› wp-content › upl… · Web viewTITLE PAGE EFFECTS OF LABORATORY PRACTICAL WORK, DEMONSTRATION...
Transcript of › wp-content › upl… · Web viewTITLE PAGE EFFECTS OF LABORATORY PRACTICAL WORK, DEMONSTRATION...
1
TITLE PAGE
EFFECTS OF LABORATORY PRACTICAL WORK, DEMONSTRATION METHOD AND LEARNING STYLES ON SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT
AND INTEREST IN CHEMISTRY
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tables Pages
TITLE PAGE i
APPROVAL PAGE ii
CERTIFICAITON PAGE iii
DEDICATION iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
LIST OF APPENDICES x
LIST OF TABLES xi
ABSTRACT xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study 1
Statement of the Problem 10
Purpose of the Study 11
Significance of the Study 11
Scope of the Study 12
Research Questions 13
Hypotheses 13
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Conceptual Framework 15
Chemistry 17
Cooperative Learning 19
Lecture Method 39
Achievement 41
Interest 42
School Location 43
Gender 45
Theoretical Framework 47
Vygotsky Theory of Learning 47
Related Empirical Studies 49
Cooperative Learning and Achievement in Chemistry 49
vii
3
Gender and Achievement in Chemistry 54
School Location and Achievement in Chemistry 58
Interest and Achievement in Chemistry 59
Summary of Literature Review 61
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHOD
Design of the Study 64
Area of the Study 65
Population of the Study 65
Sample and Sampling Technique 65
Instrument for Data Collection 66
Validation of Instrument 66
Reliability of Instrument 67
Experimental Procedures 67
Control of Experimental Variables 69
Method of Data Analysis 70
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS
Research Question One 71
Research Question Two 71
Research Question Three 72
Research Question Four 73
Research Question Five 73
Research Question Six 74
Research Question Seven 75
Research Question Eight 76
Research Hypothesis One 76
Research Hypothesis Two 77
Research Hypothesis Three 77
Research Hypothesis Four 78
Research Hypothesis Five 79
Research Hypothesis Six 79
Research Hypothesis Seven 80
Research Hypothesis Eight 80
viii
4
Summary of the Findings 80
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS
AND SUMMARY
Discussion of Findings 82
Conclusions 86
Educational Implications of the Findings 86
Recommendations 87
Limitations of the Study 88
Suggestions for Further Research 88
Summary of the Study 88
References 91
Appendices 102
ix
5
APPENDICES
A: Chemistry Achievement Test Questions CAT (multiple choice questions) 102
B: Marking Guide for the Chemistry Achievement Test Questions 104
C: Chemistry Interest Inventory Scale (CII) used for the Study. 106
D: Table of Specification for the Chemistry Achievement Test Questions (CAT) 108
E: Computation of Reliability of CAT. 109
F: Computation of Reliability of CII. 114
G: Population of SS2 Chemistry Students in Abakaliki Education Zone
for 2015/2016 Academic Session. 134
H: Sample size of SS2 Chemistry Students in Urban and Rural Schools. 136
I: Request for Validation of Research Instrument. 137
J: Some of the Correction Recommendations Made by the Validates. 138
K: Lesson Notes on Cooperative Learning 142
L: Lesson Notes on Conventional Lecture Method 158
x
6
LIST OF TABLES
1: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students to taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with the lecture method. 71
2: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of male and female students in chemistry. 72
3: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. 72
4: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught usinglecture method. 73
5: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of male and female students in chemistry. 74
6: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. 74
7: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students for the interaction effect of method and gender. 75
8: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students for the interaction effect of method and location. 76
9: Analysis of covariance of the effect of method on students’ achievement in chemistry 77
10: Analysis of covariance for the influence of location on students’ achievement in chemistry 78
11: Analysis of covariance of the effect of method on students’ interest in chemistry 78
12: Analysis of covariance for the influence of location on students’ Interest in chemistry 79
xi
7
ABSTRACT
The study investigated the Effects Of Laboratory Practical Work, Demonstration Method And Learning Styles On Secondary School Students’ Achievement And Interest In Chemistry. Eight research questions and Eight null hypothesis which were tested at 0.05 level of significance guided the study. Quasi-experimental research design was adopted for the study. The population of the study was 1175 SS II students in the said zone. The sample of the study was 160 SS II students. Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) and Chemistry Interest Inventory (CII) were used for data collection. Three experts carried out construct, face and content validity on the instruments. The reliability coefficients of 0.914 and 0.861 were obtained for CAT and CII respectively. Mean and standard deviation were used to answer research questions and ANCOVA was used to test research hypothesis at 0.05 level of significance. The findings of the study showed that cooperative learning strategy significantly enhanced academic achievement and interest of students in chemistry more than the conventional lecture method. Gender had a significant main effect on the achievement and interest of students in chemistry which shows that male students achieved higher in chemistry more than the female students when exposed to cooperative learning strategy. Location of school was not a significant factor on students’ achievement and interest in chemistry when taught using cooperative learning strategy. It was recommended among others that teacher training institutions such as colleges of Education and the universities should adopt cooperative learning strategy as a teaching strategy for teaching their students, since those students will turn out to be chemistry teachers in secondary schools.
xii
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Science is a human endeavour that consists of process and product. It is dynamic and
essentially concerned with search and explanation of both regularities and irregularities in
nature. It embraces every attempt of humans to explore, interpret and manage the natural
world (Garuba, Agweda & Abumere, 2012). Science is the systematic study of anything that
can be examined, tested and verified (Agugu 2012). The word Science is derived from the
Latin word “Scientia” meaning to know (Nwankwo, 1998). Science is a systematic process of
obtaining testable or verifiable knowledge about nature and natural occurrences, utilizing
careful observation and experimentation (Okeke, 2008). Science is a systematic study of the
universe and environment through observation and experimentation leading to production of
an organized body of knowledge (Njoku, 2013). Science as a field of study has enormous
contributions to national development. The study of science allows learners to experience the
richness and excitement of the natural world as they engage in inquiry, critical thinking and
demonstration of skills. Science also transforms the environment towards improving the
general quality of life, thus making the world a better place to live. Science is the bedrock of
technological development. It equally facilitates and enhances industrial and technological
progress among the people and within a nation. For these reasons the federal Government of
Nigeria advocates the study of science at all levels of the nations education for the production
of adequate number of scientists to inspire and support development (FGN, 2008).
Science as fields of study have many branches all working together to achieve a
common goal. These branches are divided into three major groups which are:
Natural sciences which studies natural phenomena including fundamental forces and
biological life.
1
2
Formal sciences such as mathematics and logic which use apriori as opposed to factual
methodology and;
Social sciences which studies human behavior and societies. The natural and social
sciences are empirical science, meaning that the knowledge must be based on
observable phenomena and must be capable of being verified by other researchers
working under the same conditions. (Opara, 2004: 5).
The natural sciences are made up of sub-fields such as physical science, biological
science and applied science. Chemistry is one of the basic units of the physical science which
studies matter and the changes they undergo. It studies various substances, atoms, molecules
and matter. Chemistry as a subject studies the composition and properties of matter, their
reactions and uses of such reactions to form new substance. Chemistry is part of everything in
our lives. Every material in existence is made up of matter – even our own bodies. Chemistry
is involved in everything we do, from growing and cooking food, to cleaning our homes and
bodies, to launching a space shuttle. Chemistry is one of the physical sciences that help us to
describe and explain our world.
From the foregoing, the role of chemistry in the development of the scientific base of
a country cannot be overemphasized and Nigeria is not an exception. Yet with the increasing
importance of chemistry to the unfolding world, the achievement of students in the subject at
the secondary school remains a dismal failure (Saage 2009). However it is disappointing to
note that students’ achievement in chemistry at internal and external examination has
remained considerably poor despite the relative importance of chemistry Saage, (2009).
Several factors have been advanced to account for students’ poor achievement in chemistry.
Kosau, (2006) reported that such factors include the student’s factor, teacher’s factor, societal
factor, the governmental infrastructural problem, language problem, examination body
related variables, curriculum related variables, tested variables, and textbook selected
variables and home related variables. Saage (2009) also identified specific variable such as
3
poor primary school background in science, lack of incentives for test, lack of interest on the
part of the students, students not interested in hard work, incompetent teachers in the primary
school, large class, fear of the subject psychologically etc.
Student’s achievement in chemistry at the secondary school level is deteriorating
every year. This statement is re-iterated by WAEC Chief Examiners’ Report (2014:5) “the
questions are generally within the scope of the students, although the achievements of the
students bellied the quality and simplicity of the questions”. This poor achievement has been
attributed to so many factors, some which have been mentioned, but primarily the method
used by the chemistry teachers which is the conventional method or lecture method has been
adduced to be one of the major problems (Igboanugo, 2013). This method makes students to
be passive listeners in the classroom learning. For lecture method, lectures are delivered to
students from notes or textbooks, with little discussion. So no serious effort is made to
engage the bored minds of the students. This usually leads to a situation whereby students
complete their courses or study but still lacking in a coherent body of knowledge or any
inkling to how one chemistry concepts relates to the others. The students may likely graduate
without knowing how to think logically and carryout simple experiment in chemistry.
(Igbokwe, 2007), notes that the lecture method of teaching is familiar, easy and required no
imagination. Perhaps, this is why it is the dominant method of teaching in secondary schools,
colleges and universities. As of the short-comings of the existing science teaching methods,
the researcher has decided to investigate the effect of a novel teaching method-cooperative
learning strategy and interest on student’s achievement in chemistry.
