CHAPTER II WHAT ARE AUTO-INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS A u to -in stru c tio n a l programs are ed u catio n al m a te ria l from which stu d e n ts le a rn by them selves. The teaching technique based on a u to -in s tru c tio n a l programs is c a lle d programmed in s tr u c tio n. I t s purpose is to enable the le a rn e r to p ro g ress through a p re-arran g ed sequence o f ex p erien ces to the a c q u is itio n of knowledge o r s k i l l. i s s a id to be "Programed".. Because the sequence i s p re -a rra n g e d, i t Since th e d e v ic e s them selves do not teach, but are used to hold programs so th a t the stu d en t may teach h im self, they are c a lle d s e lf - in s tr u c tio n a l or a u to - in s tru c tio n a l 1 program s. b i t s of in fo rm atio n. In program ing, each ste p i s broken down in to d is c re te The student read s an in s tr u c tio n, a question o r an incom plete sequence, lie then answers o r responds by f i l l i n g in a blank, he checks h is answers to see i f i t i s c o rre c t and then moves on to the next s te p. fram e.2 Frame ; Each question or item is c a lle d a Each in s tru c tio n a l u n it, c o n sistin g o f i n i t i a l inform a tio n, re q u e st f o r a response and in fo m a tio n re le v a n t to the c o rre c tn e ss of th e response is c a lle d a frame and the amount of in s tru c tio n given from frame to frame i s c a lle d siz e of s te p.
15 Cuing ; Program ers have given the name cuing to the technique th a t is used to in su re a c o rre c t response, A cue is a su b tle h in t which suggests the c o rre c t answer. There are d iffe re n t types of cuing, the lim it depending on a program er s in g e n u ity. When a response i s being in tro d u ced, the prograraer maximizes the number of cues. A student knows h is su b je c t when he responds c o rre c tly w ithout any cues. Cues are withdrawn g ra d u a lly. The term f o r withdrawing cues is fa d in g. S pecial fe a tu re s of the programs : A ll programed m a te ria ls have c e rta in fe a tu re s in common. F ir s t they re q u ire th e student to focus his a tte n tio n on a lim ite d amount of m a te ria l a t one tim e. Second, they req u ire him to respond (or answer) i n some way to each segment of m a t e r i a l. T hird, they give him immediate knowledge of r e s u lts a f te r every resp o n se. These th ree fe a tu re s in sequence c o n s titu te what is here c a lle d the le a rn in g cy cle. The learn in g cycle is rep eated many tim es in a program. 3 work a t h is own pace. F ourth, programs perm it each stu d en t to P o ssib le advantages of using programed in s tru c tio n : ( a) I n s tru c tio n is more e ffe c tiv e : The evidence from a la rg e number of re searc h stu d ie s is th a t programed in s tru c tio n ty p ic a lly teaches a t le a s t as much as o th er methods and in le s s tim e. This can mean several th in g s. I f the time to complete a course is kept fix e d then e ith e r more m a te ria l can be
14 covered during the course o r the m a te ria l can be stu d ied more in te n s iv e ly. I f a fix e d stan d ard of stu d en t accomplishment i s adopted and l e t the time fo r the course v ary, th en more courses can be taught in a school y e a r. (b) More of the te a c h e r s time is a v a ila b le for in d iv id u a liz in g in s tr u c tio n : The teach er can use the time fre e d by programs to hold c la s s d isc u ssio n s, to help stu d e n ts organize th e ir in fo rm a tio n, to hold in d iv id u a l conferences w ith stu d e n ts, to give them experiences in asking i n te llig e n t q u e stio n s, and to develop th e ir s k i l l s in applying what they have le a rn e d. In these ways the teach er can more e ffe c tiv e ly organize the educatio n al experiences around the needs aid in te r e s ts of each in d iv id u a l stu d e n t. (c) Students can c o rre c t th e ir own work : The programed m a te ria l i t s e l f enables the stu d e n ts to know whether he is rig h t or wrong, th a t i s, i t gives him immediate knowledge o f r e s u l ts. H olland and S k in n era ist seven advantages : 1. Each student advances at his own r a te, the f a s t le a rn e r moving ahead ra p id ly w hile the slow er le a rn e r moves a t a speed convenient fo r him. 2. The student moves on to advanced m a te ria ls only a f te r he has thoroughly m astered e a r l ie r s ta g e s. 3. Because of th is gradual p ro g ressio n and w ith the help of c e rta in techniques of h in tin g and prom pting, the student i s alm ost always r i g h t.
15 4. The student is continuously a c tiv e and re c e iv e s immediate confirm ation of h is su ccess. 5. Item s are so c o n stru cted t h a t the stu d en t must comprehend the c r i t i c a l point in order to supply the answer. 6. Concept' is rep re se n te d in the program by many exampled and s y n ta c tic a l arrangemeat s, in an e f f o r t to maximize g e n e ra liz a tio n to o th er situ a tio n s* 7. A record of s tu d e n ts responses fu rn ish e s the programer w ith valuable in fo rm atio n fo r fu tu re r e v is io n s.5 Other uses of programing : In a re g u la r class-room, a student who is a b sen t, o ften lo s e s the work lie has m issed because he can not re c a p tu re what has taken p lace in the classroom. On the other hand, i f he lias th e, program a t home w ith him, w hile lie i s a b sen t, he at l e a s t shares w ith the r e s t of the cla ss the b asic experience provided in the programed te x t even though he does not have the advantage of th e classroom d isc u ssio n. Since programed in s tr u c tio n i s s e lf - in s tr u c tio n a l, i t has v a st p o s s i b i l i t i e s far homebound stu d e n ts. The liomebound i stu d e n t may become h is own in s tr u c to r w ith p e rio d ic le sso n s and cum ulative ev alu atio n by v is itin g te a c h e rs. In some schools stu d e n ts work a t home w ith th e programed m a te ria ls. School hours are then devoted to d isc u ssio n and f u r th e r
16 e x p lo ra tio n of tile su b je c t m atter p resen te d in the program. On the college le v e l whole courses are being programed, thus allow ing the in s tr u c to r to d eal w ith more d i f f i c u l t su b ject m a tte r during the c la s s tim e. I f ro u tin e le a rn in g s can be programed and stu d ied a p a rt from school hours, e n tir e c u rric u la may soon be changed.6 P sychological p rin c ip le s underlying programed le a rn in g ; Skinner and G ilb e rt (1958) have summarized the p rin c ip le s o f le a rn in g worked out by Gagne (19 58). These p rin c ip le s have led a number of workers to consider se rio u sly the development of 7 autom atic teaching devices fo r use in the classroom, A rep h rasin g of these p rin c ip le s put in n o n -te e h n ie a l term s might take the follow in g form 1. L earning tak es place m ost ra p id ly i f the student i s a c tiv e ly engaged w ith the su b je c t m a tte r. 2. Learning is most e f f e c tiv e, i f the student develops the n s k ills ' and knowledge in a form which w ill re a d ily g e n e ra lise to the l i f e s itu a tio n fo r which they are in te n d ed. 3. Learning tak es place most ra p id ly, i f immediate "knowledge o f r e s u lts " i s given fo r each response. 4. Learning tak es place m ost ra p id ly i f th e su b je c t m atter i s organised in a h ie ra rc h ic form.
