The Effect of Semantic Maps and Different Adjunct Processing Strategies on Student Achievement of Different Types of Learning Outcomes
Open Access
- Author:
- Yamashiro, Kelly Ann Chiemi
- Graduate Program:
- Instructional Systems
- Degree:
- Doctor of Philosophy
- Document Type:
- Dissertation
- Date of Defense:
- October 09, 2001
- Committee Members:
- Carol Ann Dwyer, Committee Member
Edgar Paul Yoder, Committee Member
Kyle Leonard Peck, Committee Member
Francis M Dwyer Jr., Committee Chair/Co-Chair - Keywords:
- semantic maps
adjunct questions
metacognitive prompts
cognitive feedback - Abstract:
- The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of different adjunct processing strategies in complementing semantic maps embedded within instructional text on student achievement of different types of learning outcomes. The adjunct strategies used to complement embedded semantic maps were adjunct post-questions, metacognitive process prompts, and cognitive feedback. The 270 participants in this study were Taiwanese undergraduate students majoring in English as a foreign language at a private institute of technology in Taiwan. Subjects were divided into two groups—Group A and Group B. Subjects in each group were randomly assigned to one of four treatment subgroups—Treatment 1 received computer-based instructional text with embedded semantic maps; Treatment 2 received computer-based instructional text with embedded semantic maps and adjunct post-questions; Treatment 3 received computer-based instructional text with embedded semantic maps, adjunct post-questions, and metacognitive process prompts; and Treatment 4 received computer-based instructional text with embedded semantic maps, adjunct post-questions, metacognitive process prompts, and cognitive feedback. Prior to receipt of the computer-based instruction, subjects in Group A were not given strategy training on semantic maps and metacognitive process prompts, but subjects in Group B received one hour of strategy training on semantic maps and, if applicable, one hour of strategy training on metacognitive process prompts. Upon completion of the computer-based instruction, all subjects were given three multiple-choice tests to measure immediate achievement on three different learning outcomes. One week later, all subjects were given the same three multiple-choice tests to measure delayed achievement on the three different learning outcomes. Multivariate analysis of variance revealed no significant differences in both immediate testing and in delayed testing on the criterion tests' scores among the varied semantic map treatments regardless of whether strategy training was or was not provided. However, a doubly repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance revealed that the main effect within-factor variable of time was significant. Further analysis using one-sample t tests revealed that several test score difference values were not significantly different from zero, indicating that several test scores achieved in immediate testing were not significantly different from those achieved one week later in delayed testing. From the results, it was concluded that the costs to develop and administer the strategy training could be saved because the training on semantic maps and metacognitive process prompts did not significantly improve students' immediate and delayed achievement on the three learning outcomes. However, it was thought that if more training was provided that included practice on using the strategies, the results might have favored those who received strategy training. It was also concluded that the combination of empirically and theoretically based strategies does not necessarily enhance learning. The effectiveness of such strategies may be realized when used alone. However, when used in combination, the theoretical functions might interact with one another to the point of creating either an innocuous or an adverse effect on achievement.