Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Student attitude and learning outcomes of multimedia computer-assisted versus traditional instruction in basketball

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of multimedia computer-assisted instruction (MCAI), traditional instruction (TI), and combined instruction (CI) methods on learning the skill of shooting in basketball. Additionally, a comparison of the students’ attitudes towards the MCAI and TI methods was made. Seventy-five middle school students of seventh and eighth grade were randomly assigned into three teaching method groups: TI, MCAI and CI. Each group received ten 45-min periods of instruction divided into three sections: (a) 5-min introduction, (b) 30-min instructional time and (c) 10-min questions and review. Students took pre-, post-, and retention written test covering techniques and rules of the games. Participants in the CI group also completed a post-test attitude survey towards the MCAI and TI methods. Two-way analysis of variances (ANOVA), with repeated measures on the last factor, were conducted to determine effect of method groups (MCAI, TI, CI) and measures (pre-test, post-test, re-test) on knowledge test. Paired samples t-test analyses were conducted to measure students’ attitude towards the MCAI and TI methods. Post-test results indicated no significant differences between the groups concerning the written test. Nevertheless, the attitude test scores of the CI group were more favourable to MCAI method than the TI method. Retention test results showed that groups retained the knowledge acquisition. However, the combine method of instruction tended to be the most effective on cognitive learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, T., Kandt, G., Throgmartin, D., & Waldrop, P. (1991). Computer-assisted instruction vs lecture methods in teaching the rules of golf. Physical Educator, 48(3), 146–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antoniou, P., Derri, V., Kioumourtzoglou, E., & Mouroutsos, S. (2003). Applying multimedia computer-assisted instruction to enhance physical education students’ knowledge of basketball rules. European Journal of Physical Education, 8(1), 78–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antoniou, P., Theodorakis, Y., & Kioumourtzoglou, E. (1999). Teaching differences of the relaxation technique between traditional teaching and the one by means of computer. Exercise & Society, 38, 73–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astleitner, H., & Wiesner, C. (2004). An integrated model of multimedia learning and motivation. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1993). The word processor as an instructional tool: A meta-analysis of word processing in writing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 63–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, R., Abrami, P., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., et al. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379–439. doi:10.3102/00346543074003379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blok, H., Oostdam, R., Otter, M. E., & Overmaat, M. (2002). Computer-assisted instruction in support of beginning reading instruction: A review. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 101–130. doi:10.3102/00346543072001101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrall, P., & Patrick, P. (2001). Youth basketball drills. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christmann, E. P., & Badgett, J. L. (2000). The comparative effectiveness of CAI on collegiate academic performance. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 11(2), 91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotton, K. (1991). Computer-assisted instruction (SIRS Close-up No. 10). Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved January 12, 2007, from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/5/cu10.html

  • Dalton, D., & Hannafin, M. J. (1988). The effects of computer-assisted versus traditional mastery methods on computation accuracy and attitudes. Journal of Educational Research, 82, 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fincher, L. A., & Wright, K. E. (1996). Use of computer-based instruction in athletic training education. Journal of Athletic Training, 31, 44–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, B. S., & Salkind, J. N. (2003). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerns, M. (1989). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in teaching tennis rules and strategies. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 8(2), 123–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiboss, J. K., & Ogunniyi, M. B. (2003). Influence of a computer-based intervention on students’ conceptions of measurement in secondary school physics in Kenya. Themes in Education, 4(2), 203–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, C. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 75–94. doi:10.1016/0747-5632(91)90030-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, Y. C. (1999). Effects of hypermedia on students’ achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 8, 255–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, J. (2001). Computer-based education: Is it a panacea? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(2), 163–171.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGee, R., & Farrow, A. (1987). Test questions for physical education activities. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renshaw, C. E., & Taylor, H. A. (2000). The educational effectiveness of computer-based instruction. Computers and Geosciences, 26, 677–682. doi:10.1016/S0098-3004(99)00103-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schacter, J., & Fagnano, C. (1999). Does computer technology improve student learning and achievement? How, when, and under what conditions? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 20(4), 329–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siskos, A., Antoniou, P., Papaioannou, A., & Laparidis, K. (2005). Effects of multimedia computer-assisted instruction (MCAI) on academic achievement in physical education of Greek primary students. Interactive Educational Multimedia, 10, 61–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanDeWeghe, R. (2006). What is engaged learning? English Journal, 95(3). Retrieved September 23, 2007, from http://www.ncte.org/pubs/journals/ej/contents/120655.htm.

  • Vernadakis, N., Antoniou, P., Zetou, E., & Kioumourtzoglou, E. (2004). Comparison of three different instructional methods on teaching the skill of shooting in basketball. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 46, 421–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vernadakis, N., Avgerinos, A., Zetou, E., Giannousi, M., & Kioumourtzoglou, E. (2006). Comparison of multimedia computer assisted instruction, traditional instruction and combined instruction on learning the skill of long jump. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport, 5(1), 17–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vernadakis, N., Zetou, E., Antoniou, P., & Kioumourtzoglou, E. (2002). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction on teaching the skill of setting in volleyball. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 43, 151–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiemeyer, J. (2003). Learning with multimedia—More promise than practice? International Journal of Computer Science in Sport, 2(1), 102–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiksten, L. D., Spanjer, J., & LaMaster, K. (2002). Effective use of multimedia tchnology in athletic training education. Journal of Athletic Training, 37(4), S–213–S-219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, C., Hillier, R., Padfield, G., & Harrison, J. (1999). The effects of volleyball software on female junior high school students’ volleyball performance. Physical Educator, 56(4), 202–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yildirim, Z., Ozden, M. Y., & Aksu, M. (2001). Comparison of hypermedia learning and traditional instruction on knowledge acquisition and retention. The Journal of educational Research, 94(4), 207–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, Democritus University of Thrace, Campus, 69100, Komotini, Greece

    Nicholas Vernadakis, Eleni Zetou, Efi Tsitskari, Maria Giannousi & Efthimis Kioumourtzoglou

Authors
  1. Nicholas Vernadakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eleni Zetou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Efi Tsitskari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maria Giannousi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Efthimis Kioumourtzoglou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas Vernadakis.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 Appendix A: Knowledge test

Circle or underline the correct answer

  1. 1.

    Which shot provides one of the easiest scoring opportunities in the game?

  2. a.

    Lay-up

  3. b.

    Set shot

  4. c.

    Free throw*

  5. d.

    Jump shot

  6. 2.

    What type of spin is on a well-executed foul shot?

  7. a.

    Backspin*

  8. b.

    Forward spin

  9. c.

    Side spin

  10. d.

    No spin

  11. 3.

    What should a player do before shooting a free throw?

  12. a.

    Check the score clock to see what the score is

  13. b.

    See that teammates are properly placed on the lane

  14. c.

    Check to see where the player is who is assigned to guard him or her

  15. d.

    Relax and concentrate on the shot *

  16. 4.

    When should a player shoot when performing a jump shot?

  17. a.

    Jump and shoot at the same time

  18. b.

    Jump and shoot on the way down

  19. c.

    Jump, then shoot at the top of the jump*

  20. d.

    Jump and shoot as soon as the feet leave the floor

  21. 5.

    Which shot is the most difficult to guard?

  22. a.

    Lay-up

  23. b.

    One-hand set shot

  24. c.

    Jump shot*

  25. d.

    Set shot

  26. 6.

    When shooting a free throw, a player should:

  27. a.

    Bend his knees*

  28. b.

    Close his knees

  29. c.

    Not bend or close his knees

  30. d.

    Bending or closing knee doesn’t matter

  31. 7.

    What is the key to accuracy in making a basketball free throw?

  32. a.

    Extending the shooting arm quickly

  33. b.

    Keeping the elbow straight*

  34. c.

    Directing the ball with the fingers and with the wrist

  35. d.

    Supporting the ball with the non-shooting hand

  36. 8.

    When shooting free throws and three-point baskets, the players should grip the basketball by applying pressure to the ball with:

  37. a.

    The shooting thumb

  38. b.

    All fingers on the shooting hand*

  39. c.

    The finger pads and thumbs on the shooting hand

  40. d.

    Gripping the ball with the shooting hand does not help

  41. 9.

    Which body part is essential to keep in line with the basket when shooting a basketball jump shot?

  42. a.

    Legs

  43. b.

    Hips

  44. c.

    Arms

  45. d.

    Shoulders*

  46. 10.

    What call is made by the official after a player dunks the ball?

  47. a.

    Violation

  48. b.

    Technical foul

  49. c.

    Basket is good*

  50. d.

    Goaltending

  51. 11.

    What is goaltending?

  52. a.

    Touching the net when the ball is the air

  53. b.

    Giving up the ball without getting a shot

  54. c.

    Touching the backboard while the ball is flight

  55. d.

    Affecting the downward flight of the ball*

  56. 12.

    A basket is shot and made at the end of the game. When does it count?

  57. a.

    When the ball has left the shooter’s hand before the buzzer*

  58. b.

    When the shooter has already started motion to shoot

  59. c.

    When the ball is being tapped after the buzzer

  60. d.

    When a personal foul is committed after the buzzer and a basket scores

1.2 Appendix B: Post-test attitude scale

Table 3 Express your feeling with the following statements on a 0–5 scale where 0 = weak and 5 = powerful by comparing TI and MCAI teaching methods
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vernadakis, N., Zetou, E., Tsitskari, E. et al. Student attitude and learning outcomes of multimedia computer-assisted versus traditional instruction in basketball. Educ Inf Technol 13, 167–183 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-008-9061-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-008-9061-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation