Date of Award

1972

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Author's Department

Zoology

First Advisor

Patrick J. Docter

Abstract

During Fall Quarter, 1970, 339 students enrolled in life science taught by the audio-tutorial method and 492 students in life science by the traditional method at Eastern Illinois University. This total population was compared with respect to achievement as measured by grades. A sample of 175 students was drawn from the population. The 76 audio-tutorial students were compared with the 99 students from traditional sections with respect to achievement as measured by grades earned, retention of material, and predicted grade point average.

The study was designed: 1) To compare the achievement in life science as measured by grades of those students who had been taught by the audio-tutorial method with those who had been taught by the traditional method. 2) To compare the success as measured by grades earned of the students who had life science by the audio-tutorial method with those who had life science by the traditional method in their subsequent biological courses. 3) To compare the retention as measured by the CLEP Test of material from these courses between the two groups.

Predicted grade point average was used to equate and evaluate grades and retention scores.

Data collected from the entire population of students indicated that students taught by the audio-tutorial method earned significantly higher grades in life science than those taught by the traditional method. A comparison of grades earned in subsequent biological courses showed no differences.

A comparison of the two teaching methods indicated that the achievement level of students taught by the audio-tutorial method in life science as measured by retention did significantly better than those taught by the traditional method.

Comparisons of achievement as measured by retention showed that audio-tutorial students surpassed the regular students from the traditional method in all categories except that in which life science, botany and zoology were considered inclusively. Differences were not significant except in the latter.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Share

COinS