17 5» Receiving fre q u e n t knowledge o f r e s u l t s keep stu d en ts working a t the assigned ta s k. 6. Since s le a rn in g takes place in in d iv id u a ls, tlxe le a rn ing s itu a tio n should be designed in such a.manner th a t each student may proceed a t h is own pace. E ducational p rin c ip le s underlying programed in s tr u c tio n ; Making a l l in s tru c tio n g o a l-o rie n te d ; Every program step is intended to help the student acquire s p e c ific knowledge or s k i l l s, superfluous m a te ria l i s excluded. O rganizing in s tru c tio n in to an e ffe c tiv e sequence ; In programed in s tr u c tio n the ste p s are c a re fu lly planned. Each one b u ild s upon the preceding ones. P resen tin g one point a t a time ; By p re s e n tin g a lim ite d and se lf-c o n ta in e d u n it o f m a te ria l a t a tim e, the program fo cu sses the stu d e n t s a tte n tio n on a sin g le p o in t. He proceeds through the program taking one step a t a tim e. A ctiv ely invom ng the student in th e le a rn in g process : A teacher can expose stu d e n ts to textbooks, le c tu r e s or film s w ith l i t t l e assurance of student resp o n se. But in programed i n s t r u c t io n, the student i s expected to respond to the m a te ria l in every fram e. In tills way he becomes a c tiv e ly involved throughout the le a rn in g p ro cess.
Giving immediate knowledge of re su lts : The program, enables the student to knovi immediately after every response if lie is right or wrong. Allowing each student to proceed at his own pace : faster students are not held back, nor are the slower ones rushed 8 through m aterial they do not understand. Types of programs : A number of types of programs are being produced. Although thus far tliese have tended to cluster around two or three main types, new variations or mixtures are continually being introduced. There is l i ttle empiilcal basis as yet to favour one general type over another, although certain ones may eventually prove to be especially useful for particular educational purposes.9 1. Linear program ; Derived from 1. F. Skinner s views on learning, th is procedure aims to "shape" the learner s behaviour very gradually by requiring him to make a series of responses, for each of which he has been prepared as fully as possible, both by responses he has previously made and by various prompts and cues. 18 The The correctness of each response can be ascertained by the learner after i t has been ma.de, but, since the step between each response and the next is very small, very few errors occur. No provision is made, for modification of the sequence in the lig it of the learner s success or failure. Usually, the learner must construct a response rather than merely select from a choice of answer, for example, he might have to write down a word.
19 2, B ranching program. : Norman Crowder h as p lay ed a g re a t p a r t in developing th is techniq u e. Here the le a rn in g sequence depends upon the le a r n e r s resp o n ses. U sually the response i s in the form of a ch o ice. Depending on the choice made the le a rn e r can be re fe rre d to any of a v a rie ty of d iffe re n t le a rn in g sequences. I f h is choice Is c o rre c t, he w ill be allow ed to proceed to the next s ta g e, but i f h is choice b etray s a p a rtic u la r hind of f a ilu r e to le a rn, he might be req u ire d to re p e a t p a rt o f the problem or to undergo a sp e c ia l rem edial sequence a p p ro p ria te to th is hind of f a i l u r e. Since e rro r i s thus accommodated, the le a rn in g ste p s used in branching programs can be much la rg e r than those used in lin e a r program s. 3. Adjunct program : S. L. P ressey, the f i r s t modern in v e s tig a to r of the p o s s ib i l i tie s of the teaching machine recommends th at programed le a rn in g sequences be used as an ad ju n ct to in s tr u c tio n th a t is e ffe c te d p rim a rily by othe r means. The program would th en fu n c tio n to t e s t the le a rn e r ( f o r the in s tr u c tio n a l devices can e a s ily record e rro rs made), to help him to c o n so lid a te knowledge or s h i l l s th a t had p re v io u sly been le a r n t by more s u ita b le means, or to p resent him w ith only lim ite d kinds of in fo rm a tio n. The hinds o f program developed fo r th is purpose can re q u ire a m u ltip ie -ch o ic e response and do not u su a lly keep step siz e to a minimum, as flo those of Skinner. Teaching approach o f L in e a r and Branching program ; The co n stru cted response ; B, F. S kinner o f H arvard, using th is technique, developed a teaching approach which p re sen ts
so as i t s b a s is a m eticu lo u sly stru c tu re d s e r ie s of questio n s o r item s arranged so th a t each item le a d s (cues) the student in to making the c o rre c t response* Each item o r s te p, c a re fu lly ox-ganized in lo g ic a l sequence, re q u ire s a response from the stu d e n t. Before he proceeds to the next step o r item, the student is shown the c o rre c t response and he checks th is a g a in st h is answer. Since each successive item and c o rre c t response ismbased on the preceding item and c o rre c t response, the program provides fo r continuing p o s itiv e rein fo rcem en t. The student by giving the maximum number of c o rre c t answers, is led in to a term inal behaviour which is the o b je c t o f the le s s o n s. The problem fo r program er - and i t is a complex one - i s to evolve a d e ta ile d sequence of sm all ste p s which lead the student to the d esired outcome w ith a minimum of e r r o r s along the way. Branching : Norman Crowder, u n lik e Skinner does not c o n stru c t q u estio n s in order' to e l i c i t a uniform answer. He u t i l i z e s e rro rs to build knowledge and s k i l l. This is the m ajor concept in i n t r i n s i c program ing. In order to implement th is approach, Crowder has developed a technique c a lle d b ran d lin g. This moves the student in to another s e rie s of fram es fo r re te a c h in g, i f the stu d e n t has been u n su ccessfu l in the o rig in a l s e t o f questions o r fram es. This i s done by te s tin g the stu d ent on each u n it im m ediately. I f he f a i l s the te s t q u e stio n, the preceding u n it o f in fo rm atio n i s review ed. The n atu re of h is e rro r i s explained to him, and he is r e te s te d. The t e s t questions are m u ltip le choice, aid there is a se p ara te se t of c o rre c tio n m aterial/fo r each wrong answer th a t i s given in the
