The Study of Mastery Testing Strategy Versus an Averaging Testing Strategy
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
AuthorWhitford, Melinda M.
Style Of Learning
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractIn addition to the traditional learning style, an alternative approach is mastery learning. Traditional classroom settings typically include lectures and seat work. These methods are believed to support a masculine style of learning, as they are more individualistic and competitive. Boys tend to respond to questions quickly and confidently. Girls tend to wait longer and choose words more carefully. This leads to male students dominating the classroom. Mastery learning encourages a more cooperative style of learning. Mastery learning theorizes that if students are given the necessary amount of time needed to attain a mastery of a skill, and if the student spent that much time learning the skill, then the student would reach mastery. This master thesis examined the two different testing strategies to see if mastery learning can be appropriate for use in the school system. The study compared two testing strategies in a high school Regents chemistry class. The first allowed students to retake tests and quizzes up to three times, if desired, and the average for all taken would be recorded. The second strategy demanded an 80% or higher mastery level for each unit. Failure to reach 80% would result in a zero. Possible grades for this strategy were 0, 80, 90, and 100. Two teachers used both testing strategies using traditional methods alongside cooperative activities. Results show that there is no significant difference between testing strategies when examining exam averages and passing percentages, however students had a significantly higher percentage of achieving an 80 or higher in the mastery testing strategy. Girls in particular performed much better with the mastery strategy than with the averaging strategy.
DescriptionAbstract created by repository to aid in discovery.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
E-Learning: How Constructivist Learning Theory Guides Module LearningCannarelli, Gabriella; Kahn, Russell; Advisor; Schneider, Steven; Reviewer (2016-12-01)This paper will review the theory behind constructivism and how it connects to module based e-learning. Social and cognitive constructivism have similar views, but they are very different. Constructivism calls for a student to learn based off of previous experiences and building on that knowledge to make new assumptions. People argue the effectiveness of module learning, but many find it to be the up and coming way of learning. Technology usage is getting greater and greater all the time so why not shift how we do education? e-learning is the way of the future. Learning modules utilizing learning management systems offer a direct route to both successful learning, but also connects to the theory around constructivism.
Mathematical Learning Centers and their Impact on Students’ Mathematical Learning and UnderstandingLantzer, Erin Miner; The College at Brockport (2008-05-01)Students often struggle with mathematical word problems because they often cannot decide what steps they need to take to solve the problem. In this study, the author explores how learning centers impact the learning needs and problem-solving skills of diverse students, as well as how they might create opportunities for student collaboration. The researcher performed a case study focusing on three fourth grade students within her classroom—one higher achieving, one average, and one lower achieving. Learning centers were set up within the classroom for approximately eight weeks, during which the researcher observed students’ behavior. The researcher found that two of the three students lacked confidence in their problem solving skills, all three had difficulty identifying and discriminating between relevant and irrelevant information within the problem, and that students did not consistently apply problem solving strategies when at the centers. The researcher also found that the learning centers had the negative effect of making students implicitly aware of each other’s strengths and weaknesses, increasing their self-consciousness and sensitivity to differentiated instruction. Ultimately, the researcher found that the learning center provided a flexible, individualized learning environment that increased students’ problem solving skills and confidence in using mathematical language.
Inclusion or Self-Contained Reading: Where Do Learning Disabled Students Learn Better?Begy, Gerald; McAdoo, Kristin Lynne; The College at Brockport (1999-08-01)The purpose of this study was to determine in which type of classroom learning disabled students are more successful at learning to read. Some school districts believe that total inclusion is better for special education children's learning, while others believe that reading should be taught to students classified as learning disabled in self-contained classrooms. The subjects involved in this study were twelve sixth grade learning disabled students in a rural Orleans County school district. These twelve students included all sixth grade learning disabled students enrolled in the district for the duration of the study. Six students, along with thirteen non-classified students, participated in the inclusion reading class taught by one regular education teacher and one special education teacher. Six other students were taught in the self-contained reading class by the same special education teacher. According to achievement test scores listed on the students' Individualized Education Plans, students in both classes had comparable ability levels. The t-test of repeated measures was used to compare the self-contained reading class to the inclusion reading class on both the Degrees of Reading Power test and the Bader Informal Reading Inventory Graded Word List. The man growth was compared for each class on each assessment. Using a 95% confidence level and a critical t of 2.571, there was no statistically significant difference between the two classes on either test. The null hypothesis failed to be rejected. These results show that learning disabled students are successful at learning to read in either type of class. Both groups showed acceptable growth in one school year, yet there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups.