Problem: This study is related to the controversy surrounding the relative merits of teaching by discovery and expository methods. Specifically, it investigated the effectiveness of treatment with simple enumeration as a strategy for discovery compared to treatment using an expository method. It was hypothesized that the two treatments would yield the same mathematical achievement, but the simple enumeration treatment would yield more mathematical and non-mathematical transfer effect than the expository treatment. Procedure: The subjects comprised six classes in Mathematics 12. They had been randomly assigned to classes at the beginning of the school year and three classes were assigned to each treatment group. All classes were taught a unit on arithmetic and geometric progressions by the experimenter. Equivalence of the groups was established in terms of the covariates I. Q. and previous term mark. The measuring instruments consisted of the Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test, Form 1, Level H of the 1964 Multi-Level Edition; a mathematical content test; and a mathematical transfer test. In addition, the Nonverbal Battery of Form 1 of the Lorge-Thorndike Test was used as a pretest to measure the ability of students to generalize and discover principles from examples. Form 2 was used as a posttest measure to determine whether any improvement in ability to generalize had occurred as a result of the experience with the unit on progressions. The generalized t-test was used to compare means of achievement on all tests. All results were analysed at the University of British Columbia Computing Centre. Conclusions: On the basis of results on the tests, the following conclusions were reached: 1. Treatment with simple enumeration yielded the same level of mathematical achievement as treatment with an expository method. 2. Treatment with simple enumeration yielded significantly greater effect on a mathematical transfer test than treatment with an expository method. An examination of I. Q. levels showed that the superiority in performance was largely located at the medium I. Q. level. 3. Treatment with simple enumeration was no more effective than treatment with an expository method when the criterion measured general transfer. Both groups showed significant improvement in ability to generalize after studying the unit on arithmetic and geometric progressions. The improvement was mainly located at the medium and low I. Q. levels and was independent of teaching method. The implication of this study is that if concern is centred on acquisition of facts, simple enumeration is no more effective than an expository teaching method. However, if there is concern for pupil participation and for training students to advance independently to related but more difficult material, then discovery-orientated lessons are advantageous. / Education, Faculty of / Graduate

Thesis (Ed. D.)--West Virginia University, 2005. / Title from document title page. Document formatted into pages; contains xiii, 111 p. : ill. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 103-107).

Thesis (M. Ed.)--University of Hong Kong, 1994. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.Ed.)--University of Hong Kong, 1994. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available in print.

No description available.

Thesis--M.A.(Ed.), University of Hong Kong. / Typewritten.

The investigation examined differences in learning efficiency produced by two different methods of discrimination training among regular placement fifth-grade pupils. It was designed to explore possible between-group differences in rate of learning, length of training, mastery rate, recall of learning, and task persistence following training. The experiment consisted of training, an interference task, and a concluding posttest. Two independent groups were formed by random assignment of subjects. The experimental group began training with graduated stimulus change trials--that is, subjects were presented with a succession of three visual discrimination tasks consisting of six trials per task designed to teach correct responding before incorrect alternatives were gradually introduced. Control subjects did not receive graduated stimulus change trials. Instead, they began each task in the training phase with more complex discriminations at trial seven. Pennies were used for reinforcement of correct choices in each group; incorrect selection resulted in no reinforcer delivery. Both groups were then administered a brief exercise designed to inhibit the recall of acquired discriminations. All subjects concluded with a 54-item posttest consisting of intermingled trials from the three-task training phase. The first 21 items were considered mandatory, but the final 33 were optional (i.e., subjects were instructed to complete as many items as they wished and informed that each correct selection earned a penny). Results indicated that graduated stimulus change (GSC) learners committed significantly fewer errors learning the discriminations and mastered significantly more of the training tasks presented than did trial-and-error learners. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the length of training nor in the degree of persistence during posttest voluntary responding. GSC subjects also committed significantly fewer errors on recall than controls although the degree of absolute forgetting in each group was not significantly different. The findings suggest that regular placement, "easy-to-teach" pupils can profit from GSC programming in several important ways. Without lengthening the training process, stimulus control methodologies can render instruction more efficient than trial-and-error procedures for nonimpaired learners. The need is apparent for further experimental research on the application of errorless discrimination procedures to other areas and levels of education. / Department of Educational Psychology

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Michigan State University. Dept. of Teacher Education, 2008. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed Aug. 17, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 186-190). Also issued in print.

Thesis (M.A.(Ed.))--University of Hong Kong. / Also available in print.

Thesis (Ed.D.) -- Central Connecticut State University, 2005. / Thesis advisor: Richard Arends. "... in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 61-72). Also available via the World Wide Web.