Date of Award
8-1-1930
Document Type
Thesis
Degree Name
Master of Science (MS)
Department
Education
First Advisor
Dr. Ralph A. Fritz
Keywords
United States -- History, Study and Teaching (Secondary)
Abstract
This study attempts two things: (1) To build a usable and practical technique for teaching high school pupils to more effectively study American history; and (2) To determine the value of this new technique by using it in a typical high school history class.
The study technique was based upon the results of a questionnaire given to one hundred eleven high school pupils studying American history in the Pittsburg, Kansas, high school and the Coffeyville, Kansas, high school. The pupils filling out the questionnaire were asked to check the habits and methods of study they used in studying American history.
The most common method of study used by the pupils was "Read the assignment once" and the most commonly used method of reviewing for an examination was "Study the questions and outlines given by the teacher." These items were checked by 42 per cent and 63 per cent of the pupils respectively.
The major topics included in the technique were:
1. Reading
a. Rapid silent reading
b. Reading for information
2. Making a Summary
3. Making of Outlines
a. Serial
b. Parallel
4. Reference Work
a. Library
b. Supplementary reference books
c. Current magazines
d. Index
In order to determine the value of the new technique a controlled experiment was conducted at the senior high school Coffeyville, Kansas. Two classes in American History were used; in so far as the experiment could be controlled the only variable was the "Study Technique" used with the Experimental Group as a means of teaching the pupils how to study American history. A summary of the results is contained in the findings and conclusions which follows;
1. The most common methods of study used by the pupils were: "read the assignment once; underscore the most important points; and read the assignment for the general trend and summarize."
2. The most common method for reviewing for an examination was "Study the outlines and questions given by the teacher."
3. The average amount of time spent in studying history was thirty minutes a day.
4. The results of the study show that the mean gain (16.681) for the Experimental Group exceeded the mean gain (13.05) of the Control Group by 2.361 points when the achievement was measured by the Barr Diagnostic Test in American History. When the "fromulas 1 and 2" were applied for calculating the reliability of the difference of two means we found that this differences was reliable so far as sampling is concerned.
5. The obtained difference of the mean gains on the Barr Test in American History, Series 2A and 2B, for the Experimental Group were realiable gains for thr group.
6. The obtained difference of the mean gains on the Barr Test in American History,
Series 2A and 2B, for the Control Group are reliable gains for the group.
7. The mean gain for the Experimental Group exceeded the mean gain of the Control Group when the pupils were equated (1) on the basis of reading test scores, and (2) on the basis of mental test scores.
8. The "Study Technique" was probably the predominating factor responsible for the excess gain made by the Experimental Group.
9. The number of pupils used was too small for the results to be considered conclusive; it would be better to speak of them as indicative.
Recommended Citation
Penn, Jennie, "The Construction and Evaluation of a Study Technique For American History" (1930). Electronic Theses & Dissertations. 529.
https://digitalcommons.pittstate.edu/etd/529
