Eclectic Integration in
Teaching:
Modified PSI, PI, and Traditional
Lecture
J. Timothy Cannon, Jennifer
J. Quinn, and Galen L. Baril
University of Scranton
Compared to traditional instruction,
programmed instruction (PI) produces faster acquisition of material (17%
less study time) and somewhat greater achievement scores (.28 effect size).
Similarly, Keller’s personalized system of instruction (PSI) produces a
substantial increase in achievement scores (.49 effect size) as well as
student satisfaction (.68 effect size) (Kulik, Cohen, & Ebeling,
1980; Kulik, Kulik, & Cohen, 1979).
Buskist, Cush, and DeGrandpre
(1991) analyzed existing PSI literature to identify elements that are linked
to positive educational outcomes. They found that the necessary elements
for academic achievement are the mastery requirement, immediate feedback,
and having larger review tests. Elements that are not clearly linked
to academic achievement include student proctors as peer tutors, optional
lectures, and self-pacing. It should be noted, however, that the
use of tutors is positively related to student satisfaction. Therefore,
we propose that educators consider making selective use of those PSI elements
that are objectively linked to either achievement or satisfaction.
Despite the clear superiority
of PSI, historically, there has been some resistance to converting courses
to this format. We recommend an eclectic approach which maintains
the outward veneer of a traditional lecture while incorporating modified
PSI as the core of the course with PI supplements. PI is used primarily
for the teaching of foundational concepts and those concepts that have
been repeatedly demonstrated to be difficult for students to master.
We hope that this integrative approach will best serve the pedagogical
needs of our students.
PI
and PSI General Principles
PI
vs. PSI
PI
and PSI vs. Traditional Lecture
"Scranton
Plan"
References