X hits on this document

142 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

41 / 63

HOME-STUDY DRIVER EDUCATION

comparison

dfb, dfw

MSE

F

η2

Overall

3, 717

0.22

2.69*

.01

Correctly assigned

3, 610

0.22

3.56*

.02

Computer

3, 435

0.22

3.20*

.02

No computer

2, 172

0.23

1.07

.01

Table 9

Comparisons of Home-Study Instruction Methods and Classroom Instruction on DMV Written Test First Attempt Pass Rate

Statistical

*p < .05. †p < .10 (trend).

ANOVA

  • %Classroom) Workbook

    • -

      11.29†

    • -

      14.14*

    • -

      16.05

    • -

      11.50

Pass rate difference (%Home-Study

PEN

CD-ROM

-9.72

-12.95*

-12.35

-17.64*

-14.87

-20.92*

-14.00

When the analysis was limited to students who were properly randomly assigned by the schools, the results indicated that students who did not simultaneously enroll in driver training and completed classroom instruction passed the written test at a higher rate on their first attempt than did students in either the CD or workbook courses (ps < .05). The pass rates for classroom and PEN students did not significantly differ from each other, and neither did any of the pass rates compared among the home-study courses (ps > .05). However, the fact that the observed 12.4% lower pass rate for properly-assigned PEN students was not statistically significant may be a result of low statistical power due to the small sample size of PEN students (n = 44) used in this comparison, rather than to there being no true difference between the groups’ written test performances. For the properly assigned students with access to a computer, only the CD-ROM course was significantly worse than classroom (p < .05), and there were no differences among the pass rates for students in the courses when they did not have access to a computer. Again, finding that the PEN and workbook courses were not significantly worse than classroom in these analyses may be more a result of low power than to there truly being no difference. None of the home-study course pass rates were significantly different from each other in any of the analyses (ps > .05).

A supplementary analysis comparing correctly-assigned non-driver training students in PEN to comparable students in the other courses who were assigned only after PEN was added to the study also indicated no significant differences in written test performance, consistent with the other analyses (ps > .05).

The results of the supplementary Instruction Method x Provider School analysis did not indicate that the relative effectiveness of the instruction methods on DMV written test pass rates varied across the five provider schools included in the analysis (p > .05).

Course Evaluation Comparisons

Although not meaningful for comparing the relative effectiveness of home-study courses to classroom instruction, the exit examination also included five course evaluation questions. A description of the students’ responses to these course evaluation questions is presented in this section. Responses to these questions could range from 1 to 6 with higher responses indicating a more positive evaluation of the

course. The mean rating for each method. The mean ratings shown

question is presented in the table are based

in on

Table 10 for each instruction students who were correctly

28

Document info
Document views142
Page views142
Page last viewedSun Dec 04 20:35:11 UTC 2016
Pages63
Paragraphs1800
Words24530

Comments