The purpose of this study was to investigate possible factors that may affect academic achievement when instruction is delivered via podcast. Seventeen female Communication Sciences and Disorders students participated in this exploratory study conducted in the fall of 2006. Measurements of participants' individual differences on four variables were taken prior to learners experiencing instructional podcasts. Multiple regression analysis was used to predict learner success based on the four predictor variables: self-efficacy for online technologies, academic self-efficacy, academic self-regulation, and cognitive style. Learner success was measured via a pencil and paper, multiple-choice test covering the material delivered via podcast. Of the variables used in this study, only cognitive style was found to be a statistically significant predictor of achievement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AzevedoR., & CromleyJ. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students' learning with hypermedia?Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 523–535.
2.
AzevedoR.GuthrieJ. T., & SeibertD. (2004). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students' conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(1&2), 87–111.
3.
BakerR. M., & DwyerF. M. (2005). Effect of instructional strategies and individual differences: A meta-analytic assessment. International Journal of Instructional Media, 32(1), 69–84.
4.
BanduraA. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
5.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
CameronB., & DwyerF. M. (2005). The effect of online gaming, cognition, and feedback type in facilitating delayed achievement of different learning objectives. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 16(3), 243–258.
8.
DeTureM. (2004). Cognitive style and self-efficacy: Predicting student success in online distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 21–38.
9.
DillonA., & GabbardR. (1998). Hypermedia as an educational technology: A review of the quantitative research literature on learner comprehension, control, and style. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 322–349.
10.
DwyerF. M. (1978). Strategies for improving visual learning: A handbook for the effective selection, design, and use of visualized materials.State College, PA: Learning Services.
ErtmerP. A.EvenbeckE.CennamoK. S., & LehmanJ. D. (1994). Enhancing self-efficacy for computer technologies through the use of positive classroom experiences. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(3), 45–62.
13.
FlanaganB., & CalandraB. (2005). Podcasting in the classroom. Learning and Leading with Technology, 33(3), 20–22, 25.
14.
HakkinenP. (1995). Changes in computer anxiety in a required computer course. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27(2), 141–153.
15.
HartleyK., & BendixenL. D. (2001). Educational research in the Internet age: Examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational Researcher, 30(9), 22–26.
16.
HillT.SmithN. D., & MannM. F. (1987). Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(2), 307–313.
17.
HodgesC. B. (2005). Self-regulation in Web-based courses: A review and the need for research. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6(4), 375–383.
18.
HodgesC. B. (2008). Self-efficacy in the context of online learning environments: A review of the literature and directions for research. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 20(3–4), 7–25.
JonassenD. H., & GrabowskiB. L. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21.
Jorde-BloomP. (1988). Self-efficacy expectations as a predictor of computer use: A look at early childhood administrators. Computers in the Schools, 5, 45–63.
22.
LukS. C. (1998). The relationship between cognitive style and academic achievement. British Journal of Educational Technology, 29(2), 137–147.
23.
MayerR. E. (Ed.). (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning.New York: Cambridge.
24.
McInerneyV.McInerneyD. M., & SinclairK. E. (1994). Student teachers, computer anxiety, and computer experience. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 11(1), 27–50.
25.
MiltiadouM., & YuC. H. (2000). Validation of the online technologies self-efficacy scale (OTSES). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED445672).
26.
MultonK. D.BrownS. D., & LentR. W. (1991). Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(1), 30–38.
27.
PintrichP. R.SmithD. A. F.GarciaT., & McKeachieW. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ).Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, School of Education.
28.
ReedW. M., & OverbaughR. C. (1993). The effects of prior experience and instructional format on teacher education students' computer anxiety and performance. Computers in the Schools, 9(2/3), 75–89.
29.
SmithJ. (2002). Learning styles: Fashion fad or lever for change? The application of learning style theory to inclusive curriculum delivery. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39(1), 63–70.
30.
StimmelT.ConnorJ. L.McCaskillE. O., & DurrettH. J. (1981). Teacher resistance to computer-assisted instruction. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 13(2), 128–130.
31.
TinajeroC., & ParamoM. F. (1998). Field dependence-independence cognitive style and academic achievement: A review of research and theory. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 13(2), 227–251.
32.
TuckmanB. W., & SextonT. L. (1991). The effect of teacher encouragement on student self-efficacy and motivation for self-regulated performance. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6(1), 137–146.
33.
van GogT.EricssonK. A.RikersR. M. J. P., & PaasF. (2005). Instructional design for advanced learners: Establishing connections between the theoretical frameworks of cognitive load and deliberate practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 73–81.
34.
WhippJ. L., & ChiarelliS. (2004). Self-regulation in a Web-based course: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(4), 5–22.
35.
WitkinH. A.MooreC. A.GoodenoughD. R., & CoxP. W. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 1–64.
36.
WitkinH. A.OltmanP. K.RaskinE., & KarpS. A. (2002). Group embedded figures test manual.Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden, Inc.
37.
YoungJ. D. (1996). The effect of self-regulated learning strategies on performance in learner controlled computer-based instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(2), 17–27.
38.
ZimmermanB. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329–339.
39.
ZimmermanB. J., & Martinez-PonsM. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51–59.
40.
ZimmermanB. J., & SchunkD. H. (2003). Albert Bandura: The scholar and his contributions to educational psychology. In ZimmermanB. J. & SchunkD. H. (Eds.), Educational psychology: A century of contributions (pp. 431–457). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
