EFFECTS OF TWO TREATMENTS IN LINEAR METRIC MEASUREMENT ON DEVELOPMENTAL MATHEMATICS COLLEGE STUDENTS\u27 ACHIEVEMENT

The purpose of the study was to compare the instructional outcomes of two curriculum units on linear metric measurement, using a task analysis/learning levels approach and a cognitive developmental approach. The first unit, developed by the investigator, is based on the task analysis hierarchical model of Robert M. Gagne\u27s theory on intellectual skills. The second unit, a commercially published text, was presented according to the principles of Piaget\u27s theory in relation to the development of concrete and formal cognitive operations. The subjects of the study were 95 developmental mathematics students from a two-year college in the New York City metropolitan area. Assignment of the classes to either group was done by means of random selection. A pretest and a parallel posttest, the instruments of the study, were constructed by the investigator and validated by a jury of experts. These were used to examine the hypothesis of the study. Comparison of the effectiveness of the two treatments was ascertained by computing independent t tests to compare the means of the pretest scores, the posttest scores, and the gain scores (posttest minus pretest scores); and correlated data t tests to compare the means of the pretest and the posttest scores for each treatment group, respectively. Analysis of the data led to the following major conclusions: (1) There was no significant difference between the means of the pretest scores of both treatment groups. (2) There was a significant increase in the means of the scores of the posttest compared with the pretest for both treatment groups, leading the investigator to believe there were positive effects from both treatment methods. (3) The Gagnean task analysis/learning levels group scored significantly greater gains than the Piagetian cognitive developmental group, leading the investigator to believe that the implementation of the task analysis/learning levels approach yielded greater academic achievement than the cognitive developmental approach