Title

A Comparison of Computer-Assisted and Traditional Drill and Practice on Elementary Students' Vocabulary Knowledge and Attitude Toward Reading Instruction

Date of Award

1986

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Education (EdD)

Department

Educational Studies and Research

First Advisor

C. Warren McKinney

Advisor Department

Educational Studies and Research

Abstract

The purposes of this research were to: (a) determine the effects of computer-assisted and traditional vocabulary drill and practice on elementary basal reading students' vocabulary knowledge; (b) determine if computer-assisted and traditional vocabulary drill and practice affect students of high reading ability and low reading ability differently; (c) determine if computer-assisted and traditional vocabulary drill and practice affect males and females differently; and (d) determine the effects of computer-assisted and traditional drill and practice on students' attitudes toward reading instruction. Fifty-one fourth, fifth, and sixth grade students enrolled in two basal reading classes were randomly assigned to basal reading classes and to one of two treatment groups. Stratification of the groups was based on gender and reading ability as measured by the vocabulary subscore of the California Achievement Test. Students were pretested using an attitude scale to determine attitude toward reading instruction. At the end of the four week period, students were given a 64 item vocabulary test and an attitude posttest. Results of a three factor ANOVA indicated that the group taught using computer-assisted instruction scored significantly higher than the traditional group on the vocabulary test. A significant interaction was found between method of vocabulary drill and practice and reading ability. There were no significant differences between the scores of males and females. Results of a three factor ANCOVA indicated that students who received computer-assisted drill and practice exhibited significantly more positive attitudes toward reading instruction than those who received traditional drill and practice. No significant interactions were found between method of drill and practice and gender or method of drill and practice and ability.