You are here:

The Optimal Order of Instructional Content in Computer-Based Software Training: Sequencing Supportive and Procedural Knowledge
PROCEEDINGS

, Texas Tech University, United States ; , Boise State University, United States ; , , Texas Tech University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-64-8 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of varying the sequencing of supporting and procedural knowledge in application software training. This study employs a 2 x 3 mixed model factorial design with repeated measures on the last factor. The variables are expertise level and content sequence. The participants will consist of approximately 120 undergraduate students from a large southwestern university. Data collection is schedule from October 22nd to November 8th, 2007. The results will be presented at the conference in March, 2008. The results of this study will provide practical implications for instructional design for software training and also other types of online instructional format.

Citation

Kittikunanant, M., Hung, J., Crooks, S. & Wang, C. (2008). The Optimal Order of Instructional Content in Computer-Based Software Training: Sequencing Supportive and Procedural Knowledge. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2008--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3258-3260). Las Vegas, Nevada, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 11, 2024 from .

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Clark, R.C.(1999). Developing technical training (2nd ed.).Washington, DC: International Society for Performance Improvement.
  2. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). Expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38, 23 – 31.
  3. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38, 1 – 4.
  4. Pollock, E., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction 12, 61 – 86.
  5. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J.J.G., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251 – 296.
  6. Van Merriënboer, J.J.G., Kirschner, P., & Kester, L (2003). Taking the load off a learner ’ s mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 5 – 13.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References