Aptitude- versus content-treatment interactions

Journal of Instructional Development 06/1982; 5(4):15-27. DOI: 10.1007/BF02905228


Interest in adapting instructional methodology to accommodate individual learner characteristics has been stimulated by the
recent popularity of aptitude-by-treatment interaction research. While relevant to a descriptive theory of learning, ATI has
failed to provide an adequate conceptual or empirical basis for a prescriptive set of adaptive instructional designs. The
validity of adaptive designs as a focus for interaction research is questioned. Based upon cognitive task analysis and content
analysis, the search for content-treatment interactions and their applications to instructional development should make adaptive
designs more feasible, efficient, and consistent as well as developing important cognitive skills that may be short-circuited
by learner-adaptive designs. Examples of research-based content-treatment interactions are provided.

75 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examined the effect that systematically loading story presentations with criterion information has on the recall of abstract and concrete prose. Results indicated that aal plus picture presentations were most effective for the learning of both abstract and concrete content. Furthermore, the loading of additional detail into visual presentations resulted in greater recall than with simple pictures and also provided a greater supplementary effect to oral prose. © 1983 Association for Educational Communications and Technology.
    Educational Technology Research and Development 06/1983; 31(2):103-109. DOI:10.1007/BF02766727 · 1.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The transition to cognitive theories and assumptions about learning which began in psychology a quarter of a century ago are slowly being implemented in the practice of educational technology. Educational technology and instructional design are also in transition. Although the descriptive bases of educational technologies are accepted to be in cognitive psychology, the practical, predictive implications of it that form the processes of educational technologies are not obvious. However, the trend is ineluctable. The failure to provide generalizable instructional techniques and media has forced us to shift our emphasis from what we do to what the learners do. Instructional procedures need to be concerned with how learners are processing the information they contain. Educational technologies need to become learner‐oriented. Our task is to improve learners’ integration and reorganization of knowledge ‐‐ not simply to convey material or control behaviour. The goal of new technologies, such as learning strategies, is to promote independent, self‐motivated learners who are capable of initiating, selecting, and using appropriate strategies for acquiring, retaining, and using knowledge. That, I contend, is a more productive and constructive instructional goal than the transmission of content or the control of behaviour.
    Innovations in Education and Training International 02/1985; 22(1):26-34. DOI:10.1080/1355800850220104
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this study, the performance and attitudes toward instruction of learners working individually on a computer-based sex education lesson were compared with those of learners working cooperatively in dyads. A tatal of 60 eighth-graders received treatments that either required individual work or encouraged cooperation with a partner. Results indicated that students who worked cooperatively significantly outperformed those who worked individually. On an attitude measure, interactions were detected between instructional method and gender, as well as among instructional method, gender, and ability. High-ability males and females reported comparable attitudes toward each instructional method, but ratings for low-ability students were differentiated according to instructional method: Low-ability males responded most favorably, while low-ability females responded least favorably to individualized methods, and low-ability females responded most favorably and low-ability males least favorably to cooperative methods.
    Educational Technology Research and Development 05/1989; 37(2):15-24. DOI:10.1007/BF02298287 · 1.09 Impact Factor