m u ltip le choice a lte r n a tiv e s. I f the stu d ent passes the t e s t q u e stio n, he. is then to ld to go on to the n ex t unit of inform a tio n and the next te s t q u e stio n. The form at f o r the Crowder system in p rin te d form i s c a lle d the "Scrambled te x t". The pages are not read consequtively The student i s d ire c te d to tu rn to a p a r tic u la r page a f te r he has chosen h is answer. I f the answer is in c o rre c t, to s t i l l an o th er page. The student m ust c a re fu lly follow d ire c tio n s a t the bottom o f each page. There is a g re a t d eal of controversy in th e fie ld of programing as to the r e la tiv e m e rits of 'L in e a r program ing and 'I n t r i n s i c program ing*. Some of the newer programs are in c o rp o ra t in g a l i t t l e o f each. 10 U n til re c e n tly, few programs have been w ritte n, tie p ro cess is time consuming, and the number of programs is lim ite d. Those programs developed so f a r d i f f e r as to approach and form at, and l i t t l e may be g e n eralized about c o n stru ctin g program s. According to F o lts C harles F. " A program may assume many form s, but provides in most forms the fo llo w in g th re e basic a id s to the a s s im ila tio n and re te n tio n of knowledge by the student 1. I t re q u ire s continuous and a c tiv e student response a t moments when a s tu d e n t's i n te r e s t aid c u rio s ity are h ig h e s t, in order to p ra c tic e and t e s t each step to be
22 le a r n t. T his is provided through q u estio n s which must be answered before the stu d e n ts move on to new m a te ria ls, 2, I t su p p lies immediate confirm ation o r c o rre c tio n, again a t the moment when a s tu d e n t s in te r e s t is h ig h e s t, th u s leading the student d ir e c tly o r in d ir e c tly to a c o rre c tio n of h is e rro rs. 3. The stu d ent him self determ ines his pace of le a rn in g as he o p e ra te s the program o r device. This p erm its him to move as ra p id ly o r as slow ly as h is i n te r e s t aid comprehension le v e l re q u ire. The slow er student may be tu to re d as slow ly as n e c e ssa ry, w ith in f in ite p a tie n c e to meet h is s p e c ia l.n e e d s, Programing pio n eers : As the century passed the f i r s t q u a rte r mark, Sidney L. P ressey described A sim ple device which g iv es t e s t s and scores - and teach e s (1926)t This device was a machine which p resen te d the 12 student w ith m ulti p ie-c h o ic e questions one a t a tim e. The student se le c te d one of the two to four answers to the q u e stio n which he thought to be c o rre c t. to in d ic a te h is answer. He then p ressed down one o f the four le v e rs I f lie chose the c o rre c t answer, h is p ressure on the le v e r o p erated the device to tu rn up a new q u e stio n. I f he did not p ress the c o rre c t le v e r, the machine counted the choice but the same q u estio n remained in the viewing window u n til the c o rre c t le v e r was p re sse d. P re sse y s stu d e n ts used th is machine (and v a ria tio n s of h is machine) in some of t h e i r courses at Ohio S ta te U n iv e rs ity. These stu d e n ts a l l stu d ied re g u la r assignm ents
3 ana then c o n so lid ated and extended th e ir le a rn in g by taking teaching machine t e s t s. B. 3P. Skinner described a p p lic a tio n s of the p rin c ip le s of le a rn in g to education and to the use of teaching m achines. These p rin c ip le s were derived from liis y ears o f work w ith anim als in lab o ra to ry experim ents. Skinner p re fe rs f i l l - i n questions to m u ltip le -c h o ic e q u e stio n s on the b a sis th a t the student should be req u ire d to c o n stru c t his own answer ra th e r than m erely make a choice. As soon as S kinner s student com pletes his answer to a q u e stio n, lie is p erm itted to check i t ag ain st one or 13 more acceptable answ ers. While P re ssey s student stu d ie s reg u la r assignm ents aid then takes a teaching-m achine t e s t, S k in n e r's student may n o t have any conventional assignm ent at a l l aid is not te s te d by the q u e stio n s. In S kinnerian programed in s tr u c tio n (whether mechanized o r n o t} 'th e stu d ent Is i n i t i a l l y asked q u e stio n s which he cai e a s ily answer c o rre c tly, w ithout any previous study of th is p a rtic u la r le sso n. Then the student is taught by the sequence of q u e stio n s. More and more is asked of him as th e lesso n p ro ceed s, in very sm all dozes, so th a t the student is always (or n e a rly always) c o rre c t but is encountering harder and harder problems or is being req u ire d to be more and more s k ille d w ith the m a te ria l. P ressey has continued through the y ears to advocate what he c a lls "ad ju n ct program s", c o n sistin g of m ulti pie-choice questio n s to be used fo r review and co n so lid a tio n of le a rn in g. There is a very 14 r e a l d ifferen c e between Pressey* s and S k in n e r's approaches.
