“The Effects Of Quality Of Instruction On The Cognitive And Affective Learning Of Students”, 1981-12 ():
[on Bloom’s two-sigma (1984); republished as 1983? criticism, eg. 1987, defense] The major purpose of the research was to determine the effects of quality of instruction on selected learning outcomes and learning processes. 3 different quality of instruction conditions were used in the studies: (1) tutoring, a maximal quality which adapts each component of quality of instruction to the individual, (2) conventional group-based instruction, a minimal quality which is least adaptive to individual learning needs, and (3) mastery learning, a quality which lies between the two extremes exemplified by tutoring and conventional instruction.
The effects of quality of instruction on achievement and on students’ engagement in learning were examined. The relations which developed between the students’ prior characteristics (aptitude and prior achievement) and their subsequent achievement under the 3 different learning conditions were also examined. In addition, the studies investigated the effects of achievement and students’ perception of achievement on the affect (attitude and interest) students developed toward learning.
3 studies were conducted. In each of the studies, students were randomly assigned to tutoring, conventional, or mastery learning conditions. 3 different grade levels and two different academic content areas were involved. Students in grades 4 and 5 were taught probability, and students in grade 8 were taught cartography.
The results of all 3 studies strongly indicate that quality of instruction has a pervasive influence on the achievement students attain and on the extent to which their achievement is related to either their aptitude or prior achievement. In these studies, 90% of the students who received tutoring and about 70% of the students who learned under mastery conditions attained levels of summative achievement reached by only the highest-achieving 20% of the students under conventional conditions. In tutoring and mastery conditions, the relations between summative achievement and students’ aptitude or prior achievement were weak, but under conventional conditions, the relations remained comparatively strong. The effects of quality of instruction were also evident in the students’ engagement in learning. The highest levels of task involvement were found for students receiving tutoring, followed by the levels found for students in mastery learning conditions. The lowest levels and largest variations in engagement in learning occurred in conventional groups. The results also indicate that affect toward learning emerges from achievement and perception of achievement. The relations between perception of achievement and affect were particularly strong.
The major implication of these findings is that widely held assumptions about human potential for school learning must be reassessed. Inequalities in learning outcomes among students are not an inevitability of the differences in students’ prior characteristics; they are, instead, the consequences of providing students with instruction which is not adapted to the learning needs of individuals. The results of these studies can serve as a yardstick for measuring the effectiveness of future attempts to enhance the quality of instruction available in schools.