Teacher versus the computer for instruction: a study

Abstract

Computer assisted instruction (CAI) was tested for effectiveness within a small group of midwifery students. The topic covered was ‘Interpretation of a cardiotocograph (CTG)’ which is normally taught in a one hour tutorial session. Nine pre-registration students were chosen at random to be taught either by tutorial or a CAI package that had been written for medical students. A test of CTG interpretation was given to the whole group before instruction and the test was repeated, two weeks after instruction. The scores of the CAI group improved in the post-test compared to their pre-test scores, whereas the tutorial group showed no improvement. However, the pre-test revealed a higher level of prior knowledge in the group receiving the tutorial, compared to the group who were allocated to CAI. We conclude from the study that the CAI package was effective as the knowledge of the group given CAI improved and the improvement was maintained over a two week period. As the prior knowledge of the groups receiving CAI and tutorial instruction was different, we cannot compare the methods of Instruction. The similarity of some of the pre-test results led us to believe that there may have been bias due to collaboration. Although only four students were in one group and five in the other, improvement was significant for the CAI group (Student's t-test P=O.04 for post-test compared to pre-test This study has given us information with which to proceed to a study of larger numbers of students in which greater precautions will be taken to prevent collaboration motivated by inadequate knowledge in the pre-test.