24 Norman A. Crowder suggested a m o d ific a tio n in tile use of tlie P ressey -ty p e teaching m achine. "autom atic tu to rin g by i n t r i n s i c program ing". Crowder described what he c a lls In th is case the student -studies a sm all amount of m a te ria l and is asked a q u estio n. He s e le c ts an answer to the q u e stio n. I f he is c o rre c t, he is given new m a te ria l to study and asked another q u e stio n. I f he is not c o rre c t, in ste a d o f being req u ire d to 'guess again { as w ith P re sse y s m achines), he i s given some review m a te ria l which e x p la in s his e rro r. Then he is r e te s te d. Study assignm ents and teach in g - te s ts a re combined by Crowder. The exact sequence of m a te ria l in the program, may be d iffe re n t fo r every stu d e n t. Each answer a 15 student chooses determ ines what he is given to study n e x t. The im portance of reward o r reinforcem ent as a p a rt o f the in s tru c tio n a l sequence is emphasized by Skinner more than P re sse y. For a w hile ii appeared th a t Crowder f e l t th a t " the e s s e n tia l problem is th a t of c o n tro llin g a communication px ocess by the use of feed-b ack." 16 and th a t there was no need to arrange the program so t h a t the stu d e n t m ates a minimum numbex* of e rro x's. However, in a recen t paper Crowder says, "I th in k i t desix-able th a t on a ro u tin e progi am s te p ( i f thex'e is such a tiling) no more th an 15 fo of the stu d ents should s e le c t a wrong answer. However, a m ajor program branch m i$ it have a q uestion th a t would be f a ile d 17 by 90 fo of th e s tu d e n ts." Thus Crowder would both agree and d isag ree w ith S kinner s prem ises. the common 10 pex cent s e t by many S k in n erians. This 15 p ercen t i s not f a r from F ifte e n per cent i s f a r few er erx'ors than a c tu a lly im ported to occur in many research
25 re p o rts p u rp o rtin g to p resen t stu d ie s involving S kinnerian programed le a rn in g. Skinner has never denied the appro p ilatene ss of branching o r the p o ssib le d e s ir a b ility of d iffe re n t types of sequence fo r stu d ents of d iffe rin g backgrounds. The d is tin c tio n between " in tr in s ic " and " e x trin s ic " programing made by Crowder is not a d iffe re n c e between s tr a ig h t lin e sequences fo r a l l stu d en ts as opposed to lesso n s involving branches. Crow der's d is tin c tio n is between an in d iv id u a l answer w ith in the pin gran determ ining whether o r not a branch occurs (an i n tr i n s i c program ), as opposed to se p ara te t e s t s, te a c h e r's judgm ents, o r o th er c rite ria ^ e x te rn a l to the in s tr u c tio n a l program ( e x tr in s ic fa c to rs ) determ ining the in s tru c tio n a l sequence to be follow ed. To the e x te n t th a t Crowder advocates keeping the e rr o r r a te g e n e ra lly low and d istin g u is h e s h is programs p rim a rily on the b a s is of the method fo r determ ining when and to what e x te n t b ran d ies occur, h is d iffe re n c e s w ith Skinner seem to have been n e e d le ssly exaggerated. One might put i t th a t the d iffe re n c e s a p p aren tly b o il down almost to m a tte rs of s ty le. Crowder p re fe rs to follow P ressey in using m u ltip ie -ch o ic e questions as they make i n t r i n s i c branching and m eehanization more convenient. Skinner p re fe rs b r ie f answer f i l l in -q u e stio n s which re q u ire the student to c o n stru c t h is own answer and leave branching to be determ ined by e x tr in s ic f a c to r s. Crowder also p re fe rs a g reat deal more s tra ig h t reading m a te ria l as oppesed to S k in n e r's o ccasio n al "P anels".
26 Discriminations, generalizations and chains in programing ; To a learning theorist, most of the behavior with which one is concerned in education and training is most u sefu lly 18 analyzed in terms of discrim inations, generalizations and chains. " Discrimination " is the technical term for what i s commonly called 'making distinctions, "categorizing or "classifying". A more precise definition of discrimination would be " a tendency to make one kind of response in the px esence of one kind of stimulus situation, and another kind of response in the presence of other kinds of stimulus situations." Discriminations may be either correct or incorrect, desirable or undesirable. When one deals with desired discriminations, one speaks of " a b ility to make discriminations," "ability to categorize", or "ability to do or say the appropriate thing at the appropriate time". Learning- theorists also speak of multiple discriminations. A discrimination is "multiple" if i t involves more than two responses and stim uli. It is the ab ility to make more than two kinds of responses to more than two different kinds of stimulus situations. Knowing the alphabet is a multiple discrimination, because it en tails being able to make twenty six kinds of responses to twenty six kinds of stim uli. Hex'e are some other common examples of discrim inations : 1. Saying "good morning" before noon and "good afternoon" after noon. 2. Proceeding when the light is green, and stopping when i t is red. 3. Drawing or writing appropriate labels on the appropriat e parts of a diagram.
"G eneralizatio n " is the te c h n ic a l term for what is commonly c a lle d "seeing s im ila r itie s ", "lumping th in g s to g e th e r", "n o ticin g common elem ents", o r "d isreg a rd in g d iffe re n c e s ". Again, th is leav es open the questio n of whether or n o t a g e n e ra liz a tio n i s ap p ro p ria te or in a p p ro p ria te, d e s ira b le or u n d e sira b le. When one deals w ith g e n e ra liz a tio n s, one speaks of " a b ility to see s im ila r itie s ", " a b ility to n o tic e common elem ents", and the lik e. A more p re c ise d e fin itio n of g e n e ra liz a tio n i s "making the same kind of response to d iffe re n t s tim u li." Here are some examples o f g e n e ra liz a tio n s ; 1. Saying "good morning" to a l l kinds of people (g e n e ra liz ing among p e o p le ), re g a rd le s s of what time of day i t is so long as i t is be foie noon, (g e n e ra liz in g among d iffe re n t tim es of the d a y ). 2. Proceeding when the lig h t is green, re g a rd le s s of whether the t r a f f i c lig h t i s suspended or on a p o st, re g a rd le ss of w hether you are in a car or on fo o t, and re g a rd le s s of whether i t is m orning, noon o r n ig h t. 3. In an anatom ical draw ing, la b e lin g the h e a rt w ith the word "h eart" re g a rd le s s of w hether i t is drawn in black or blue in k, w ith th ic k or th in lin e s, or whether the drawing is la rg e or sm all. When an in d iv id u a l is capable of making g e n e ra liz a tio n s w ith in c la s s e s, such as those used in the foregoing exam ples, aid d isc rim in a tio n s between c la s s e s, one can say th a t he has a concept.