Cooperative learning refers to the instructional strategies in which pairs of small
group of learners work together to accomplish a shared goal (Ogbu2008). The purpose of
cooperation is for learners to maximize their own and each others’ learning, with members of
the group all striving for joint benefit. Cooperative learning according to Adams (2013),
4
employed many of the following characteristics and strategies in the class room: positive
inter-dependence, face to face interactions, individual accountability, social skills and group
processing.
Group work has served as a pedagogical tool in a variety of learning situations. Ogbu
(2008), explains that group work is the act of working together with a group of people all
trying to solve the same problem. This strategy is different from a situation where the teacher
leads and dominates learning activities thereby having all decision made regarding purposes,
content and participation in his/her hands.
In recent times, more effort has been made towards bringing into reality what goes on
in the society into the classroom setting. It has been discovered that various skills are needed
to function in the society as human beings, since life is not a solitary existence that which
must be lived in the company of others. Cooperative learning as an aspect of learning is both
a fact of life and a realistic aspect of existence have learned skills. For example, skills of
critical thinking, and interdependent ingoing and group participatory behavior are some of the
skills of cooperative learning. In cooperation, students experience a joint workspace. The
essential elements of cooperative learning are; positive interdependence, face to face
promotive interaction, individual and group accountability, interpersonal and small group
skills and group processing. Through a deliberate application of cooperative learning
strategies in the classroom, educators aim at correcting the unconscious societal and
educational bias that requires competition. Huang and Su (2010) are of the view that because
cooperative learning groups have active interdependence, it will cultivate team spirit of
students penetrating into the teaching of the class, as well as lay a good foundation of
development of I Q for students entering the society. This assertion is in line with the
observation of Mezieobi (2009) that: “When students acquire values or cooperation, self
discipline orderliness, group work, attitude and harmonious cohesive behavior, as a result of
5
the level of classroom interactive situation created by the teacher, they are equipped with
good citizens’ skills for cooperative nation building and development(p.79)”.
The above views from different researchers point to the fact that cooperative learning
is very useful to the learners in particular and the society as a whole. It has been argued that
though cooperative learning strategy has been tried in teaching arts and commercial subjects
(Adams, 2013), many chemistry teachers have not been trained or be made aware of the
benefits of this strategy in non-practical situation. Consequently, there is the need to test the
benefits claimed by researchers on cooperative leaning strategy in non-practical chemistry
learning situations. Cooperative learning strategy is different from other types of group work
done by students because it has the underlying philosophy that knowledge is essentially
social in nature. It is a give and take process that depends on interaction with other
individuals during learning situations. In other words, as a matter of fact, students learn from
each other through communication and cooperative efforts. Also in this learning strategy, the
teacher acts as an organizer, a facilitator and to a varying degree as a resource person.
According to Yamarik (2007), cooperative learning strategies have demonstrated the ability
to outperform teacher-centered strategies in the classroom, especially in social studies. From
the foregoing, it can be deduced that a cooperative learning interaction in the science
classroom, especially in chemistry may offers students the opportunity to develop interest in
chemistry, as well as record positive achievement in the subject. Hence learning
cooperatively by interaction between students enables them to not only work together in
solving problems easily, but also making wise decisions using both thoughts and teaching or
logic and intuition.
Closely related to cooperative learning strategy of teaching is interest of students in
chemistry learning. Interest is an important variable in the academic achievement of
chemistry because when one is interested in chemistry, one becomes eager to learn it. Interest
6
is a persisting inclination to be attentive and enjoy some activities in contents. Paul (2013),
observes that Interest can help learners think more clearly, understand more deeply and
remember more accurately. According to the author, interest has power to transform
struggling performance in learners to a new academic achievement. Subramanian (2009),
observes interest as a psychological stage of engagement, experience in the moment and
proposition to engage repeatedly with particular ideas events or objects. According to the
author, interest acts as an urge and it is considered as a cognitive and affective state. Interest
enables learners to employ more effective learning strategies such as critical thinking and
making connections between old and new learning experiences. It is therefore important for
teachers to be acquainted with adequate teaching methods or strategies and materials which
will increase students’ interest in chemistry. Therefore in the teaching and learning of
chemistry in secondary school, it is necessary to arouse the interest of students so as to
enhance students’ achievement in chemistry. The researcher is of the opinion that if
cooperative learning strategy is used in the teaching of chemistry, it will enhance the interest
of students in chemistry thereby promoting better achievement in the subject.
However, although there is a general belief that students’ poor achievement in
chemistry could be traced to inappropriate method of teaching used by teachers and low or
lack of interest on the part of the students, some intervening variables such as gender and
school location of students can also affect the achievement of students’ in chemistry.
Gender is a variable which plays an important role in the learning process. According
to Ezeh (2013:7), “Gender refers to one’s subjective feeling of ‘maleness’ and ‘femaleness’
irrespective of one’s sex. It is generally classified into masculine and feminine and concerned
with attitude that describes males and females in the social and cultural context”. Chukwu
(2012), sees gender as the behavioural, cultural and psychological characteristics associated
with boys and girls which may influence their academic achievement. This involves all
7
characteristics of men and women which a particular society has determined and assigned to
each sex. The issue of gender is an important one in science education especially with
increasing emphasis on ways of boosting manpower for technological development as well as
increasing the population of females in science and technology fields (UNESCO, 2009). In
Nigeria, and perhaps the whole of Africa, gender bias is still very prevalent (Nwosu, 2012).
This is a view to which Onuigbo (2009) has also alluded in pointing out that: “girls are
naturally perceived to be weak and should study courses that are not very difficult like such
as food science, education and English. The boys are seen to be strong and should take
subjects that are scientific and require calculations such as physics, chemistry and
mathematics and other courses such as medicine, engineering, aeronautics or astronomy. This
implies that societal norms influence people actions (p.183)”. It is common place to see
gender stereotypes manifesting in the day-to-day life of an average Nigerian. Certain
vocations and professions have traditionally been regarded as men’s (Medicine, Engineering,
Architecture) and others women (Nursing, catering, typing, arts). Typically, parents call boys
to wash cars, cut grass, fix bulbs or climb ladders to fix or remove things. On the other hand,
chores such as washing dishes, cooking, clearing and so on are reserve for girls. In a nutshell,
what are regarded as complex and difficult tasks are allotted to boys, whereas girls are
expected to handle the relatively easy and less demanding task.
As a result of this way of thinking, the larger society has tended to see females as the
“weaker sex”. Consequently, an average Nigerian child goes to school with these fixed
stereotypes. Gender issues, both on the part of the teachers and students have been
documented to affect learning generally (Erinoso, 2005). Conflicting results in gender-related
research should, however be expected as studies vary in their learning content. These include
the methodology, populations, geography, and research task and classroom interactions.
8
Viann, (2002) carried out a research to investigate gender differences and the effects
of cooperative learning interactions in science classroom using individualized learning
method with three treatment sections using cooperative learning strategy based on learning
together model of Johnson and Johnson (1991), the result shows non-significant gender-
related differences but females achieved slightly higher grades than males. Samuel and John
(2004), examined how the cooperative class experiment (CCE) teaching methods affects
students’ achievement in chemistry. They found that there was no significant difference in
gender achievement between the experimental and control groups, but girls had a slightly
higher mean score than boys did.
Kolawole (2007) found that boys performed better than girls in both competitive and
cooperative learning strategies when the researcher carried out a research on the effects of
competitive and cooperative learning strategies on Nigerian student’s academic performance
in mathematics. Billings (2000); Agnele and Uhumniah (2008), found out in their studies at
various times, that male students achieved significantly better than female students in science
education. These differences in achievement according to the researchers may be attributed to
gender stereotyping which encourages male and female students to show interest in subject
relevant and related to the roles expected of them in the society.
All the above findings are inconclusive in their respective reports as to whether
females and males differ in the way they learn and interact cooperatively in chemistry and
science classroom. Also none of the research showed effect of gender on students’ interest in
chemistry. It is therefore important to find out in clear terms any gender differences in
cooperative learning strategy in chemistry among secondary school students.
Closely related to gender influence on students achievement in chemistry is location
of school. The location of school has a lot to do with how a child learns in school. Location is
a particular position or geographical area. It can also mean a settlement, whether a village,
9
town or city usually occupied by human beings (Marja, 2006). School location simply refers
to the geographical area where the school is located, whether in Urban or Rural area.
Differentiation between urban and rural area are demographically done by the government
offices of regional planning and development. Urban area schools are believed to have social
facilities, while rural area schools are believed to lack social facilities such as electricity,
pipe-borne water supply, tarred roads, well-equipped laboratories and qualified teachers
among others. However, the specific problems of teaching chemistry in urban and rural
schools and whether students achieve significantly better in any of the locations when taught
using cooperative learning strategy have not been adequately investigated. Also, there are
contrary views as regards the effects of school location and students academic achievement in
the few researches carried out. Bodunde (2010), reports that school location is a significant
factor in students’ achievement in oral English. Uzoegwu (2004), also reports that school
location has significant effect on the academic achievement of students in essay writing,
while Yusuf and Adigun (2010), shows that location has no effect on students academic
achievement. Nbina and Obomanu (2011), observed that federal and State governments in
Nigeria have been making concerted efforts to improve the educational system in the rural
areas using certain educational management commissions to ensure that qualified teachers
who have been trained using cooperative learning strategy and facilities that will enhance
student’s academic achievement are sent to rural schools. These efforts by the government
notwithstanding, secondary school in rural areas appear to be disadvantaged in areas of
infrastructure. The researchers also observed that most rural secondary schools are not well-
equipped as most urban secondary schools. Furthermore, well-trained and more
technologically informed teachers prefer posting to urban schools than rural schools. Hence,
it is important to investigate whether school location influences students’ achievement in
10
chemistry and any relationship between students’ interests and achievement in rural and
urban schools, when students are taught using cooperative learning strategy.
