Record Details
Evaluation of multi-level reading materials, intra-class discussion techniques and student experimentations on achievement in fifth grade elementary science
ScholarsArchive at Oregon State University
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | Evaluation of multi-level reading materials, intra-class discussion techniques and student experimentations on achievement in fifth grade elementary science |
| Names |
Fryback, William Herbert
(creator) Williamson, Stanley E. (advisor) |
| Date Issued | 1965-05-10 (iso8601) |
| Note | Graduation date: 1965 |
| Abstract | The purpose of this study was to statistically evaluate one kind of new elementary science curriculum materials. The materials; (1) are written at five reading levels to partially meet the reading ability spread found in the intermediate grades, (2) provide ways to stimulate class discussion, and (3) provide three levels of sophistication for student experimentation on both an individual and a class basis. The significance of each of these parts was evaluated by an analysis of variance. Population: The materials were used with 29 fifth grade classes in three school districts within a radius of 60 miles of Portland. The classes were divided into six different treatment groups which were distributed among the schools. Treatment Groups: The six treatment groups were composed as follows: Treatment 1. Students read only the middle (C) level of the five reading levels provided in a full set of the materials. They discussed the materials and also carried out the experiments provided with the (C) level materials. Treatment 2. Students read, according to ability, at three levels; A (the lowest), C (average) and E (the highest). Students discussed the materials and worked the experiments provided with these three reading levels. Treatment 3. Students read, according to ability, the materials at five reading levels; A, B, C, D, E. They discussed the materials and worked the experiments provided in the full set of materials. Treatment 4. Students used the materials as in Treatment 3 except they did not discuss any of the materials with their teacher or classmates. Treatment 5. Students used the materials as in Treatment 3 except they did not work any of the experiments. Treatment 6. Students did not use any of the materials. Null Hypotheses Tested: There are no greater differences in achievement on criterion test items about atmosphere, among classes of fifth grade students who: (1) study materials written at one, three or five reading levels, (2) do, or do not interact in classroom discussion, or (3) do, or do not perform both individual and group science experiments, than would be expected to result from the vagaries of random sampling frorn a single, normally distributed, infinite population. Results: 1. There were no significant differences on achievement gain scores among the first three treatment groups. 2. There were no significant differences on achievement gain scores among any of the first three treatment groups and treatment group four. 3. There was a significant difference on achievement gain scores between treatment group five and any of the other treatment groups. Conclusions: Based on the results of this 1. There are no advantages investigation it can be stated that: in achievement for students who respectively read these materials written at their reading ability level. 2. There are no achievement advantages to students who discuss these materials with other members of their class. 3. There are significant achievement advantages to students who work the science experiments provided in these materials. The results indicate to the researcher that science experiments which involve active participation on the part of the learner provide significant advantage to him and that they might well be made the central part of elementary science curriculum materials. Although the provisions for reading ability levels and class discussion did not show significant influence on achievement, further investigation needs to be carried out to evaluate their effectiveness on other objectives; (1) arousing curiosity in science, (2) stimulating creativeness, and (3) developing skills of inquiry. |
| Genre | Thesis/Dissertation |
| Topic | Science -- Study and teaching |
| Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/1957/48437 |