28 This is the broadest p o ssib le d e fin itio n of concept, and the one villich is used by most le a rn in g th e o r is ts. This d e fin itio n of ' concept has the advantages of being p re c is e, g e n e ra l, and u se fu l fo r the purpose of teach in g concepts. I f any p a rtic u la r concept has been analyzed in term s of the g e n e ra liz a tio n s and d isc rim in a tio n s of which i t is made up, one can proceed to teach i t by teaching the d isc rim in a tio n s and g e n e ra liz a tio n s Involved. Chain is the te c h n ic a l term fo r what is sometimes c a lle d "procedure, "p ro cess", "sequence/6f a c tio n s ", "reasoning sequence", "thought p ro cess", or " ro u tin e ". A d e fin itio n of chaining is "a sequence of responses where each response c re a te s the stim ulus fo r the next resp o n se". Some common examples of chains are : (a) re c itin g a poem by h e a rt, (b) ty in g a shoelace, (c) u tte rin g a sentence, (d) w ritin g a name, (e) going through the ste p s of solving a problem in m athem atics, and (f) perform ing an experim ent. ' In any given p r a c tic a l in sta n c e, and in any given s itu a tio n, an in d iv id u a l c a r r ie s out one sin g le chain. However, i f one attem pts to analyze a l l the p o ssib le a lte r n a tiv e chains an in d iv id u a l might execute in any p a r tic u la r s itu a tio n, one must consider the "branching p o in ts" in the c h ain. Every chain c o n tain s p o in ts where the In d iv id u a l may proceed In any of sev eral d ire c tio n s depending on the p a r tic u la r s itu a tio n which co n fro n ts him. C onsider, f o r example, the chain involved in c a llin g somebody on the telephone when you do n o t have h i s number. The f i r s t resp o n se
29 in tlie chain is c a llin g in fo rm a tio n. The o p erato r who answers may say any of se v e ra l th in g s, such a s, "we d o n 't have a l i s t i n g under th a t name, "in which case you may say to h e r, " I t might be a new l i s t i n g ". She may a lso sa y, " we have se v era l l i s t i n g s under th a t name, do you have an address?" In th is case you may look up the a d d re ss. The n ex t response in the ch ain fre q u e n tly depends upon which p a rtic u la r stim ulus the prev io u s response produces. In th is case you may look up the ad d ress. The next response in the chain fre q u e n tly depends upon which p a rtic u la r stim ulus the previous response produces. In th is s itu a tio n, you through only one p a r tic u la r sequence of responses on any one p a r tic u la r o ccasio n. The s p e c ific sequence depends on what s itu a tio n you encounter at each ju n ctu re : what the o p erato r says, what you fin d when you look up the a d d re ss, and so on. But there is a la rg e number of th in g s you might do in th a t s itu a tio n, sin ce th ere are se v e ra l p o ssib le outcomes a t each ju n c tu re. All the p o ssib le th in g s you might do c o n s titu te the d e c isio n p ro c e ss. While only one p a r t i cu lar chain r e s u l ts in any p a r tic u la r s itu a tio n, in analyzing a chain, a l l o f the im portant a lte r n a tiv e s must be diagram ed. This type of branching diagram is c a lle d a "d ecisio n tre e ". Chained sequence in L in e a r Program ing ; In lin e a r program, the student lias to g ive response to the q u estio n asked in each fram e. This response may be c o rre c t or in c o rre c t. I f the stu d e n t lias to go ahead reading frame a f te r fram e, sim ply knowing about the r e s u lt whether i t is c o rre c t (+ ve) o r wrong (- ve), the p o s itio n w ill be as shown in F ig. 1.
