Search

The article discusses the relevance of Principle Nine of the Code of Professional Ethics by the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). It cites a scenario involving a manager commanding an intern to do a task without considering the intern's existing obligations. The AECT Code states that a member shall abstain from behaviors which could be seen as discriminatory, harassing or offensive. It says that the scene shows that multitasking may lead to disorientation.

The article presents an analysis on how an Educational Technology instructor deals with the student's sexually explicit behavior. Since there is no stringent policy regarding the situation, the instructor struggles with the differences of laws in relation to pornography. An eminent neuroscientist notes that the new media technologies are influencing the minds of the children. The "Children's Internet Protection Act," which limits the children's exposure to pornography and explicit content online and the "Child Pornography Prevention Act," giving the right freedom of speech are also discussed.

The article presents an analysis of the school problem on the chairs used in its computer laboratory. It presents the scenario where the problem arises. The analysis showed that traditional school chairs are not designed for keyboarding at a computer station. The height of the chair seat and of the work surface are important factors which should be taken into considerations. The result recommends that adjustable furniture would help the students in their learning process, taking into account their physical abilities.

This study examines the timing using computer-enriched instruction (CEI), before or after a traditional lecture to determine cross-over effect, period effect, and learning effect arising from sequencing of instruction. A 2×2 cross-over design was used with CEI to teach central limit theorem (CLT). Two sequences of graduate students in nursing participated in this study. Sequence A was given the CEI and handout first, followed by a traditional lecture and handout. Sequence B was given a lecture and handout first, followed by the CEI and handout. A pre-test and posttests (posttest1 after the first presentation and posttest2 after the second presentation) were given to measure instructional outcomes. All tests were 10 multiple choice questions with four options and only one option was the correct answer. No significant difference in scores was seen in posttest1 between students in sequence A (6.1±2.5) and B (6.5±2.1) (p =0.52 by unpaired t-test; p =0.80 after adjusted for pre-test score by ANCOVA). No significant carryover effect was seen (p =0.66). A significant period effect was observed, in which 7.7 for period 2 was greater than 6.3 for period 1, the difference of 1.4 with 95% CI between 0.8 and 2.0, p <0.0001. When the course material was taught twice, traditional lecture had a higher average score (7.3) than CEI (6.6) and the difference between two teaching methods was 0.7 with 95% CI between 0.1 and 1.3, p =0.02). Sequence A’s increase (2.1) represented a preview effect of CEI and sequence B’s increase (0.8) represented a review effect of CEI. The study time needed for the first presentation was the same for the two teaching methods (55min); the study time needed for the first presentation was always longer than that of the second presentation, regardless of which teaching method was being used. When comparing the subjective rating on two teaching methods between two sequences, sequence A students rated traditional lecture significantly better than sequence B students did in regards to satisfaction (p =0.0003), clarity (p =0.002), understanding (p =0.02). About two-thirds of sequence A students preferred CEI followed by the lecture, and 43.8% of the sequence B students preferred the lecture followed by CEI. In conclusion, when CLT was taught once, CEI and traditional lecture were equivalent in terms of the test score (posttest1) and teaching time. When CLT was taught twice, traditional lecture had a higher average test score than CEI. Preview effect of CEI in CLT was suggested because of higher difference in test score in sequence A than sequence B, and better subjective rating of traditional lecture in sequence A than in sequence B. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]