Student Response to Differentiated Learning Tasks in CML

Abstract

This paper describes reactions of student teachers to a computer‐managed course of study involving distinctive types of learning experiences in curriculum theory.

A post‐facto analysis based on use of the system, academic achievement, satisfaction and tests of ‘locus of control’ and ‘ambiguity tolerance’ was made.

Results indicate that students who see themselves as responsible for their achievement (internals) did achieve better results than those who saw the system as responsible for their progress (externals) and this was not accounted for by any differences in the extent of system use.

Students who were more tolerant of ambiguity made significantly less use of the system. Students who used the system less did not compensate for their low achievement by doing better in group activity despite their preference for working outside the CML control system. These preliminary results suggest that whilst a high degree of external control over learning may achieve better academic results it may do so only by giving an advantage to closed‐minded system followers. A CML system (ICL's CAMOL system) provides a secure learning environment for students with low tolerance of ambiguity and high expectations of external control from which they can be progressively weaned into internal control of learning and tolerance of ambiguity.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

John S.A. Anderson

John S.A. Anderson, BA, is Project Officer in the same project.

James C. Barton

James C. Barton, DASE, MSc, PhD, is a lecturer at Wilson College, Chowpatty, Bombay, 400 007, India.