30 Both correct and incorrect responses immediately followed by appropriate knowledge of, re su its *xx (+ or -) may lead to the same next step. But i t is non-interpretive program. ro io CO T I LO Selection -+ 1 T cn ro Selection 05 T> TO ^ ± y f TV I t is as good as the form of instruction provided by a simple paper or a film, or television broadcast. I t communicates but does not adapt to individual differences and thus does not keep the progressive development of knowledge under control. This is not a very clever ta c tic, one would much p refer to know when the learner went wrong and why, so th at one could tu to r him on the source of h is error. 19 This is where branching or interpretive programs enter; they are attempts to be adaptive. The s k ill of the programer in anticipating error p o ssib ilitie s and in building appropriate branches or side sxs sequence into the program is crucial here. Error-loop programing - basic branch program : A big step in the direction of adaptivity is made when the program aid device are designed to implement the correction procedure. This modification of the lin ear program can be represented symbolically as in Fig.2. The c ritic a l difference between this circular,o r error-loop program, aid a lin e a r program is in the d iffe re n tia l
seq u en tial a c tio n p o ssib le with the e rro r-lo o p program. In both types of program ing the r i g i t response takes the le a rn e r to the next ste p. ~ Si Ri R2 S3 I v v - A + B T / 1 > A + ----- B In the e rro r-lo o p prog ran, however, the wrong response i s followed by negative knowledge of r e s u lts and the le a rn e r is retu rn e d to the o rig in a l q uestion or problem and req u ire d to make another resp o n se. E ventually he must take the c o rre c t response before going to the next s te p. Thus, the l a s t response i s always the c o rre c t one. Types of branching : A dditional ste p s in the d ire c tio n of a d a p tiv ity are p o ssib le and have been used. They f a l l in to three b asic form s; (a) condensing o r skipping branches, ( d) enrichm ent branches ; aid (c) expanding ox* rem edial b ran d ie s. Each of th ese forms p erm its a la rg e number of p o ssib le v a ria tio n s. Consequently, only the sim p lest examples of the basic forms w ill be described and i ll u s t r a t e d. The f i r s t s* has also been c a lle d, " forw ard branchin g ", but to emphasize i t s e ffe c t upon th e le n g th of the program as experienced by the le a rn e r i t is c a lle d the condensing branch program. With i t a rig h t response sk ip s the le a rn e r ahead by one CO H to fa 03 E-c O S W O CO 73 0) Selection, 03 < CQ \ -+ >4-1 cn Selection 03 >
32 The two o th er basic forms of branching are achieved by e ith e r using tiie c o rre c t or in c o rre c t response to ro u te the student to p a rts of the program. I l l u s t r a t e d in fig u fe ^ is the rem edial branch. With i t, the branch is b u ilt in to the e rro r loop. A wrong response takes the le a r n e r to a supplem ental sequence: Si 0 I?! c o ji=: A ---- ------ o JO B * sr. o A ------y. <y 3 KK 3 <Si CD P R O M P T or P S L P N P P O A T P 7 or # l P -4 in which he re c e iv e s a "help" o r prompt and th en re tu rn s to the o rig in a l q u e stio n. With the enrichm ent e x e rc ises to fu rth e r develop the concept or s k i l l being ta u g h t. I t should be noted th a t these are basic forms which can be used as such or in V arious com binations, e.g. the c ir c u la r or.erro r-lo o p along w ith the condensing branch form. N eith er the lin e a r form, the condensing branch form, nor the enrichm ent branch form u t i l i z e s the c o rre c tio n procedure. The e rro r-lo o p form and i t s v a ria n ts which u t i l i z e the c o rre c tio n procedure add a new dim ension to a d a p tiv e programming. The Ruleg system : Iv a n s, Homme and G laser attem pted to the approach of the a n a ly s is of knowledge by beginning w ith the humble prem ise th a t a l l
33 verbal subject matter tliat appears in a program can be c la ss ifie d into two groups of statements, ru les and examples. They called rules ru' s and examples eg's and talked about the "Ruleg system". The d efin itio n s of mi s and e g's are re la tiv e ones, aid sometimes 20 a rule can be an example and an example a rule. In general, a rule can be a definition, a mathematical formula, an empirical law, a principle, axiom, postulate, or hypothesis from any area of knowledge. The invariant featu re o f a rule i s th at i t is a s ta te ment of some generality for which substitution instances or examples can be obtained. An example can be a description of a physical event, a theorem or deduction, or a statement of a re la tio n ship between physical or conceptual objects. The invariant feature of a ll eg's is that they are statements of some specificity derived from more generalized rules. The clearest example of ru les and th e ir corresponding e g's are, of course, in mathematics. The algebraic statement that a + b = b +a isa rule th at summarizes an in fin ite number of substitution instances, so th at an example is 7 + S = S + 7. The la tte r statement is in turn a rule for an example of such a statement as 7 stones -f 2 stones = 2 stones + 7 stones. I t is also possible th a t the in itia l algebric statement a + b = b + a is an example of a rule in group theoiy such a o b * b o a in which neither the objects nor the operator are specified and a + b = b + a becomes an example. Similar examples can be easily generated in d ifferen t subject matter domains. The Ruleg system suggests th a t in the preparation of a program one w rites down the ru le s, one wishes to teach and arranges
34 them in some o rd e r. The n a tu re of the o rdering and the n e c e ssity fo r o rd erin g the ru le s in a p a r tic u la r way is a fu n ctio n of the extent to which the su b je c t m atter is s tru c tu re d. In c e rta in su b je ct m a tte rs i t appears th a t c e rta in tilings " lo g ic a lly came before o th e rs. Rules may be ordered on some continuum-of sim p lic ity to com plexity, as iqfa p h y sics program. In a geography program the o rd e rin g may be along some s p a tia l continuum. Some su b je ct m atters appear to re q u ire a d e fin ite o rd e rin g aid o th e rs may n o t. Perhaps some thought should be given to the in v en tio n of an index o f o rd erin g or se q u e n tia lse ss fo r v ario u s su b je c t m a tte rs, which would bear some re la tio n s h ip to the se q u e n tia l dependencies req u ire d in a program. P re p a ra tio n of program : A programmer needs e x tensiv e tra in in g and p ra c tic e in the philosophy and techniques of -programing before lie can be co n sid ered s k ille d. On can not become a program er by reading few pages. Programed in s tru c tio n a l c ry s ta liz e s what a good te a c h e r should be able to do in the classroom as p a rt of good teaching procedure. I t c a lls fo r the h ig h e s t o rd er of planning. U n til re c e n tly, most programing was done by experim ental p sy c h o lo g ists, but th e ir programs o fte n lacked content s u ita b le fo r classroom use. T herefore, e f f o r t s are now being made to teach programing to experienced te a c h e rs - te a c h e rs who can communicate w ith c h ild re n and who know language le v e ls and the c u rric u la.
