Communicating in Education and Training

Abstract

This article maintains that the focus of learning and training at all levels is moving increasingly towards the individual ‐‐ how the individual learns and the influences of his or her environment on learning. It suggests that, among the increasing wealth of research into educational technology, the emphasis needs now to be placed on the learning process and the learning environment. But the learning processes and environments have to be seen as part of an educational scenario which is changing rapidly. Education at all levels, together with training at the adult level, and the resources devoted to these purposes will continue to be under direct challenge. To make learning more effective, the questions of contacts and connections by and with media must be examined and assessed. For effective communication the methods and the processes have to be matched to objectives. The article concludes that the rapidly changing technology of communications is helping to shift the balance from an emphasis on what has been largely a one‐way system of communication to one in which the individual learner is increasingly in control and in which the learning process itself, rather than the teaching system, has become the focus.     

Assessment of attention in school children: teachers' ratings related to tests of attention

The paper provides (1) a teacher-administered rating instrument for inattention without confounding the rating with hyperactivity and conduct disorder, and (2) evidence that the ratings correlate with the scores obtained from cognitive tests of attention. In Study I, the first objective was to investigate the construct validity and the inter-rater reliability of the Attention Checklist (ACL) by factor analysing the teacher ratings of 110 Grade 4 children, obtained by using the ACL. The second objective was to investigate the predictive validity of the ACL by examining the relationship between the scores obtained for the participants from teachers' ratings using the ACL and the scores obtained by participants in the lab-type attention tests. The results of factor analysis showed that a single factor labelled ‘inattention’ underlies the 12 items in the ACL. Examining the differences in performance on attention tests, the ‘low attention’ children as rated by the teachers on the ACL scored lower than the ‘high attention’ children on the objective tests of attention. These findings were replicated in Study II, which was conducted to test further the construct validity and predictive validity of the ACL. This time, only those two tests (Auditory Attention and Visual Attention) that had shown relatively poor discrimination between the high and low attention groups in Study I were, again, administered to another cohort of 97 Grade 4 children, as it was our intention to further challenge the reliability of the ACL. Overall, the results of both studies suggest that comprehensive assessment of attention skills should include both ACL and objective measures of selective attention.