Based on the previous studies, the effect of cooperative learning strategy, interest,
school location and gender on students’ achievement seem to be inconsistent and
contradictory. This calls for continuous and further research on the effect of cooperative
learning strategies, interest, school location and gender on students’ academic achievement
from time to time and place to place. Consequently, this study seeks to investigate the effect
of cooperative learning strategy and students’ achievement and interest in chemistry in
Abakaliki education zone of Ebonyi State.
Statement of the Problem
There have been consistent reports of poor achievement in chemistry among
Nigerians students over the years. Also, results on students’ achievement in senior secondary
certificate examination (SSCE) in chemistry over the year have not been commendable.
Failure in this subject area has been attributed to the methods and strategies of teaching
adopted by the teachers. The lecture method employed by teachers in the teaching of
chemistry at the senior secondary school have been found to have some limitations, one of
which is that it is teacher-centered instead of learner-centered. Also, the poor achievement of
students in chemistry at the secondary school level may also be as a result of interest of
students in the subjects. It has been observed that student’s lack of interest in chemistry could
also be traced to inappropriate method of teaching used by the teachers.
There is the need to address this problem in order to enhance students’ interest and
achievement in chemistry in both internal and external examinations. It is assumed that the
method used in teaching chemistry has a great role to play in the alleviation of this problem,
and that the use of cooperative learning strategy could help in this regard. Therefore, the
11
problem of this study put in question form is: what is the effect of cooperative learning
strategy on senior secondary school student achievement and interest in chemistry?
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to ascertain the Effects Of Laboratory Practical Work,
Demonstration Method And Learning Styles On Secondary School Students’ Achievement
And Interest In Chemistry
Specifically, the study seeks to:
1. find out the mean achievement scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative
learning strategy and those taught using lecture method.
2. ascertain the influence of gender on the mean achievement scores of students in
chemistry.
3. ascertain the influence of school location on the mean achievement scores of student in
chemistry.
4. ascertain the effect of cooperative learning strategy on the interest of chemistry students.
5. ascertain the influence of gender on the interest of chemistry students.
6. ascertain the influence of school location on the interest of chemistry students.
7. ascertain the interaction effect between method and gender on students’ mean
achievement scores in chemistry.
8. ascertain the interaction effect between method and school location on students’ mean
achievement scores in chemistry.
Significance of the Study
The findings of the study when implemented will have both practical and theoretical
significance. The theoretical significance of this study its result will throw more light on
Vygotsky theory of learning (1978) which explains that the process of intellectual
development takes place with social and cultural contents. The findings of this present study
12
will either support or disagree with Vygotsky’s theory which also views learning as a process
that requires environmental input and social interaction. This theory shows how, within a set
environment, individuals serve as each others’ monitors, supporters and guides. Also this
study is theoretically significant because it will provide insight into the currently existing
theories on cooperative learning strategy, which is thought to reduce students’ passivity and
competition in classroom learning situation, thereby facilitating the effective acquisition of
collaborative skills in chemistry.
The findings of this study will benefit the students, teachers, education authorities,
and curriculum developers. The students will benefit from the findings of this study because
the use of cooperative learning strategy will improve their achievement in chemistry.
Applications of the findings of this study pedagogically, will reduce the teacher’s
stress in the classroom as most of the learning activities will be carried out by the students
while the teacher will just be a facilitator of learning. The findings of this study will enable
education authorities to organize seminars and workshops where they will enlighten the
chemistry teachers on how to use cooperative learning strategy and on the teachers the
necessity to use the strategy in their various schools as it will help improve their students’
achievement in chemistry.
Curriculum developers will also benefit from the findings of this study. They will
include the strategy as an innovation in science teaching strategy in secondary school
curriculum. The strategy will also be included in the curriculum used for training teachers.
Scope of the Study
This study will be carried out in Abakaliki education zone of Ebonyi State. Senior
Secondary School Two (SS II) students will be used for this study. The choice of SSII is
made because of students’ achievement in chemistry at this level is very poor in Abakaliki
education zone. (Source: Secondary Education Board, Ugwuachara Abakaliki). The
13
researcher intends to investigate the effect of cooperative learning strategy on students’
achievement and interest in chemistry in this education zone.
The study will cover some selected topics in Senior Secondary School two (SSII)
chemistry curriculums. The topics includes: periodic table of elements, rate of chemical
reaction, oxidation-reduction reaction and energy changes in chemical reaction. The
researcher chose these topics because they are appropriate for the students’ level and are
enshrined in the SS2 curriculum. Also these topics were selected because they fall within the
period they will be taught to students as contained in the SS2 scheme of work for the term.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided this study:
1. What are the mean achievement scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative
learning strategy and those taught using the lecture method?
2. What are the mean achievement scores of male and female students in chemistry?
3. What are the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry?
4. What is the effect of cooperative learning strategy on the interest of chemistry students?
5. What is the effect of gender on the interest of chemistry students?
6. What is the effect of school location on the interest of chemistry students?
7. What is the interaction effect of method and gender on students’ mean achievement
scores in chemistry?
8. What is the interaction effect of method and school location on students’ mean
achievement scores in chemistry?
Hypotheses
The following null Hypotheses guided this study and was be tested at 0.05 level of
significance.
14
H01: There is no significance difference between the mean achievement scores of students
taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the
lecture method.
H02: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of male and
female students in chemistry.
H03: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of urban and
rural student in chemistry.
H04: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of students taught
chemistry using the cooperative learning strategy and those taught using lecture
method.
H05: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of male and
female students in chemistry when taught using cooperative learning strategy.
H06: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of urban and rural
student in chemistry.
H07: There is no significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ means
achievement scores in chemistry.
H08: There is no significant interaction effect of method and school location on students’
mean achievement scores in chemistry.
15
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter present review of related literature under the following heading;
conceptual framework, theoretical framework, the review of empirical studies and summary
of literature review.
Conceptual Framework
• Chemistry
• Cooperative learning
• Lecture method
• Achievement
• Interest
• Gender
• School location
Theoretical Framework
• Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of cooperative learning
Review of Related Empirical Studies
• Cooperative learning and achievement in chemistry
• Gender and achievement in chemistry
• School location and achievement in chemistry
•Interest and achievement in chemistry
Summary of Literature Review
15
16
Fig. 1: Schematic diagram for the study of the effect of cooperative learning strategy on
students’ achievement and interest in chemistry.
The figure above begins with a focus on chemistry which is the subject area. This
research work is considering. Chemistry is a physical science subject which studies the
composition, structure and uses of matter. It also studies the changes matter undergo during
chemical reaction. Chemistry is an important science subject that students at the senior
secondary school level who intends to chose a career in science is expected to study. This is
InterestThis is what influences students learning behaviour and intention to participate in teaching and a learning process
Achievement This is doing something successfully typically by effort, courage and skills
ChemistryIs a branch of physical science, which studies the composition, properties and behaviour of matter.
Cooperative Learning StrategyA method of teaching involving the pairing or grouping of students in learning situation.
Lecture MethodA method of teaching involving the teacher dictating notes or content of a topic verbally or orally to students in learning situation.
Students
Gender Is a psychological term describing behaviour and attributes expected of individuals on the basis of being born as a male or female.
School LocationRefers to where the school is located, whether in urban or rural area.
Teaching MethodThis is a recognized and systematic way of performing a task of teaching.
17
because chemistry is one of the basic units of science and anyone who intends to excel in
science related career is expected to have background knowledge of chemistry.
Chemistry as a subject cannot be effectively impacted on learners without the teacher
using a method of teaching. Method of teaching is a major determinant in every learning
situation. That is, a recognized and systematic way of performing a task of teaching. The
teaching method based on the present study includes the cooperative learning strategy and the
lecture method of teaching. For this diagram, the method of teaching used by the teacher
determines the extent which the students are able to learn the content of topic they are
exposed to. Also, gender of students and the location of the school play a vital role on
students’ interest in learning and consequently their achievement in a learning situation. Each
aspect of the diagramed model is well represented in the conceptual, theoretical and empirical
framework of this present study. Therefore, this study will investigate the effect of
cooperative learning strategy on student’s achievement and interest in chemistry.
Chemistry
Chemistry is a physical science which studies the composition, properties and
behavior of matter. As a fundamental component of matter, the atom is the basic unit of
chemistry (Opara, 2004:10). Chemistry is concerned with atoms and their interactions with
other atoms, with particular focus on the properties of the chemical bond formed between
species. Chemistry is also concerned with various forms of energy (e.g photochemical
reactions, oxidation-reduction reactions, changes in phases of matter, separation of mixture,
properties of polymers etc). Chemistry is sometimes called “the central science” because it
bridges other natural science like physics, biology and geology with each other.