35 Perhaps an even b e tte r approach might be th a t of a team composed of the p sy ch o lo g ist to help w ith cuing and reinforcem ent techniques and the teach er who would be re sp o n sib le fo r the content and tiie sequence of the fram es. For teach e rs : Learning to program can be a valuable experience fo r any te a c h e r. I t is through the experience of co n stru ctin g fram es f o r programed in s tr u c tio n th a t the te a )h e r becomes aware o f th e very thought p ro cesses by which a student le a rn s a concept. In program ing, one must p lace each step in proper sequence in order to e l i c i t the d e sire d le a rn e r response. The technique of c a re fu l sequencing is a d is c ip lin e which every teacher should have, fo r i t is one of the more c re a tiv e a sp e c ts of p lan n in g. When a f a u lty frame is co n stru cted ( one th a t produces u n d esirab le or in c o rre c t re sp o n se ), the teacher m ust're-exam ine the question and reword i t to in clu d e the proper cues so th a t the c o rre c t response is more p ro b ab le. The fram es which e l i c i t wrong answers from any s ig n ific a n t p o rtio n of stu d e n ts are by d e fin itio n poorly co n stru cted fram es. I f a teacher were to examine every le a rn in g experience by f i r s t id e n tify in g the o b je c tiv e (term in a l behaviour) and then proceed to plan each ste p by breaking i t down to i t s stim ulus - response elem ents and then to include ste p s to ensure the use of the inform ation (a p p lic a tio n ), he would be analysing the te s te ra th e r than "p resen tin g a le sso n ". In programing both the in d u ctiv e and deductive sequences are e f f e c tiv e. Both can be used w ith in the same program. In
36 in d u ctiv e sequences the p rin c ip le is the response; in deductive programing the p rin c ip le is the cu e-stim u lu s. Both these approaches are m eaningful to the le a rn e r since the p rin c ip le is re in fo rc e d by both a response and a cue-stim u lu s. How should a program be developed : The c a re fu l development of a program in v o lv es many 21 tech n ic al a sp e c ts. There are fo u r basic sta g es to be developed. 1. S p e c ific goals : The goals or o b je c tiv e s of the program should be c le a rly s p e c ifie d, in terms of behavioural changes. The tei'm inal behaviour th at you expect from the stu d e n ts should be e n lis te d. Thus ta s k -a n a ly s is i s the f i r s t step to p repare the program. 2* W rite fram es : The m a te ria l is broken down in to lo g ic a lly ordered sraa.ll u n its or fram es, each of which demands a response from the stu d e n t. The student should be able to x espond c o rre c tly only i f he understands the fram e. 3. Try out and re v is e : This ste p i s the h e a rt of program w ritin g. The f i r s t v e rsio n of th e program is tr ie d out on stu d e n ts and then re v ised on the b a sis of th e ir comments and e rro rs. The program w rite r or program er continues to make re v is io n s u n til lie is confident th a t the stu d e n ts are le a rn in g s a t is f a c to r i l y. The try -o u t on stu d e n ts in d ic a te s to him how the o rg a n iz a tio n of the su b je c t m atter might be m odified and what s ste p s need re v is io n. He fre q u e n tly fin d s th a t the f in a l product is consid erably d iffe re n t from the o rig in a l v e rsio n.
37 4. V alid a te : The px-ogran should be v a lid a te d, or te s te d before i t i s re le a sed for general school use. In v a lid a tio n one determ ines how much stu d e n ts le a rn from the prog ran. A standard ized t e s t, or a t e s t e s p e c ia lly c o n stru cted fo r the purpose, is used to asse ss le a rn in g, stu d ent re a c tio n s to the program, as w ell as the le a rn in g scores should be re p o rte d. The re la tio n s h ip s among academic a b i l i t y, le a rn in g sc o re s, learn in g time and stu d e n ts ' a ttitu d e are also determ ined. Task analy sis : Task a n a ly sis is the d eterm ination of what a person does, how he does i t, why he does i t and the s k i l l s involved in doing the work. A ctually d escrib in g task a n a ly s is in t h i s way r e l a te s the su b je ct to the whole dimension of tr a in in g. I t i s, in fa c t an im portant p a rt of an evolving tra in in g techno l o g /. I t Is a base on which a tra in in g program should,be b u ilt, re g a rd le ss of w hether th a t tra in in g program i s -of a conventional type or a pi-ogramed in s tru c tio n.. 22 t e s t. From task a n a ly s is one can e a s ily e s ta b lis h meaning to the o b je c tiv e s, one can c o rre c tly d e lin e a te the th re sh o ld knowledge req u ire d in the stu d ent ; one can a c c u ra te ly detexinine the behavioral changes to be brought about in the tra in e e, one can s e le c t proper su b je c t m atter fo r program ing, one can determ ine c o rre c t sequencing fa r teach in g, one can ape o ily programing techniques aid one can e s ta b lis h r e a l c r i t e r i a fo r e v a lu a tio n.
38 The task analysis involves four elements : the what, the how, the why and the sk ills involved. In finding out what a worker does, an 3i± analyst must consider two types of a c tiv ity : physical responses and mental responses. Physical responses required of a worker in a job situation include such tilings as grinding or polishing m aterials ; inserting, soldering, wiring; or performing a multiple of other physical a c tiv itie s. On the o tter hand, a worker may mentally plan, compute, judge, d irect or otherwise govern the expenditure of his own physical a ctiv ity, or that of o th ers, by a corresponding exercise of mental e ff o r t. In a job, a person may expend any combination of physical and mental e ffo rt required by the job to be performed. In finding out what tlie worker does, the analyst establishes the complete scope of tlie job by considering the to tal universe of responses demanded by the tasks to be performed. All the physical mental a c tiv itie s involved in the job as a whole, as well as in the individual steps that co n stitu te the whole job, must be carefu lly considered. Tlie re is seldom a job consisting of only one act, be i t physical or mental. Most jobs consist of more than one act, or task but even one task may involve d iffe re n t physical and mental a c tiv i tie s on the part of tlie worker. I t is up to the analyst to discover these tasks and report them in the most direct terms so as to develop a clear, concise, coherent and complete description of the job.
