The Keller plan revisited: The use of the Personalized System of Instruction in a course in leadership and management offered to senior baccalaureate nursing students

• Main Author: Shpritz, Deborah Wright
• Format: Dissertation
• Language: English
• Published: ProQuest Dissertations & Theses 01-01-1993
• Subjects: Curricula; Curriculum development; Higher education; Leadership; Management; Nursing; Teaching
• ISBN: 9798207951232

The purposes of this quasiexperimental study were to assess the effectiveness of PSI as a teaching strategy in a required course in Leadership and Management taught to senior nursing students; to determine if there was a difference in the demographic characteristics of students who preferred PSI and those who preferred it less; and to compare faculty time required to prepare and teach a course using PSI format with a course taught by the traditional lecture-discussion method. Students were randomly assigned to one of five course sections. One section (n = 34) received the experimental intervention, PSI, during the first half of the course; traditional teaching methods were used in the second half. The other four sections (with class sizes of 28, 30, 30, and 26, respectively) were taught by traditional teaching methods throughout the semester. Instrumentation involved the use of (1) a pretest, (2) a common multiple choice midterm examination, (3) a non-cumulative final examination, (4) a two-part questionnaire consisting of a demographic survey and an attitude survey and (5) a faculty time log. Repeated measures ANCOVA, using the pretest as covariate, tested differences in midterm and final examination scores of PSI and control groups. The main effects for teaching method (PSI vs. non-PSI) and time of exam (midterm vs. final) were significant: PSI students consistently outscored their non-PSI counterparts; final exam grades were consistently higher than midterm exam scores. The interaction was nonsignificant. Attitude survey did not lend themselves to inferential analyses, but results showed a large majority of students preferred PSI. Faculty time logs indicated PSI required more time for preparation and instruction. Although it is not possible to unequivocally conclude that superior performance was solely the result of PSI, alternative explanations such as pretest score differences, class size and demographic differences could be ruled out. Generalization of the results beyond the study's subjects can be done only with extreme caution. The results do support the notion that students are open to alternative instructional strategies. Faculty should be educated and encouraged to explore nontraditional, alternative instructional strategies to empower them as educators and to empower students as life long learners.