Prabhakar, S. (1995). Development of Software for Computer Aided Instruction and its Comparison with Tradition Method for Teaching Physics at Plus II level. Unpublished. Ph.D., Education. Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya. Indore,M.P.
The objectives of study were: (1) To develop computer software for computer aided instruction for teaching selected topics in physics, namely, semiconductors’, P-N Junctions’ and Electro-Magnetic Induction’. (2) To study the effectiveness of CAI material in terms of achievement and reaction towards CAI material. (3) To compare the achievement of (a) class XII students taught through CAI with those taught through traditional method, (b) class XII students with those of class XI students both taught through CAI, and (c) male students with female students of class XI taught through CAI by considering intelligence, pretest, attitude towards science, adjustment, personality and study habits separately as covariates. (4) To compare the reaction towards CAI material (a) of class XII students with those of class XI students both taught through CAI, (b) of male students with those female students of XI both taught through CAI, and (c) of male students with those of female students of class XII both taught through CAI by considering intelligence, achievement, attitude towards science, adjustment, personality and study habits separately as covariates. (5) To study the effect of treatment, adjustment with its various dimension and interaction on achievement separately. (6) To study the effect of treatment, attitude towards science and their interaction on achievement. (7) To study the effect of treatment, study habits and their interaction on achievement.
The hypotheses of study were: (1) The adjusted mean achievement scores
of class XII students taught through CAI do not differ significantly
from those taught through traditional method when intelligence is
considered as covariate. (2) The adjusted mean achievement score of
class XII students taught through CAI do not differ significantly from
through traditional method when pretest is considered as covariate. (3)
The adjusted mean achievement scores of class XII students taught
selected topics of physics through CAI do not differ significantly from
those taught through traditional method when pretest is considered as
covariate separately. (4) The adjusted mean achievement scores of class
XII students taught through CAI do not differ significantly from those
taught through traditional method when attitude towards science,
emotional adjustment, social adjustment, educational adjustment,
personality and study habits is considered as covariate separately. (5)
The adjusted mean achievement scores of class XII students taught
through CAI do not differ significantly from class XI students also
taught through CAI when intelligence, pretest, attitude towards science,
adjustment, personality and study habits is considered as covariate
separately. (6) The adjusted mean achievement scores of male students of
class XI do not differ significantly from female students both taught
through CAI when intelligence, pretest, attitude towards science,
adjustment, personality and study habits is considered as covariate
separately. (7) The adjusted mean achievement scores of male students of
class XII taught through CAI do not differ significantly from female
students also taught through CAI when intelligence, pretest, attitude
towards science, adjustment, personality, study-habits is considered as
covariate separately. (8) The adjusted mean reaction scores of class XII
students taught through CAI do not differ significantly from class XI
students also taught through CAI when intelligence, pretest,
achievement, attitude towards science, personality and study habits is
considered as covariate separately. (9) The adjusted mean reaction
scores of male students and female students of class XI both taught
through CAI do not differ significantly when intelligence, achievement,
attitude towards science, adjustment, personality and study habits is
considered as covariate separately. (10) The adjusted mean reaction
scores of male students of class XII do not differ significantly from
female students both taught through CAI when intelligence, achievement,
attitude towards science, adjustment, personality and study habit is
considered as covariate separately. (11) There will be no significance
effect of (a) treatment, personality and their interaction, (b)
treatment, emotional adjustment and their interaction, (c) treatment,
emotional adjustment and their interaction, (d) treatment, social
adjustment and their interaction, (e) treatment, educational adjustment
and their interaction, (f) treatment, adjustment and their interaction,
(g) treatment, attitude towards science and their interaction, and (h)
treatment, study habits and their interaction on the achievement of
students separately.
Sample comprised 203 students of class XI and XII of Indore city school where CBSE syllabus is being followed.
The tools used for measuring variables were: Study Habits Inventory by M. Mukhopadhyay and D.N. Sansanwal, Science Attitude Scale by Avinash Grewal, Maudsley Personality Inventory by S.S. Jalota and S.D. Kapoor, Adjustment Inventory by A.K.P. Singh and R.P. Singh, Standard Progressive Matrices by J.C. Raven, and criterion test on selected topics of physics and Reaction Scale for assessing Reaction towards CAI material were developed by investigator.
The present study was experimental and pretest-posttest control group design was used. The two groups were equated with respect to intelligence.Sex, pretest, attitude towards science, adjustment and personality were the moderate variables.
Data analyses were performed with the help of percentile, mean, correlated t-test, coefficient of variance, chi-square test, ANOVA and ANCOVA.
The findings of study were: (1) The CAI material was found to be effective in terms of achievement and reaction towards CAI material of both class XI and XII students. (2) The CAI was found to be significantly superior to traditional method in terms of achievement of class XII students when moderate variables were considered as covariates separately. (3) The class XII students achieved significantly higher than class XI students both taught through CAI when moderate variables were taken as covariates separately. (4) CAI was found to be equally beneficial to both males and females of class XI in terms of achievement when moderate variables were considered as covariates separately. (5) CAI was found to be equally beneficial to both males and females of class XII in terms of achievement when moderate variables were considered as covariates separately. (6) Class XI students were found to be have significantly more favorable reaction towards CAI material than class XII students when moderate variables were considered as covariates separately. (7) Class XI and class XII males as well as females were found to have equally favorable reaction towards CAI material when moderate variables were considered as covariates separately. (8) The CAI was found to be significantly superior to traditional method in terms of achievement of students. (9) The achievement was found to be independent of personality as well as interaction between treatment and personality. (10) The achievement was found to be independent of personality, adjustment, emotional adjustment, social adjustment, educational adjustment, attitude towards science, and their interaction with treatment separately. The CAI was found to benefit both students with poor as well as good educational adjustment. (11) The study habits as well as interaction between treatment and study habits were not found to influence significantly the achievement of students.
Keyword(s): Computer Aided Instruction , Computer Aided Instruction , Teaching Physics, Plus II level