International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education

This paper reported a comprehensive “meta-review” and synthesis of research on variables related to learning, including both cognitive and affective schooling outcomes. A conceptual framework was developed encompassing 228 items related to school learning, organized a priori into 30 scales within six categories. Search and selection procedures yielded 179 selected handbook and annual review chapters, commissioned papers, and other authoritative reviews. Content analysis yielded over 3,700 ratings of the strength of influence of the variables on learning. The variables confirmed the primacy of student, classroom, home, and community influences on learning relative to more distal policy variables such as state and district characteristics. Additionally, the variables also highlighted the importance of metacognition, classroom management, quantity of instruction, classroom interactions and climate, and the peer group.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/40539680.pdf

What Influences Learning? A Content Analysis of Review Literature

Background
Standard surgical training has traditionally been one of apprenticeship, where the surgical trainee learns to perform surgery under the supervision of a trained surgeon. This is time-consuming, costly, and of variable effectiveness. Training using a virtual reality simulator is an option to supplement standard training. Virtual reality training improves the technical skills of surgical trainees such as decreased time for suturing and improved accuracy. The clinical impact of virtual reality training is not known.

Objectives
To assess the benefits (increased surgical proficiency and improved patient outcomes) and harms (potentially worse patient outcomes) of supplementary virtual reality training of surgical trainees with limited laparoscopic experience.

Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Science Citation Index Expanded until July 2012.

Selection criteria
We included all randomised clinical trials comparing virtual reality training versus other forms of training including box-trainer training, no training, or standard laparoscopic training in surgical trainees with little laparoscopic experience. We also planned to include trials comparing different methods of virtual reality training. We included only trials that assessed the outcomes in people undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

Data collection and analysis
Two authors independently identified trials and collected data. We analysed the data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models using Review Manager 5 analysis. For each outcome we calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals based on intention-to-treat analysis.

Main results
We included eight trials covering 109 surgical trainees with limited laparoscopic experience. Of the eight trials, six compared virtual reality versus no supplementary training. One trial compared virtual reality training versus box-trainer training and versus no supplementary training, and one trial compared virtual reality training versus box-trainer training. There were no trials that compared different forms of virtual reality training. All the trials were at high risk of bias. Operating time and operative performance were the only outcomes reported in the trials. The remaining outcomes such as mortality, morbidity, quality of life (the primary outcomes of this review) and hospital stay (a secondary outcome) were not reported.

Virtual reality training versus no supplementary training: The operating time was significantly shorter in the virtual reality group than in the no supplementary training group (3 trials; 49 participants; MD -11.76 minutes; 95% CI -15.23 to -8.30). Two trials that could not be included in the meta-analysis also showed a reduction in operating time (statistically significant in one trial). The numerical values for operating time were not reported in these two trials. The operative performance was significantly better in the virtual reality group than the no supplementary training group using the fixed-effect model (2 trials; 33 participants; SMD 1.65; 95% CI 0.72 to 2.58). The results became non-significant when the random-effects model was used (2 trials; 33 participants; SMD 2.14; 95% CI -1.29 to 5.57). One trial could not be included in the meta-analysis as it did not report the numerical values. The authors stated that the operative performance of virtual reality group was significantly better than the control group.

Virtual reality training versus box-trainer training: The only trial that reported operating time did not report the numerical values. In this trial, the operating time in the virtual reality group was significantly shorter than in the box-trainer group. Of the two trials that reported operative performance, only one trial reported the numerical values. The operative performance was significantly better in the virtual reality group than in the box-trainer group (1 trial; 19 participants; SMD 1.46; 95% CI 0.42 to 2.50). In the other trial that did not report the numerical values, the authors stated that the operative performance in the virtual reality group was significantly better than the box-trainer group.

Authors' conclusions
Virtual reality training appears to decrease the operating time and improve the operative performance of surgical trainees with limited laparoscopic experience when compared with no training or with box-trainer training. However, the impact of this decreased operating time and improvement in operative performance on patients and healthcare funders in terms of improved outcomes or decreased costs is not known. Further well-designed trials at low risk of bias and random errors are necessary. Such trials should assess the impact of virtual reality training on clinical outcomes.

Virtual reality training for surgical trainees in laparoscopic surgery

The “Virtual Classroom”: Using Computer‐Mediated Communication for University Teaching

The use of computers to assist in the learning situation in a simulation, game, tutorial, or drill and practice mode is reviewed on an international basis with centers of activity identified in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan. The use of the computer as an adjunct to support learning is compared to its use in a substitution mode. Evaluative studies of CAI are reviewed and costs are examined. The critical issues of CAI are enumerated and analyzed as they pertain to computer hardware, CAI languages, and courseware development and use. The future of CAI is briefly sketched from the viewpoints of individuals prominent in the field. Finally, conclusions are drawn and recommendations are offered to help ensure the most educationally cost-effective use of CAI in learning situations.

Computer assisted instruction: current trends and critical issues

No wonder you activities are, reading will be always needed. It is not only to fulfil the duties that you need to finish in deadline time. Reading will encourage your mind and thoughts. Of course, reading will greatly develop your experiences about everything. Reading computer assisted instruction its use in the classroom is also a way as one of the collective books that gives many advantages. The advantages are not only for you, but for the other peoples with those meaningful benefits.

Computer-Assisted Instruction: Its Use in the Classroom

main criterion for admission to special education programs for the gifted. Thus, by implication, giftedness is defined predominately as the demonstration of high level convergent thinking abilities. The validity of this assumption has begun to be questioned in some areas, especially in reference to the penalties such culturally loaded verbal assessment devices place on culturally different students (Bernal, 1973; Bernal & Reyna, 1975). For this study it was assumed that giftedness embraces more than just high level convergent thinking abilities. It was assumed that the ultimate goal of special education programs for the gifted is to aid students who show the greatest potential for future high level intellectual and creative contribution to perform at their highest levels. Within this context, the study was further limited to students of Mexican-American backgrounds, since such students appeared to be receiving the least support from the present assessment procedures. The study was thus designed to provide tools with which

Jack A. Chambers

Papers

Computer assisted instruction: current trends and critical issues

Computer-Assisted Instruction: Its Use in the Classroom

Identifying Gifted Mexican-American Students:

Computer Assisted Instruction: Factors Affecting Courseware Development.

The Culturally Different Gifted Student: Identifying the Ablest