The effect of textual input versus iconic input in computer assisted instruction on interval recognition
This study was initiated out of the growing concern of the prevailing poor sense of pitch intervals among music teacher trainees reflected the unsure perception and direction in their aural training. It was sought that in employing a computer assisted instruction approach in aural training with t...
محفوظ في:
| المؤلف الرئيسي: | |
|---|---|
| التنسيق: | أطروحة |
| اللغة: | English English |
| منشور في: |
2004
|
| الموضوعات: | |
| الوصول للمادة أونلاين: | http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/8792/1/FEM_2004_8%20IR.pdf |
| الوسوم: |
إضافة وسم
لا توجد وسوم, كن أول من يضع وسما على هذه التسجيلة!
|
| الملخص: | This study was initiated out of the growing concern of the prevailing poor sense of
pitch intervals among music teacher trainees reflected the unsure perception and
direction in their aural training. It was sought that in employing a computer assisted
instruction approach in aural training with the use of an aural software will offer
music teacher trainees an opportunity to work independently on their aural skills
outside the confines of a formal aural lesson in the classroom. This study hopes to
bring greater efficiency for music teacher educators to structure aural lessons tailored
to music teacher trainees' pace and ability.
The objective of the study was to compare the effect of a textual input versus an
iconic input in computer assisted instruction on interval recognition of music major and non music major teacher trainees at a teacher's training college. The study also
investigated the music teacher trainees' evaluation of the aural training software,
Auralia. The textual input group (n=32) and iconic input group (n=32) consisted of
music major (n=16) and non music major (n=16) teacher trainees in each input
group. The textual input and the iconic input groups completed 20 drill and practice
lessons in interval recognition. Both groups completed a progressive test at every
session, a total of 20 progressive tests for the 20 lessons. At the end of the treatment
in the study, each input group completed a final test from the aural software. Pretest
and posttest of the same contents were administered to the groups before and after
the study.
The results indicated there were no significant differences in interval recognition
achievement in the final tests and posttests between the textual input (music major
and non music major) and iconic input (music major and non music major) groups.
The results also showed no significant differences in music teacher trainees'
evaluation of the software between the textual input (music major and non music
major) and iconic input (music major and non music major) group. This CAl study
suggests that in employing two different inputs, a textual input or an iconic input
using aural software had no significant differences on interval recognition. |
|---|