| This study examined the cost-effectiveness of using a locally developed computer-assisted interactive videotape-based equipment independent laboratory experience as a substitute for a conventional equipment dependent laboratory experience. An intact group of students (N = 139), enrolled in an undergraduate Industrial Technology laboratory course, was divided into experimental and control groups. The control group used a conventional equipment dependent laboratory activity which covered hydraulic system concepts. The experimental group used a locally developed computer-assisted interactive videotape-based equipment independent laboratory experience covering the same concepts. A pretest, treatment, posttest design was employed to measure achievement. Achievement was used as the measure of effectiveness.;The costs of both treatments were analyzed using a marginal cost analysis approach. The results of the analyses indicated that, in this study, the costs of using a computer-assisted interactive video-based equipment independent laboratory experience would be lower than the costs of the conventional equipment dependent laboratory experience over a projected ten year life cycle. A sensitivity analysis indicated that the cost relationships between the two treatments was sensitive to changes in total costs incurred by additional fixed costs of developing additional courseware units. An additional sensitivity analysis indicated that changes in inflation rate and interest rate assumptions did not effect the cost relationship between the treatment methods. The researcher concluded that the computer-assisted interactive video-based equipment independent laboratory experience was a cost-effective method of providing simulated laboratory experiences.;The findings of this study supported the findings of other studies reported in the literature. Computer-assisted instructional methods can be as effective as other modes of instruction. In certain situations, computer-assisted instruction can provide reductions in instructional costs.;T-tests and Analysis of Covariance were the statistical procedures used. The t-test analysis indicated that there was a significant positive difference between pretest and posttest for both groups. The analysis of covariance indicated that there were no significant differences between groups on the posttest, controlling for an Ability factor which included the pretest score, cumulative grade point average, high school percentile rank, and ACT composite score. |