59 In order tlia t the tra in e d worker performs ills job s a t is f a c to r i l y, i t is e s s e n tia l th a t the v ario u s ste p s be taken in tile a p p ro p ria te sequence on the jo b. At th is p o in t, i t is w ell to note th a t when jfcai tra in in g m a te ria ls are prepared, th e sequence of p re s e n ta tio n may w ell s h i f t. I t does not n e c e s s a rily follow th a t the c o rre c t educational sequence is the same as the sequence fo llo w ed on the jo b. However, a t th is p o in t in the p re p a ra tio n o f a task a n a ly s is, the in v e s tig a to r is not n e c e s s a rily in te r e s te d in how the tra in in g course w ill be organized. He is only in te r e s te d in re p o rtin g the job th a t the worker does so th a t when a program is prepared a l l the d a ta w ill be a v a ila b le in c le a rly understandable term s. Having determ ined what the worker w ill be expected to do as a r e s u lt of complying w ith the demands of the job, the in v e s tigator should next tu rn h is a tte n tio n to how the worker w ill respond. How the work is done concerns the methods used by the worker in accom plishing the assigned ta s k s. As in the case o f d e lin e a tin g what the worker does, the a n a ly st should co n sid er both the p h y sical and m ental responses re q u ire d. P h y s ic a lly, the performance of task may involve the use of m achinery o r to o ls, m easuring instrum ents or d ev ices, other re la te d equipm ent, follow ing ro u tin e s and procedures, and the movements of the worker h im self. M ental responses to th e demands of th e job l i e c h ie fly in the khow how th a t must be ap p lied to the ta s k s. T his may involve the use of c a lc u la tio n, form ula, a p p lic a tio n of judgement,
40 or making d e c isio n s. The in v e s tig a to r should assure him self th a t he has a complete grasp of how the job is done so th a t when the time comes to prepare the program nothing w ill be overlooked o r ignored. The a n a ly st must co n sid er the s k i l l s involved in the performance of a ta sk o r a jo b. D efining the s k i l l s involved c o n s is ts of l i s t i n g and ex p lain in g the basic fa c to rs th a t must be considered. These elem ents bring out the manual s k i l l s, knowledges, a b i l i t i e s and o th er c h a r a c te r is tic s req u ire d on the p a rt of a w orker, whether th a t job is manual, c r a f t, p ro fe s s io n a l, c l e r ic a l or any other ty p e. The r e c ita tio n of the s k i l l s re q u ire d in su c cessfu l job performance c o n s is ts of a l l the inform ation necessary to descrim inate between jobs and to' e s ta b lis h th e degree of d if f ic u lty of any Eh job or ta s k. G en erally, an a n aly st w ill concern him self w ith a c c u ra te ly re p o rtin g on c e rta in elem ents, among which are r e s p o n s ib ility, job knowledge, m ental a p p lic a tio n, d e x te rity and accuracy re q u ire d. The s k i l l s re q u ire d in a job have a d ire c t and poten t a p p lic a tio n in the p re p a ra tio n of a tra in in g program. E valuating programed m a te ria ls : In the next few y ears the market w ill be flooded w ith programs, fhe se pro g ram a w ill be d o u b tle ss range from very poor to e x c e lle n t. I t w ill be the re s p o n s ib ility of the school P rin c ip a l, aid the classroom ta s ta c teach e r to review these programs and determine which, i f any, should be purchased. Then to o, programs
41 developed w ith in the school system should also be su b jected to c a re fu l a p p ra is a l. Perhaps the g re a te s t tra in in g for ev alu atin g programs is the experienee of program ing. Even a little /a c tu a l programing experience can help the program e v alu ato r to know what to look fo r. The follow ing questions suggest c r i t e r i a for ev alu atin g programed m a te r ia ls.23 1. I s the s u b je c t m a tte r in the program c o rre c t and adequately covered? The teach er and the curriculum expert are the best judges of t h i s. In a c c u ra c ie s o r om issions in content would in v a lid a te the r e s u l ts. 2. Has s u ffic ie n t research on th e program been conducted? (a) (b) (c) On what p u p il p o p u latio n lias th e program been developed? Wliat is the i n te l l e c t u a l, socio-econom ic and e th n ic complexion of th e t e s t p o p u latio n? How many re v is io n s have been made before the fin a l p rin tin g? (d) Has the p u b lis h e r published a summary of the r e s u lts of p r e te s ts in d ic a tin g th e extent of re v is io n s? (e) How many stu d e n ts were involved in the experim ent? 3. Wliat is the e rro r ra te? (a) Are the number of e rro rs during the experim ental sta g es few er than 5 per cent? Low e rro r ra te is but one c r ite r io n of program q u a lity. Low-error r a te s can be obtained w ith very simple item s. I f
42 the item can be e a s ily answered w ithout th e student le a rn in g -what the item is supposed to teach, then the pro gram doe s not co nt ro 1 be ha v i o u r. 4. What does the program propose to teach? What are the o b je c tiv e s of tlie program? 5. Does the su b je c t m atter meet the curriculum requirem ents? (a) Does the program meet present course requirem ents? (b) Does the program provide fo r e n ric h in g the curriculum content? 6. Are the item s or fram es in lo g ic a l sequence? (a) Does the program s t a r t w ith a sim ple concept and b u ild toward a g e n e ra liz a tio n? (b) Does i t include a review of e a r l ie r fram es? (c) Are the fram es so co n stru cted th a t these are n a tu ra l / stopping p la c e s? 7. Does the program provide for frame form at v a ria tio n? (a) Does the info n a t i o n p resen ted vary in le n g th from frame to frame? (b) Do fram es vary in th e p a tte rn of development? (c) (d) (e) (f) Are the p ic tu re s on th e fram es in te re s tin g and a p p ro p ria te? Does the program provide fo r humour w herever p o ssib le? I f there is an audio p o rtio n of the program, i s i t c le a r in tone and p ro p e rly synchronized w ith the w ritte n m a te ria l? I s th e re a v a rie ty of vocabulary when the same
43 thought must be repeated in a number of frames? 8. Does the program, make use of the effectiv e techniques of programing? (a) Is there sufficient cuing - are the clues clear but not overdone? (b) Is there a lim it to the number of possible responses to a frame? (c) Does the program move to a fin al uncued terminal response? Gan the student make his own synthesis of the in format! on in the program through which he lias proceeded? 9. How is the program w ritte n? (a) (b) Is the vocabulary appropriate to the in te rest and achievement of the students? Are the sentences well constructed in a clear and concise manner? 10. What is the to ta l length-of the program? (a) Is the pi gram divided into sections? Gan a pupil stop a fte r a period of time and pick up the program wi th in terest? (b) How long is the average work period of a learning session?