A comparison of student performance in

Instead, two graphs depicting student progress and teacher integrity were shared with the teacher. Teachers were trained to implement function-based treatment packages to address student problem behavior. Off-task behavior was defined as any motor behaviors lasting a minimum of 3 s or verbalizations that were not permitted or were unrelated to the assigned academic task.

During pretraining baseline, teachers had not yet been trained on the intervention procedures. Data collected from the tests and questionnaire was used to generate the statistics.

Can Online Courses Deliver In-class Results?

Previous factor analyses revealed that all items loaded onto a single factor, termed general acceptability Martens et al. She had an MA degree in elementary education and was certified in preschool and elementary education. The results may be important because of claims made by supporters of technology-based education.

He had a BA and was certified in elementary education in two states. Because the student was able to escape the lesson by engaging in these behaviors during baseline, the teacher was asked to implement an intervention plan similar to that described for Student A on-task behavior was rewarded with escape from task demands and access to an alternative activity within a token reinforcement program.

Dyad D Teacher D, a Caucasian woman, had been a teacher in a special education class of 6 students for 1 year. Teachers were provided all necessary materials e. Allow the student to select a reward icon from back of chart reward that allows him to leave work area and move the icon to the choice box.

Table 1 Intervention Components for Student A 1. The study was conducted at a technical college in Atlanta, Georgia. After the student earns five stickers he should receive his reward of a break.

Once treatment integrity decreased and was stable two consecutive data points within 20 percentage points following initial training, the consultant met with each teacher to set a goal for student behavior based on baseline performance. He taught a class of 5 students.

The training consisted of coaching and immediate corrective feedback. The first author served as the consultant for all four dyads. The results were expected to provide instructors, administrators, policy makers, and software program writers a better understanding of instructional techniques that can be incorporated along with technology, thus improving student learning and subsequently improving student performance in the class.

In one condition, a package of three interventions was used with teachers. The teacher was then asked to set a goal for herself regarding the number of praise statements she would provide for these behaviors within daily min sessions. The treatment integrity analysis included six phases: At the start of this phase, the consultant explicitly described the contingency to each teacher.

A second goal of this study was to replicate the findings of DiGennaro et al. Once treatment integrity decreased or was stable, the next phase was introduced.

He had been referred for a variety of off-task behaviors including work refusal, disruption, sleeping, and teasing others. The following day, the consultant began training while the teacher implemented the intervention in the classroom.

Implementation Baseline Following initial training, teachers implemented the plan without assistance or feedback from the consultant.

Treatment Effectiveness To assess the effectiveness of the intervention, the first and third authors also collected data on student problem behavior.

Therefore, the identified target behavior for Student A was off-task behavior, defined as any motor behaviors that lasted a minimum of 3 s or verbalizations that were not permitted or were unrelated to the assigned academic task.

He had been enrolled in the school for just under 4 years. Integrity was maintained at high levels when the package was faded to once a week and then once every 2 weeks. A pretest was administered to the students enrolled in face-to-face traditional class at the beginning of the quarter which determined the weak areas of the student.

A copy of the adapted version of this scale is available from the first author. Teachers were provided with daily written feedback and time-series line graphs of their performance and that of their respective students.

Common behaviors included walking around the room, flopping on the floor, and looking through books during times when this was not allowed.A Comparison of Student Persistence and Performance in Online and Classroom Business Statistics Experiences.

Authors. Constance H. McLaren. Analytical Department, School of Business, Indiana State University, Terre Haute A Comparison of Student Performance in Three Learning Modes, Journal of Education for Business, The flipped classroom: A comparison of student performance using instruc-tional videos and podcasts versus the lecture-based model of instruction.

Issues in Informing Science and Information Student Performance Using Instructional Videos and Podcasts versus the Lecture-Based Model of Instruction Retta Guy and Gerald Marquis Tennessee State. 1 a comparison of student performance in single -sex education and coeducational settings in urban middle schools by craig erico ogden (under the direction of linda m.

arthur). curricula at most colleges and universities in the united states are scheduled accord- ing to quarters or semesters.

while each schedule has several potential advantages over the other, it is unclear what effect each has on student performance. A Comparison of Student Performance and Satisfaction in an Online versus a Face-to-face Introductory Sociology Course Adam Driscoll, Karl Jicha, Andrea N.

Newly Released State-by-State Snapshot of Educational Performance. Percent of students, by state, deemed proficient in 4th and 8th grade reading and math on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for students overall, with separate state-by-state comparisons for Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and students with disabilities.

Download
A comparison of student performance in
Rated 5/5 based on 61 review