Chemistry studies how matter combines or separates to form other substances and
how other substances interact with energy (Ababio, 2013). According to the author, people
think of chemists as scientists wearing white coats and mixing strange liquids in a laboratory,
18
but the truth is that we are all chemist. Doctor, nurses and veterinaries must study chemistry,
but understanding basic chemistry concepts is important for almost every field of study.
Chemistry as a physical science subject has five main branches, each of which has
many areas of study. These branches include: Analytical chemistry, physical chemistry,
organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry and biochemistry. Within these broad categories are
countless fields of study, many of which have important effects on our daily life. Chemists
improve many products from the food we eat and the clothing we wear to the materials with
which we build our homes (Opara, 2004:11). According to the author, food chemists improve
the quality, safety, storage and taste of our food. They work to develop new products or
improve processing; they test products to supply information, used for the nutrition labels or
to determine how packaging and storage affects the safety and quality of food. Chemistry
helps to protect our environment and searches for new sources of energy. Environmental
chemists study how chemicals interact with the natural environment. Environmental
chemistry is an interdisciplinary study that involves both analytical chemistry and
understanding of environmental science. Environmental chemist must first understand the
chemicals and chemical reactions present in natural processes in the soil, water and air.
Through sampling and analysis, they are able to determine if human activities have
contaminated the environment or cause harmful reactions to it.
The issue of substances and chemical reactions that affects the environment is the
major concern of agricultural chemistry. In order words, agricultural chemistry is concerned
with the substances and chemical reactions that are involved with the production, protection
and use of crops. It is a highly interdisciplinary field that relies on many other sciences.
Agricultural chemists develop fertilizers, insecticides and herbicides necessary for large scale
crop production. They also monitor how these products are used and their impacts on the
environment. Agricultural biotechnology is an aspect of agricultural chemistry which has
19
helped in genetically manipulates crops to be resistant to the herbicides used to control weeds
in the field of agriculture.
Chemical engineering is an aspect of chemistry which combines a background in
chemistry with engineering and economics concepts to solve technological problems.
Industries require chemical engineers to devise new ways to make the manufacturing of their
products easier and more cost effective. Chemical engineers are involved in designing and
operating processing plants, develop safety procedures for handling dangerous materials and
supervise the manufacture of nearly every product we use. Chemical engineers work to
develop new products and processes in every field. Apart from chemical engineering another
aspect of chemistry worth of mention because of its importance is Geochemistry.
Geochemistry is an aspect of chemistry that combines chemistry and geology to study
the make up and interaction between substances found in the earth. Geochemists determine
how mining operations and waste can affect water quality and the environment. Petroleum
geochemists are employed by oil and gas companies to help find new energy reserves.
Cooperative Learning
Cooperative learning as “the instructional use of small groups so that students work
together to maximize their own and each others learning” (Johnson, Johnson and Smith,
1991: 33). The authors also define three broad categories for cooperative learning groups:
Formal cooperative learning groups used to teach content and problem solving skills;
informal cooperative base group that ensure active processing during a lecture, and
cooperative base group that provides long-term academic support. To be genuinely
cooperative, each type of group requires the presence of five basic elements. These are
“positive interdependence (a sense of sink or swim together); individual accountability (each
team member has to contribute and learn; interpersonal skills, communication, trust,
leadership, decision making, and conflict resolution); Face-to-face promotive interaction, and
20
processing (tem reflection on how well the team is functioning and how to function even
better” (Johnson & Johnson, 2002a).
In their meta-analysis of effect of small group learning on undergraduate n
mathematics, engineering and technology, spring, Stanne and Donovan (1997), defines
cooperative learning as a teaching technique that brings students together to learn in small,
heterogeneous groups. In these groups, students work interdependently without constant and
direct supervision from the teacher. Assignments are structured so that everyone contributes
challenges as well as rewards are shared brainstorming, lively discussion, and collaboration
are the hallmarks of the cooperative-learning classroom. Cooperative learning is not the same
as ability grouping where a teacher divides up the class in order to instruct students with
similar skills. Cooperative learning is not having students sit side by side at the same table to
talk while they complete individual assignments. Cooperative learning is not assigning a task
to a group in which one student does the work and the others get equal credit.
According to the authors, cooperative learning shows real scientific experience in
which scientist work together, not isolation, to solve difficult problems, with cooperative
learning; the classroom becomes a fertile environment for ideas and novel solutions.
Cooperative learning empowers and involves students in that it raises students’ self-esteem
because they are learning something on their own through cooperation, rather than being
handed prepackaged knowledge. It helps students become self-sufficient, self-directed,
lifelong learners. In a cooperative learning environment, students are less dependent on the
teacher for knowledge and this enhance intellectual development and better academic
performance. Cooperative learning serves the heterogeneous classroom, in the sense that with
group work, everyone has the chance to participate, and everyone has a role to play. As
students join forces to achieve a common goal they come to recognize commonalities that cut
across differences related to ethnicity, socio-economic background, and gender. Likewise,
21
cooperative learning provides an excellent vehicle for students of differing ability level to
work together in a positive way. Challenged students can interact successfully with average
and advanced students and in so doing can learn that they have something to offer.
Cooperative learning strengthens interpersonal skill this is because group task are
structured so that students must cooperate to succeed. Students quickly understand that they
will sink or swim together by how constructively they interact. Consequently, students
develop important interpersonal and social skills, that help them function in a group setting
and that twill ultimately benefit them socially at work, and in other situation. Cooperative
learning helps students develop appropriate social skill, in that when doing cooperative group
work students channel their energies into constructive task while satisfying their fundamental
need for social interaction. Cooperative learning is an effective management tool because;
establishing cooperative learning in the classroom requires the teacher to relinquish some
control, so the students themselves can become responsible for building their own
knowledge. Working in groups to probe and investigate ideas, answers, questions, and draw
conclusions about observations allows students to discover and discuss concepts in their own
language. When students learn through cooperation, the knowledge derived becomes their
own, not just a loan of the teachers ideas or those from the textbooks (Godwin, 1999:20).
Cooperative learning interactions help students to develop their emotional
intelligence, since working together involves the interactions of the emotions of the group
member which eventually promote higher academic achievements for the students in all
subject areas. Cooperative learning is an effective tool for meeting the individual needs of
students. Cooperative learning builds relationships among students where relationships might
not have developed before. Students are required to interact with each other as individuals
with common goals. In so doing, students learn more about each others personal
22
characteristics, manage their emotions and that of others and as a result, many stereotypes are
destroyed.
Cooperative learning enhances social interaction, which is essential to meet the needs
of at risk students (Slavin, Karwelt, and Madden, 1989; Johnson, 1998). Within the
framework of cooperative learning groups, students learn how to interact with their peers and
increase involvement with the school community. Positive interaction does not always occur
naturally and social skills instruction must precede and concur with the cooperative learning
strategies. Social skills encompass communicating, building and maintaining trust, providing
leadership, and managing conflicts (Godwin 1999). In two studies (Nelson & Johnson, 1996;
Peter, Bruhl, & Serna, 1998) found that students with behaviour disorder who do not receive
social skills instruction perform better with direct instruction method and that student who
did receive social skills instruction perform better with cooperative groups methods.
Cooperative learning has been found to be a successful teaching strategy at all levels,
from pre-school to post secondary. The developmental characteristics of middle school
students makes cooperative learning a good fit of teaching strategy for the needs of students.
Young adolescent need to socialize, be a part of group, share feelings, receive emotional
support, and then to see things from other perspectives. Cooperative learning groups do not
separate students on the basic of class, race, or gender and the goals of middle schools are
consistent with the goals of cooperative learning theories. It is a peer-centered pedagogy that
promotes academic achievement and builds positive social relationships (Sapon-Shevin,
1994). From the various definitions of authors given above, cooperative learning strategy is a
method of teaching involves the pairing or grouping of students in learning situation. It is a
kind of students centered type of teaching were the student discusses a concept among
themselves and find solution to the problem and the teacher only act as a facilitator and not as
the instructor. Cooperative learning strategy helps to eliminate the teacher centered methods
23
of teaching and enables the students be an active participant in the teaching-learning process.
This leads to a sense of belonging and motivation on the part of the students. Also, it
enhances team spirit among students which in-turn prepares them individually for life in the
longer society. From the literature review, it was observed that cooperative learning strategy
has been an effective teaching method in impacting knowledge especially in practical
learning situation. However, this method has not been used effectively in a non-practical
situation. Hence the researcher identifies this gap and intends to fill it. Therefore, the present
study will investigate the effect of cooperative learning strategy on student achievement and
interest in chemistry.
Models of Cooperative Learning
Slavin (1995) Model of Cooperative Learning
While there is a fair consensus among researchers about the positive effect of
cooperative learning on students’ achievement, there remains a controversy about why and
how cooperative learning methods affects achievement and, most importantly, under what
conditions cooperative learning has these effects. In earlier work, Slavin (1995) identified
motivation, social cohesion, cognitive-developmental and cognitive elaborations as the major
theoretical perspectives on the achievement effects of cooperative learning.
