Gibson. E. J. Ppinciplgp of pepceppugl lggpping and dgvel-
opmgnt. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts. 19 9.

Goldstein. Bruce E. The perception of multiple images.
Audio-Vi ual Communication R view. 1975. pg. 34-68.

Gould. J. Looking at pictures. In R. A. Monty & J. W.

Senders (Eds.). Eye movements and psychological
ppppggfipp. Hillsdale. N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum As-

sociates. 1976.

 

Cropper. George. Learning from visuals: Some behavioral
considerations. Audio-Visual Communication Review.

1966: L4,: 37‘69-

Haber. R. N.. & Hershenson. M. The s cholo of visual
rce tion. New York: Holt. Rinehart and Winston.
1980.

Haring. Marilyn J.. & Fry. Maurine A. Effect of pictures
on children's comprehension of written text. Edu-

cational Communication Technology Journal. 1979.
g1. 185-190.

Hochberg. J. In the mind's eye. In R. N. Haber (Ed.).
Contem orar theo and research in visual erce -
tion. New York: Holt. Rinehart and Winston. 19 8.

Kates. Solis L.. & Yudin. Lee. Concept attainment and mem-
ory. Journal of Educational Ps cholo . 1964. 55.
103‘109 e

Kennedy. John.M. A s cholo of icture rce tion. Jos-
sey-Bass Publishers. 1974.

Knowlton. James Q. On the definition of picture. Audio-
Visual Communication Review. 1966. l4. 157-183.

Koenke. K.. & Otto. W. Contribution of pictures to child-
ren's comprehension of the main idea in reading.

Psychology in the Schools. 1969. p, 298-302.

Kuder. G. F.. & Richardson. M. W. The theory of the esti-
mation of test reliability. Psychometrika. 1937.
.2... 151-1600

Levin. Joel R. What have we learned about maximizing what
children learn? In J. Levin & V. Allen (Eds.).

Co itive learnin in children: Theories and strat-
egies. Academic Press. 1976.

209

Levin. J.. Divine-Hawkins. P.. Kerst. S.. & Guttmann. J.
Individual differences in learning from pictures
and words: The development and application of an

instrument. Journal of Educational ngchology.
197“ 9 éé: 296’303 °

Levin. J.. & Lesgold. A. On pictures in prose. Education-
al Communication Technology Journal. 1978. g5. 233-
2 3.

Loftus. G. R. Eye fixations and recognition memory for
pictures. Co itive Ps cholo . 1972. 3. 525-551.

Lucas. Daniel. Fifth-grade children's preferences for il-
lustrations in middle-grade basal reading materi-
als (Doctoral dissertation. Montana State Universi-

ty. 1977). Dissgrtation Abstractg International.
1977 . 1%. 3270A.

Mehrens. William A.. & Lehmann. Irvin J. Measurement and
evaluation in education and s cholo . New York:
Holt. Rinehart and Winston. 1978.

Myatt. Barbara. & Carter. Juliet M. Picture preferences of
children and young adults. Educational Communica-

pion Technology Journa . 1979. 22. 5-53.

Nelson. Keith E. Memory development in children: Evidence
from nonverbal tasks. P chonomic Science. 1971.

_2_5 ' 3146-3148 e
Norvell. George W. What bo s and irls like to read. Mor-
ristown. N.J.: Silver Burdett Company. 1958.

Odom. Penelope B.. & Nesbitt. Nancy H. Some processes in
children's comprehension of linguistically and vis-

ually depicted relationships. Journal of Ex eri-
mental Child P cholo . 1974. ll. 399-408.

Paivio. A. Mental imagery in associative learning and mem-
ory. Ps cholo ical Revi w. 1969. 16. 241-263.

Paivio. A. On the functional significance of imagery.
Ps cholo ical Bulletin. 1970. 23. 385-392.

Paivio. A. Imagepy and verbal proceppe . New York: Holt.
Rinehart and Winston. 1971.

Peeck. J. Retention of pictorial and verbal content of a
text with illustrations. Journal of Educational
Ps cholo . 1974. pg, 880- .

210

Peng. C.-Y.. & Levin. J. R. Pictures and children's story
recall: Some questions of durability. Educational

Communication Technology Journal. 1979. pg. 39-44.

Perrin. Donald G. A theory of multiple-image communication.
Audio-Visual Communication Review. 1969. l1. 368-
'IF_''—''"“"“““""“"""

3 2.

Piaget. J. The owth of lo ical thinkin . New York: Ba-
sic Books. 1958.

Piaget. J.. & Inhelder. B. The child's conception of space.
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 195 .

Piaget. J.. & Inhelder. B. Mental imagepy in the child.
New York: Basic Books. 1971.

Pressley. Michael. Imagery and children's learning: Putting
the picture in developmental perspective. Review of

Educational Researc . 1977. 42. 585-622.

Pressley. Michael. & Levin. Joel. The development of mental
imggegy retrieval. Child Development. 1980. 5l.
55 -5 0-

Raskin. Larry. & Baker. Georgia. Tactual and visual inte-
gration in the learning processes: Research and im-

lications. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 1975.
-0 .51-‘55.

Reese. H. W. Imagery in children's learning: A symposium.
Ps cholo ical Bulletin. 1970. 13. 3 3-421.

Reynolds. J. H. Cognitive transfer in verbal learning.

Journal of Educational Psychology. 1968. 52. 133-
3 .

Rock. I. An introduction 30 percgption. New York: MacMil-
lan Publishing Co.. 1975.

Rohwer. William D.. Jr. Images and pictures in children's
learning: Research results and educational implica-

tions. Psychological Bulletin. 1970. 23. 393-403.

Rusted. Jennifer. & Coltheart. Veronika. The effects of
pictures on the retention of novel words and prose

passages. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.
1979' g! 51 '52 e

Severin. W. Another look at cue summation. Audio-Visual
Communication Review. 1967. l5. 233-2 5.

211

Shepard. R. N. Recognition memory for words. sentences. ‘
and pictures. Jou al of V rbal Learnin and Ver-
bal Behavior. 1967. 6. 156-163.

Silverston. Randall A.. & Deichmann. John W. Sense modali-
ty research and the acquisition of reading skills.
Revi W’Of Educational Research. 1975. 45. 149-172.

Sloan. M. A. Picture preferences of elementary school
children and teachers (Doctoral dissertation. State
University of New York at Buffalo. 1972). Disser-
tation Abstract International. 1972. 5;. 6018A.

Sperry. Roger W. The great cerebral commissure. Scientif-
ic American. January 1964. pp. 42-52.

Stanley. Julian C. Reliability. In Robert L. Thorndike
(Ed.). Educational measurement. Washington. D.C.:
American Council on Education. 1971.

Travers. Robert. & Alvarado. Victor. The design of pic-
tures in teaching children in elementary school.

Audio-Visual Communication Review. 1970. l8. 47-64.

Whipple. G. Appraisal of the interest appeal of illustra-

téons. Elgmentapy School Journal. 1953. 53. 262-
2 9.

Wright. J. M.. Gebhard. P.. & Karttunen. M. A developmen-
tal study of the recall of spatial location. Jour-

nal of Experimental Child Psychology. 1975. pg.
1 1‘190e