The effectiveness and cost of two alternate models of formative evaluation for printed instructional materials was investigated. Ten instructional designers were divided into two groups: one group of five designers formatively evaluated and revised a printed module of instruction using student data as a basis for making the revisions; the other group of five designers used instructional editing guidelines incorporating the attributes of effective instruction, to make the revisions. Instructional effectiveness was based upon: (a) student performance on the module posttest, and (b) a content analysis of the modules. The data revealed no significant difference in student performance between the two formative evaluation models. However, it cost significantly more to develop the modules in which student data was used. The content analysis also revealed differences between the ten modules in terms of the attributes listed in the instructional editing guidelines. The modules revised by the designers who used the instructional editing guidelines incorporated more of the attributes of effective instruction than the modules revised by the designers who used student data. However, the modules revised on the basis of student data more consistently matched instructional content and posttest items. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 43-09, Section: A, page: 2873. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1982.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fsu.edu/oai:fsu.digital.flvc.org:fsu_74922 |
| Contributors | GOLAS, KATHARINE CARROLL., Florida State University |
| Source Sets | Florida State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text |
| Format | 138 p. |
| Rights | On campus use only. |
| Relation | Dissertation Abstracts International |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds