No abstract

The costs, effects, and utility of mathematics instruction assisted by microcomputer presentations were compared with those of conventional classroom approaches for grades 3 and 5. In both grades, students who received microcomputer assisted instruction scored significantly higher on a standard test of total mathematics achievement and on a test of computer literacy than did those who received conventional instruction. Students in all groups scored about the same on a survey of mathematics attitudes. In grade 3 the cost per month of grade placement gain in total mathematics was about $20 per student for microcomputer assisted instruction and $33 per student for conventional instruction. These costs were about $17 and $27, respectively, in grade 5. Based on utility ratings obtained from school board members, microcomputer assisted instruction was found to have greater cost utility in both grades. Given the results reported here and by Levin, a strong case is suggested for the cost-effectiveness of grouping students on microcomputers located in classrooms. is the superintendent of curriculum for the Saskatoon Public School Board, 405 3rd Ave., South, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7K 1M7. He specializes in strategic planning, curriculum implementation, and application of technology to instructional practice. PHILIP K. PIELE is director of ERIC Clearinghouse and professor of educational policy and management at the School of Education, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403. He specializes in networks and communication systems, school law, and applied statistics.

In today’s research and development, and training communities, return on investment (ROI) and training effectiveness (TE) are critical factors that need to be considered up-front, during, and post deployment of a training technology/platform or program. In the past, TE may have been viewed as a construct separate to ROI; however, today, viewing TE in the same sentence as ROI has been accentuated. Panelists will discuss current and/or past experiences with TE and/or ROI. Perspectives from the military, training, and industry communities will be represented. Some topics that will be discussed are: should ROI and TE be viewed as separate constructs or a synergy, group and team TE, return on training investment, and measures and outcomes of TE and ROI.

This report documents a review of the technical approach used to develop the semi-automated forces (SAFOR) portion of DARPA's Advanced Simulation Technology Program. The review was conducted in August 1989 by an independent panel of four computer scientists whose comments are presented and summarized. The panel concluded that (1) the SAFOR development is work of high quality: (2) the suite of hardware being used is non-optimal, but the effort to change it is not currently justified, (31 conversion of the software to another language is not currently justified, (4) the objectives of the SAFOR development should be explicated and made more specific, (5) some limited measures should be taken in the short term to improve the adaptability of the SAFOR, but more substantial measures should be pursued in a longer term research effort, (6) more and better tools for users of the SAFOR should be developed, (7) more systematic test and evaluation procedures should be incorporated in the SAFOR effort. Program. The review was conducted in August 1989 by an independent panel of four computer scientists whose comments are presented and summarized. The panel concluded that (1) the SAFOR development is work of high q~iaity; (2) the suite of hardware being used in non-optimal, but the effort to change it is not currently justified, (3) conversion of the sof.v'ar.e-to is iio currently justified, (4) the objectives of the SAFOR development should be explicated and made more specific, (5) some limited measures should be taken in the short term to improve the adaptability of the SAFOR, but more substantial measures should be pursued in a longer term research effort, (6) more and better tools for users of the SAFOR should be developed, (7) more systematic test and evaluation procedures should be incorporated in the SAFOR effort. iii CONTENTS

No abstract