The Motivationlist perspective presumes that task motivation is the single most
impactful part of the learning process, asserting that the other process such as planning and
helping are driven by individuals’ motivated interest. Motivationlist- oriented scholars focus
more on the reward or goal structure under which students operate, even going as far as to
suggest that under some circumstance, interaction may not be necessary for the benefits of
cooperative goal structure to manifest (Slavin, 1995). By contrast, the social cohesion
perspective (also called interdependent theory) suggests that the effect of cooperative
learning is largely dependent on the cohesiveness of the group. This perspective holds that
24
students help each other to learn because they care about the group and it’s member and come
to derive self-identity benefits from group membership (Johnson and Johnson, 1998). The
two cognitive perspective focus on the interactions among groups of students, holding that in
themselves, these interactions leads to better learning and thus better achievement. Within the
general cognitive heading, developmentalist, attributes these effect to processes outlined by
scholars such as Piaget and Vygotsky. Work from the cognitive elaboration perspective
asserts that learners must engage in some manner of cognitive restructuring (elaboration) of
new materials in order to learn them. Cooperative learning is said to facilitate that process
one reason for the continued lack of consensus among cooperative learning scholars is that
adherents of each perspective tend to approach the topic without reference to the body of
similar work from other perspectives.
The following are some theoretical perspectives on cooperative learning strategies:
Motivational Perspectives: Motivational perspectives on cooperative learning posit that task
motivation is the most important part of the process believing that the other processes are
drawn primarily by motivation. From a Motivationlist perspectives (e.g. Johnson and
Johnson, 1998; Slavin, 1983, 2009), cooperative incentives structures create a situation in
which the only way group members can attain their own personal goals is if the group is
successful. Therefore, to meet their personal goals, group member must help their group mate
to do whatever enables them to succeed, and, perhaps even more importantly, to encourage
their group mates to excerpt more efforts. In other words, rewarding groups based on group
performance (or the sum of individual performances) creates an interpersonal reward
structure in which group members will give or withhold social reinforces, (e.g. praise,
encouragement) in response to group mates’ task related efforts.
25
The motivationalist critique of traditional classroom organization holds that the
competitive grading and informal reward system of the traditional classroom experts creates
peer norms opposing academic efforts (Coleman, 1961). Since one student’s success decrease
the chances that other will succeed, students are likely to express norms that high
achievement is for “nerds” or “teacher’ pets. However, by having students work together
towards a common goal, they may be motivated to express norms favoring academic
achievements, to reinforce one another for academic efforts.
Not surprisingly, motivational theorists build group rewards into their cooperative
learning methods. In methods developed by Johns Hopkins University (Slavin, 1994, 1995),
students can earn certificates or other recognition if their average team scores on quizzes or
other individual assignment exceeds a pre-established criterion. Methods developed by David
and Roger Johnson (1998) and their colleagues at the University of Minisota of ten given
students’ grade based on group performance which is defined in several ways. The theoretical
rationale for these group rewards is that if students value the success of a group, they will
encourage and help one another to achieve.
Considerable evidence from practical applications of cooperative learning in
elementary and secondary schools supports the motivationalist position that group rewards
are essential to the effectiveness of cooperative learning, with one critical qualification. Use
of group goals or rewards enhances achievement outcomes of cooperative learning if and
only if the group rewards are based on the individual learning of all group members (Slavin,
1995). Most often this means that team scores are computed based on the average scores on
quizzes which all team mates, take individually, without teammate help. For example, in
students Team-Achievement Division or STAD (Slavin, 1994), Students works in mixed-
ability teams to master the material initially presented by the teacher. Following this, students
take individual quizzes on the material and the terms may earn certificates based on the
26
degree to which team members have improved over their own past records. The only way the
team can succeed is to ensure that all team members have learned, so the team members
activities focus on explaining concept to one another, helping one another practice, and
encouraging one another to achieve. For contrast, if group rewards are given based on a
single group product (for example, the team completes a worksheet or solves a problem),
there is little incentive for group members to explain concept to one another, and one or two
members may do all the work (Slavin, 1995).
In assessing the empirical evidence supporting cooperative learning strategies, the
greatest weight must be given to studies of longer duration. Well executed, these are bounds
to be realistically generalizable to the day to day functioning of classroom practices. A
review of 99 studies of cooperative learning in elementary and secondary schools that
involved durations of at least four weeks compared achievement gains in cooperative learning
and control groups of sixty-four studies of cooperative learning methods that provided
rewards based on the sum of group members’ individual learning, fifty (78%) found
significantly positive effects (Slavin, 1995). The median effect size for the studies from
which sizes could be computed was +.32 (thirty-two percent of a standard deviation separated
cooperative learning and control treatments). In contrast, studies of methods that used group
goals based on a single group product or provided no group rewards found few positive
effects, with the median effect size of only +17. comparison of alternative treatments within
the same studies Found similar performances patterns; group goals based on the sum of
individual learning performances were necessary to the in structural effectiveness of the
cooperative learning models (e.g. Fantuzzo, polite and Grayson, 1990; Fantuzzu, polite and
Grayson, 1990; Fantuzzu, Riggio, Connelly, and Dimeff, 1980).
27
In contrast, when group’s task is to ensure that every group member learns something,
it is in the interest of every group member to spend time explaining concept to his or her
groups mates. Studies of students of behaviour within cooperative groups have consistently
found that the students who give most from cooperative work are those who give and receive
elaborated explanations (Webb, 1985, 2008). In contrast, giving and receiving answers
without explanation were negatively related to achievement gain. Group goals and
individuals accountability motivates students to give elaborated explanations and to take one
another’s learning seriously, instead of simply giving answers.
Social Cohesion Perspectives: A theoretical perspective some what related to the
motivational viewpoint holds that the effect of cooperative learning on achievement is
strongly mediated by the cohesiveness of the group. The quality of the group’s interactions is
thought to be largely determined by group cohesion. In helping one another learn because
they identify with the group and want one another to succeed. This perspective is similar to
the motivational perspective in that emphasizes primarily motivation rather than cognitive
explanations for the instructional effectiveness of cooperative learning. However,
motivational theorist holds that students help their group mate primarily because it is in their
own interest to do so. Social cohesion theorist in contrast, emphasizes the ideal that students
help their group mates learn because they care about the group. A hallmark of the social
cohesion perspective is emphasize on team building activities in preparation for cooperative
learning, and processing or group self-evaluation during and after group activities. Social
cohesion theorist has historically tended to downplay or reject the group incentive and
individual accountability held by motivational researchers to be essential. They emphasized,
instead, that the effect of cooperative learning on the students and on the students’
achievement depends substantially on the quality of the group interaction. For example,
(Cohen, 1986:20), stated that “if the task is challenging and interesting, and if students are
28
sufficiently prepared for skills in group process, student will experience the process of group
work itself as highly rewarding… never grade or evaluate students on their individual
contributions to the group product” Cohen’s (1994) and Elliot Aronson (Aronson, Blaney,
Stephan, Sikes and Snapp, 1978) and his colleagues, may be described as social cohesiveness
theories. Cohen, Aronson, and the Sharons all prescribe forms of cooperative learning in
which student take on individual roles within group, which Slavin (1983) calls “task
specialization” methods in Aronson’s Jigsaw method, student study materials on one of the
form of five topics distributed among the group members. They meet “expert group” to share
information on their topics with members of other teams, who had same topic, and then take
turns presenting their topics to the team. In the Sharon’s group investigation method, group
take on topics within a unit studies by the class as a whole and then further subdivided the
topics into task within a group. The student investigates the topic together and ultimately
presents their finding to the class as a whole.
One main purpose of the task specialization used in Jigsaw, group investigation, and
finding out is to create interdependence among group members. In the Johnson’s methods, a
somewhat similar form of interdependence is created by having students take on roles as
“checker”, “recorder”, “observer”, and so on. The ideal is that students value their group
mates (as a result of team building and other cohesiveness-building activities) and are
dependent on one another; they are likely to encourage and help one another succeed.
Cognitive Perspective: The major alternative to the motivationalist and social cohesiveness
perspective on cooperative learning, both of which focus primarily on group norms and
interpersonal influence, is the cognitive perspective. The cognitive perspective holds that
interactions among students will in themselves increase student achievement for reason
which has to do with mental processes of information rather than with motivations.
Cooperative methods developed by cognitive theories involve neither the group goals that are
29
the cornerstone of the motivationalist methods nor the emphasis on building group
cohesiveness characteristics of social cohesion methods. However, there are several quite
cognitive perspective, as well as some which are similar in theoretical perspective, but have
developed on largely parallel tracks. The two most notable of these are described below.
Developmental perspectives: One widely researched set of cognitive theories is the
developmental perspective (e.g. Damon, 1984). The fundamental assumption of the
developmental perspective on cooperative learning is that interaction among children around
appropriate task increases their mastery of critical concepts Vygotsky (1978:32), defines the
zone of proximal developmental as “….The distance between the actual developmental level
as determined by independent problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with
more capable peers”. In this view collaborative activity among children promotes growth
because children of similar ages are likely to be operating within one another proximal zones
of development, modeling in the collaborative group behaviours more advanced than they
could perform as individuals.
Similarly, Piaget (1926) held that social-arbitrary knowledge languages, values,
morality, and symbol system… can only be learned in interactions with others. Peer
interactions are also important in logical-mathematics thought in disequilibrating the child’s
egocentric conceptualization and providing feedback to the child about validity of logical
construction (Slavin, 1995). Despite considerable support from theoretical and laboratory
research, there is little evidence from classroom experiments conducted over meaningful time
periods that “pure” cooperative methods, which depend solely on interaction, produce higher
achievement. However, it is likely that the cognitive processes described by the
developmental theorist are important mediating variables which can help explain the positive
outcomes of effective cooperative learning method (Slavin, 1995).
30
A simple path model of cooperative learning process, adapted from Slavin (1995) is
diagrammed below. It depicts the main functional relationship among the major theoretical
approaches cooperative learning.
Interactions of theoretical perspective on cooperative learning strategy on learning.
Fig. 2: Adapted from Slavin (1995) theory of cooperative learning
The figure above begins with a focus on group goals or incentive based on individual
learning of all group members. That is, the model assumes that motivation to learn and to do
encourage and help others to learn and help to do encourage and help others learn activities
cooperative behaviours that will result in learning. This would include both task motivation
and motivation to interact in the group. In this model, motivation to succeed leads to learning
directly, and also drives the behaviours and attitudes that lead to group cohesion, which in
turn facilitates the types interactions that yield enhanced learning and academic achievement.
The relationships are conceived to be reciprocal, such that as task motivation leads to the
development group of cohesion, that development may reinforce and enhance task
Enhanced learning
Group goals based on learning of all members
Social Cohesion
Motivation to learn
Motivation to encourage group mates to learn
Motivation to help group mates learn
Elaborated explanation (peer tutoring) peer modeling
Cognitive elaboration peer practice
Peer Assessment and correction
31
motivation. By the same token, the cognitive processes may become cohesion intrinsically
rewarding and lead to increased task motivation and group cohesion. Each aspect of the
diagrammed model is well represented in the theoretical and empirical cooperative learning
literature. Based on the above theory, cooperative learning interactions is fostered through
group motivation, social cohesion and cognitive or mental processing. Therefore this study
will further prove whether this element of cooperative learning according to slaving (1995)
will influence students academic achievement in chemistry.
Johnson, D.W; and Johnson, R.T. (1984) model of cooperative learning
In the Johnson and Johnson model of cooperative learning, there are five essential
elements: positive interdependence, promotive interaction, individual accountability, group
processing, and social skills. In this review the first three of these essential elements will be
discussed in details; this review is intended to help students and teachers better understand
what positive interdependence, individual accountability and promotive learning interactions
are why the three elements are important in cooperative learning interactions, and how this
elements might be incorporated in wide range of learning activities.
Cooperative learning is the instructional use of small groups so that students work
together to maximize their own and each other’s learning manage their emotions and
emphatize with the emotions of others during the process of group learning (Johnson and
Johnson, 1984). This preceding brief definition of cooperative learning may provide an
intriguing starting point; teachers might require more depth to think about how they might
introduce cooperative learning into classes. Two descriptions may help the teacher and
readers form more complete and pictures of cooperative learning in their classrooms. The
first description shown in the figure below is a structural model drawn from Johnson and
Johnson, with five pillars of cooperative learning.
32
Fig. 3: Adapted from Johnson and Johnson (1984) model of cooperative learning.
Positive interdependence is the belief by each individual that there is value in working with
each other students and that both individual learning and work product will be better as a
result of collaboration. The following quotes Illustrates different perspective on positive
interdependence.
“Positive interdependence is linking students together so that one cannot succeed
unless all group members succeed. Group members have to know that they sink or swim
together”.
When students clearly understand positive interdependence, they understand that each
member’s effort are required and indispensable for group success and each group member
has a unique contribution to make to the joint effort because of his or her resource and/or
role and task responsibilities. Positive goal interdependence ensures that the group is united
around a common goal, a concrete reason for being, such as ‘learn the assigned material.
Positive interdependence is successfully structured when group member perceive that they
are linked with each other in a way that one cannot succeed unless every one succeeds. Group
goals and task therefore, must be design and communicated to students in way that make
Cooperative Learning
Positive interdependence “we need contribution from each of my teams members if the we’ re going to succeed
Promotive, face to face interaction “How I think, talk and act toward my team members will influence how well we perform”
Individual accountability “Although my team members can help with the assigned task my individual performance will shape my grade
Social skills
“working effectively together as a team means that I need to improve my interpersonal skills”
Group
processing
33
them believe they sink or swim together. When positive interdependence is solidly structured,
it highlights that each group members are required and indispensable for group and success
and each group members has a unique contribution to make to the joint effort because of his
or her resources and /or role and task responsibilities. Doing so creates a commitment to the
success of group members as well as one’s own and is the heart of cooperative learning. If
there is no positive interdependence there is no cooperation product goal interdependence:
use a product that requires contribution from each member. An example is asking a group of
students to reach a consensus answer, turn in one problem solving assignment at the class, or
produce a single graph.
Reward interdependence: can be designed into a task using some form of shared grades. For
examples, besides their individual scores on exam, students may receive a certain number of
points if all group members score at or above a certain grade.
Resource interdependence: exist when individuals each possess specific resources needed for
the group as whole to succeed. Teachers may promote resources interdependence by giving
specific resources to different individuals in the group.
Role interdependence: exist when specific roles are assigned to team members (for example
recorder or timekeeper). These roles need to be performed in order for the team to function;
however, assigning the roles highlights their importance and assigns accountability to
individual. Roles can be rotated regularly to give all team members experience
Task or sequence interdependence: Occurs when one group member must first complete
his/her task before the next task can be completed. For example, collecting water samples
might be assigned to two group members, while research on how to collect sample is done by
two other group members.
Promotive Interaction: Although it is an important element of cooperative learning, positive
interdependence alone does not generate the degree and intensity of interaction required in
34
cooperative learning activities first, team members used to think that success of the team
depends on the contribution by each member. Next, they think that ongoing interactions,
particularly face-to-face interactions are required for success. Some tasks are positively
interdependent such as report preparation or programming assignments, because they result in
a single team product, but they many not require ongoing interactions. Group writing
assignments-term papers, and programming projects – have positive interdependence because
the final products depend on contributions from all group members. However, they lack
another element that is required for cooperative learning activities, promotive interactions,
promotive interactions is a set of characteristics in the task or learning activity that requires
ongoing conversation dialogue, exchange and support. Students need to do real work together
in which they promote each other successes by sharing resources and helping, supporting,
encouraging and applauding each others effort to achieve. There are important cognitive
activities and interpersonal dynamics that can only occur when students promote each others
learning. This includes orally explaining how to solve problems, teaching one’s knowledge to
others. Checking for understanding, discussing concepts being learned and connecting
present with past learning. Each of these activities can be structured into group task directions
and procedures. Doing so helps ensure that cooperative learning groups are both and
academic support system (every students has someone who is committed to helping him or
her learn) and a personal support system (every student has someone who is committed to
helping him or her learn). It is through promoting each other’s learning face-to-face that
members become personally committed to each other as well as to their mutual goals. Below
are some examples of how learning activities or part of learning activities might be structured
to encourage face-to-face promotive interaction in order to provide greater understanding of
this important pillar of cooperative learning.
35
Ask students to work on a problem or part of a problem (to limit amount of time spent
on the exercise), in class. The problem should be challenging enough to require contributions
from multiple team members but not so challenging that team members are not able to
succeed.
Ask students to form individual responses to a multiple-choiced question focused on a
particular concept and then reach consensus on an answer as a team.
Ask teams to generate possible applications of a concept introduced in class.
With a complex concept or task, divide it into part and post different parts on the tops of flip
charts. Have groups move from chart to chart and spend a couple of minutes generating lists,
including what they know about the part, what they need to know about it and applications
related to it. Allow all groups to move around the room until they return to their starting
points, have them analyze and summarize the information and report it to the class
Follow up successful team activities by asking students to reflect on how the team helped
individual learning.
Form heterogeneous groups so that different individuals have more to learn from each other
than in homogenous groups.
Individual Accountability: Individual accountability is the belief by each individual that
he/she will be accountable for his/her performance in learning. Phrased negatively, an
individual believes that he/she cannot receive a satisfactory rating by riding in the coat tails
of other members of the group on cooperative learning; Johnson and Johnson (2004) describe
the need for both group and individual accountability. Two levels accountability must be
accountable for achieving its goals and each member must be accountable for contributing his
or her share of the work. Individual accountability exists when the performance of each
individual is assessed and the results are given back to the group and the individual in order
to ascertain who needs more assistance, support and encouragement in learning. The purpose
36
of cooperative learning groups is to make each members a stronger individuals in his or her
right. Students learn together so that they subsequently can gain greater individual
competency. After participating in a cooperative lesson, group members should accomplish
the same kind of tasks by themselves. They learn to do something together so that they can do
it more easily when they are alone. Individual accountability is the structural element
required to discourage and lower the likelihood of free riders or social loafing. Individual
accountability is promoted by providing opportunities for the performance of individuals to
be observed and evaluated by others.
Social Skills: It is very important for students to have sufficient social skills, involving an
explicit teaching of appropriate leadership, communication, trust and conflict resolution skills
so that they could cooperative effectively, social skills should explicitly taught to the students
so that they can work among themselves not only in terms of cooperation but also without
hostility and with the teachers authority. With this, each students get motivated internally by
need for freedom love and fun and also students must be taught these skills and motivated to
use them. If the group members lack the interpersonal and small group skills to cooperate
effectively, cooperative learning would not be productive.
Group Processing: The teaching of cooperative skills is essential, placing socially unskilled
students in a group and telling them to cooperate did not guarantee that ability to do so
effectively. Students must learn the task and maintenance skills for group to run smoothly.
Students might not instinctively know these skills; therefore they must be taught explicitly
how to cooperate with others. The interpersonal and small group could be taught through a
number of means; first of all, setting a social skills goal along with the academic goal. Let
students know it’s importance to the teacher. Secondly, it could establish through role
playing, modeling, and discussing the component of particular social skills. The teacher’s
role in this teaching method was not of someone who measures the capacities of the students
37
in terms of a final product but in terms of the process. That is someone acting as friends, as a
coordinator, as a director who guided his/her actors how to perform, and as an advisor in the
academic task and in the psychosocial and cognitive development of the students.
From the Johnson and Johnson (1984) theory of cooperative learning, the five
essential elements of the literature reveals that adequate and effective learning interactions
among students in the classroom is facilitated through positive interdependence, promotive
interactions, individual accountability, social skills and group processing. Based on these
findings, this study will seek to further ascertain the importance of these elements of
cooperative learning on student’s achievement in chemistry.
Kagan (2009) Model of Cooperative Learning
Kagan (2009), modified the key elements of cooperative learning documented by
Johnson and Johnson (1993) to devise the PIES principles. Positive interdependence,
individual accountability, equal participation and simultaneous interaction. Kagan (2009),
summaries the PIES principles into a set of five questions:
Positive Correlation: Are pupils on the same side?
Defined by Kagan (2009) as a direct link between the benefit received by one group
member and the next and between one group and next. If a pupil knows that another pupils
success will benefit them, they will support and encourage that pupil to succeed. Similarly if
the classroom has a competitive atmosphere a pupil may assume that one’s loss is another
gain. In other words, the question seeks to understand the nature of the classroom
environment, are the pupils cooperating or competing.
Interdependence: Does the task require working?
To gain a truly cooperative atmosphere in the classroom, task need to be structured to
ensure that pupil is capable of completing the task on their own, but all pupils are able to
complete it by working cooperatively (Johnson and Johnson, 1989).
38
•Is individual, public performance required?
Individual accountability was introduced by Kagan (2009) to eradicate the inherent
group grades’ problem that he claims put in any teacher off using cooperative-learning
approaches. He argues that if individual, public performance is required by task, then pupils
can be graded individually. An individual performance indicates that the task can be done
individually without help.
•Is Participations approximately equal?
The task has to ensure that all pupils working in groups are participating equally
throughout the lesson. There are several approaches to this, for example using pre-defined
structure, assigning roles to the group numbers or providing timed allocations.
That percentage of pupils is overly interacting at once?
The notion of simultaneous interaction is concerned with ratio of pupil interaction
during the lesson. For example, during a sequential question and answer session where the
teacher asks a question, awaits pupils to raise their hands, select a pupil to answer and then
responds to that answer. In this example, for every interaction the pupils makes, the teacher
makes twice as many. This can lead to lessons being teacher led and some pupils not
interacting at all during the lesson on the other hand, when the pupils are working in groups
there are several lines of interaction available to them. During well-constructed pair of work
for example, pupil interaction can as high as 50% of time.
According to Kagan (2009) in a “traditional” classroom, reinforcement tends to be
delayed. For example, the teacher gives out worksheet, the pupils completed the lesson. The
pupils do not receive their reward until the following lesson, which could be the next day or
even the following week.
39
Kagan (2009); claims however, that in a ‘cooperative’ classroom there is immediate
reinforcement upon the completion of each problem, pupils receive praise from their peers
and hence the reward occurs immediately. Furthermore, the reward system itself is fairly
infrequent in a ‘traditional’ classroom in contrast with cooperative classroom. Using the
example above the pupils only receive one reward per lesson or worksheet on the other hand.
Pupils are receiving a reward after each problem in a cooperative classroom. Finally, we
address the desirability of the rewards. The pupils in today’s world are vastly motivated by
grades or the teacher feedback. The pupils of the 21st century live a peer-based culture praise
or feedback from their peers seen for more desirable than teacher praise (Kagan, 2004).
From the Kagan (2009) modified version of the elements cooperative learning,
positive correlation (i.e. pupils seeing themselves succeeding if the entire group succeeds)
and the question of what percentage of pupils interacting in a lesson is strongly related to
what cooperative learning interactions is expected to achieve. Based on this findings; the
present study will further seek to ascertain whether positive correlation, and participation
patterns and percentage of interactions in cooperative learning influences academic
achievements of students in chemistry.
Lecture Method
Method or strategy, for the purpose of this work, refers to a recognized and systematic
way of performing the task of teaching. A strategy is a planned series of actions for achieving
something (Azikiwe, 1998). A strategy is a process, style and method of doing something. It
involves a sequence of steps with prescribed strategies and practices used in implementing a
teaching approach. There are various teaching methods for impacting knowledge in science.
The methods include: lecture method, demonstration method, guided-discovery method,
inquiry-based method, experimentation method etc. Amongst the listed teaching methods,
lecture method is one of the oldest teaching methods and appears to be very popular in the
40
teaching chemistry and science in general. The lecture or conventional method of teaching
emanates from the school of behaviorists with the proponents like B.F. Skinner, E.L.
Thordike and so, believe that learning is simply forming bonds between stimulus and
response and popularized the notion that behavior can be objectively studied.
According to Eya (1999), lecture is a discourse delivered allowed for instruction or
entertainment. Sometimes, lecture method cannot be avoided especially when the class is
large, course content is large, there is limited time and space, inadequate facilities, inadequate
personnel and unqualified teachers. The conventional instructional model (lecture model) is
preferred by many teachers in secondary schools to other methods for a number of reasons
(Salu, 2000). The author argues that it enables the teacher to reach large number of students
at the same time.
According to Prado and Plourde (2005), in this teaching method, the teacher usually
spends sometime in teaching, guides and students through a complex problem broken down
into simple steps; then the students are given one by one simple steps to carryout on their
own, and finally the students are given one or more simple problems to accomplish by
themselves. According to the authors, to use this teaching method well, there is the need to
choose a concept or topic for which lecture method is appropriate. The students must know
what to expect in it’s order and the apportioned time for each. The teacher should speak
clearly with a varied tone and speed. The teacher should enhance the speed with visuals and
vary the lesson by not speaking always. For any lesson longer than 30 minutes, the teacher
should be varied and also allow the students to ask questions. Such questions are usually low
memory questions. The teacher asks a question and chooses a student to answer it. To answer
the teacher’s question, the student plays “guess what is in the teacher’s head” until the student
guesses right.
41
According to Ibe (2006), the lecture method of teaching enables the teacher have total
control of the timing of the lesson, it help the instructor or teacher to monitor the activities of
the students easily in the learning process. The lecture method of teaching, though may be an
old method of teaching, but may not be discarded but requires support strategies. Therefore
the present study intends to investigate whether cooperative learning strategy will enhance
student’s achievement and interest in Chemistry.
Achievement
Achievement means doing something successful typically by effort, courage and
skills, the art of achieving, attainment or accomplishment. According to Nwachukwu (2004),
achievement is accomplishing whatever goals you have set for yourself, which is doing what
you want to do within the bounds of the law, overcoming obstacles and attaining a high
standard. It is the pursuit of dreams without fear and unbelief. Achievement requires drive
and single mindedness and it is about completing goals one has set for oneself.
As noted by Onyilo and Onyilo (2010), achievement is a term for noteworthy act.
Achievement connotes final accomplishment of something note worthy after much effort and
often in spite of obstacles and discouragements. Achievement connotes boldness, bravery,
and usually ingenuity. Achievement sometimes demands skills and strength. According to
Barnes (2013), achievement is something accomplishing, especially by superior abilities,
special effort, great courage, etc. Achievement is a result gained by effort. It is a great or
heroic deed. Achievement is the act of accomplishing or finishing.
Habibian (2012), refers to academic achievement as all knowledge, sills and an idea
gained in the course of academic programme. Ojebisi, Olosunde and Isola (2011), looked at
academic achievement as a child’s performance in an academic area such as in reading,
mathematics, science and history. Williams (2011), also defines academic achievement as
excellences in all academic disciplines in class as well as extra-curricular activities.
42
Academic achievement from various definitions from other authors can be summarized as the
ability of a learner to complete an academic activity successfully. Academic achievement is
important because it is strongly linked to positive outcomes for human beings. It helps to
secure a bright future and brings higher opportunity of success in life. In others words, it is
used to indicate whether the learners have been successful or unsuccessful in mastering an
academic content or skill. For instance, a student who takes a standardized text in chemistry
and scores 99 percent is regarded as an achiever while a learner who scores 10 percent in the
same text is seen as a non-achiever. In view of the above, academic achievement manifest
itself in what one can do after a given academic programme. Thus, effective teaching method
like cooperative learning method could enhance learner’s achievement. Therefore this study
will seek to find out if cooperative learning strategy can lead to students’ academic
achievement in chemistry.
Interest
Interest in academic context could be referred to as what influences student learning
behavior and intention to participate in learning. Paul (2013), observes that interest can help
learners think more clearly, understand more deeply and remember more accurately.
Subramanian (2009), observes that when learners are interested in what is being learnt, they
pay attention and process information more efficiently. According to the author, interest
enables learners to employ more effective learning strategies such as critical thinking and
making connections between old and new knowledge. Dunst quoted in Stonehouse (2012),
defines interest as a child’s individual likes, preferences and favourites. According to the
researcher, interest should be used as a starting point for effective learning to take place. It is
a known fact that children learn best and are more engaged when they are interested. Okoro
(2011), state that one of the strongest factors affecting students’ learning a particular subject
adopted by the teacher which highly correlates with the perception of the subject relevant to
43
their future is the interest of the learner. According to the researcher, the interest of the
students is one of the critical element in curriculum implementation, therefore, in selecting
learning experiences, it is natural for students no to be engaged in what they are not interested
in. Hence, a teacher asked to consider the interest of the student to enable him or her base the
activities selected for the attainment of the specific objectives of the lesson. This is because
no student will want to engage in what they are not interested in. Therefore, interest should be
used in providing a meaningful learning experience. To be interesting, a learning material
must be novel, complex and comprehensible. From the above definitions, interest in
academic context could be referred to as what influences student learning behavior and
intention to participate in learning process, therefore, the researcher is of the view that the use
of good instructional teaching method like the cooperative learning strategy can arouse
learner’s interest and facilitate meaningful learning. Hence, this study will investigate the
influence of cooperative learning strategy on student’s achievements and interest in
chemistry.
School Location
School location simply refers to where the school is located, whether in urban or rural
areas. Differentiation between urban and rural areas is demographically done by the
government offices of regional planning and development. Urban areas are those with social
facilities while rural areas lack social facilities like electricity, pipe water supply tarred roads
etc. Owoeye (2011) stated that rural community is characterized by low population,
subsistent mode of life, monotonous and burdensome, while in the city hotels, recreational
center, markets, banks, and good road networks are present in the urban area. The author
further states that highly qualified teachers prefer to serve in urban areas than rural areas.
Nbina and Obomanu (2011) also stressed that teachers are known to prefer to serve in urban
schools rather than rural schools. Accordingly, Kuliman, Weather, and Baterworth (2007)
44
observed that teachers do not accept postings to rural areas because their conditions are not
up to the expected standard as their social life in the area is virtually restricted as a result of
inadequate amenities; facilities are deficient, playground are without equipment, libraries are
without books, while laboratories are glorified ones.
Making a critical analysis of locational factors, Hallak (2007) also guessed that the
provision of education in rural areas is normally fraught with the following difficulties and
problems; qualified teachers refusing appointments in isolated villages, villagers refusing to
send their children to school because they are dependent on them for help, parents hesitate to
entrust their daughters to male teachers, some villages have few children for an ordinary
primary school, lack of roads or satisfactory means of communication also makes it difficult
to get books and teaching materials to the school which place difficulties in the way of
organizing school transport amongst others.
According to Nbina and Obomanu (2011), federal and state governments in Nigeria
have been making effort to improve the educational system in the rural areas using certain
education management commissions to ensure that qualified specialist teachers and facilities
are sent to rural schools. The authors noted that notwithstanding, all the efforts made by the
government, secondary school in rural areas is comparatively new, and not as well equipped
as urban secondary schools. Ezeudu and Obi (2013), indicated that schools in the urban areas
have electricity, water supply, more teachers, learning facilities and infrastructure. Onah
(2011), indicated that students in schools in the urban areas achieve more than students in the
rural areas in science subjects. Specifically, Owoeye and Yara (2011), showed in their studies
that schools in urban locations had better academic performance than their rural counterparts
in chemistry. On contrary, Ezeudu (2003) and Bosede (2010) showed that school location had
no effect on students’ academic achievement in chemistry. Gana cited in Owoeye (2011), on
the effect of using designed visual teaching models on the learning of mathematics at junior
45
secondary school level of Niger state, found that there was no significant difference in
mathematics achievement scores of students in urban and rural locations. Alokan (2010),
found out that students problems are strongly associated with poor performance and that sex
and location do not affect the negative relationship between students problems and academic
performance. Shield and Dockrell (2008), while looking at the effect of classroom and
environmental noise on children’s academic performance found out that both chronic and
acute exposure to environmental and classroom noise have a detrimental effect upon
children’s learning and performance.
From all the above literature and the influence of school location and academic
achievement, some of the researchers believe that location have effect on students’ academic
achievement while some hold a contrary view to the effect of school location on students’
academic achievement. Nevertheless, different opinions by different scholars have shown
existing differences in academic achievement between schools in urban areas and rural areas.
The present study is therefore a contribution to further studies on whether school location
affects students’ academic achievement in chemistry.
Gender
Gender is defined as a cultural constraint which distinguished the roles, behaviour,
mental, and emotional characteristic between males and females developed by a society
(Uwah, 2005, Azikiwe, 2005). A society in this regard is a group of individual who share a
common interest and norms and live together in a particular geographical location. In the
same vein, Umo (2004), defined gender as a psychological terms used in describing
behaviour and attributes expected of individuals on the basis of being born either male or
female. On the influence of gender on academic achievement, Azikiwe (2005), observes that
although assumption of gender difference in English language in favour of females seemed to
be accepted to a large extent through research evidence in English language speaking
46
countries. Ekeh (2003) discovered that male secondary school students performed better than
females in science and mathematics subjects. These differences in achievement may be
attributed to gender stereotyping which encourages male and female students to school to
show interest subject relevant and related to the roles expected of them in the society.
National Assessment educational Progress (1994) showed that males had higher average
score than females between ages of 9, 13, and 17 in science, Mathematics and reading
assessment. Okon (2003), maintains that gender has no significant influence on student
performance in science. Some authors believed that males perform better than females in any
course that deal with calculation as observed by Awoniyi (2000) who stated that male
candidates performed better, related to female in subject in requiring quantitative ability. The
researcher said that male show superiority in science, statistics and accounting. Raimi and
Adeoye (2002), in their research on gender differences among college student as
determinants of performance in integrated science revealed a significant difference between
male and female in terms of their attitude towards integrated science in favour of males.
Other suggestion to show that gender has effect on science teaching and learning
abound. Umback (2004) believed that females are more likely than males’ counterpart to
value and use effective educational practices. This therefore helps in placing emphasis on
academic challenge and enriching their educational experience. Furthermore, Ozioko (2003),
investigate the effect of word attack skill strategy on students’ achievement in reading
comprehension. The author found out that no difference exists between the performance of
males and females. Uzoegwu (2004) carried out a study on the effect of cooperative method
on students’ achievement in English essay writing, gender was a variable considered in the
study. The author found out that male students achieved higher than female students in easy
writing. Conversely, achievement of students in English according to Balarebe (1999) and
Bodunde (1999), has no significant difference. The duo found out that no sex difference in
47
motivation, learning and performance. Azikiwe (2005), studied gender influence on language
learning. The researcher found out that sex had no influence on language learning. From the
foregoing, it shows that enough research evidence have not been established in Nigeria to
support the claim that females achieve better than males in science and chemistry to be
specific. Also the findings above reveal controversy on gender difference in science students’
achievement in chemistry at the senior secondary school level. As a result of this conflicting
issue, it is imperative to find out if there are any gender differences on students’ achievement
in chemistry among secondary students hence this study will investigate the effect of gender
on students’ achievement in chemistry.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Vygotsky’s (1978) Theory of Learning
This theory was propounded by Vygotsky a Russian teacher and psychologist in 1978.
Vygotsky’s main concern is that social interaction and social context, a world full of other
people, who interact with the child from birth onwards, are essential in the cognitive
development. He states that “every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice
first, on the social level and later on the individual level, first between people (inter-
psychological) and then inside the child (intra-psychological). This applied equally to
voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to the formation of concepts. All the higher
functions originate as actual relationship between individuals (Vygotsky, 1978: 57).
Next, he pointed out at the ideal that the potential for cognitive development is limited
to a certain time span, which he names the “zone of proximal development” (ZPD). For
addition, full development ZPD depends upon full social interaction. The ranges of skill that
can be developed with adult guidance or peer collaboration exceed what can be attained
alone. It is of very fact that other people playing important roles in helping children to learn;
providing objects and ideals to their attention, talking while playing and sharing, reading
48
stories, asking question. In a wide range of ways, adult mediate the world for children and
make it possible for them to get access to it. The ability to learn through instruction and
mediation is characteristic of human intelligence. By the help of adult, children can do and
understand more than they can on their own.
Actually, Vygotsky proposed the notion of the zone of proximal development (ZPD)
to give a new meaning to intelligence instead of measuring intelligence by what a child can
do alone. Vygotsky suggested that intelligence could better be measured by what a child can
do with skilled help. Vygotsky attempted to shed light on consciousness which develops as a
result of socialization. While learning, the first utterances have a communicational purpose,
but once internalized they become “Inner Speech.” According to Vygotsky, young children
can often be observed talking to themselves and act as if they carry out task or play, in what
is called private speech. As children get older, they gradually speak less and less loud, and
differential between social speech for others and inner speech, which continues to play an
important role in regulating and controlling behaviour. In the internalizing process, the
interpersonal, joint talk and joint activity, later becomes interpersonal, mental action by one
individual.
In Vygotskian terms, development in learners can be seen as internalizing from social
interaction process which grow as the learners’ takes control of the learning process with
other children and the adult acting as a facilitator. According to the author social learning
process provides learners with a new tool, opens up opportunities for doing things and for
organizing information on their own.
From the above, it is crystal clear that Vygotsky’s theory of learning encourages
cooperative learning. He emphasizes interaction among learners of science and that the full
development of a student can only be attained via cooperative learning. Hence, this theory is
49
related to this study. This study emphasizes cooperative learning strategy where students
experience a joint workspace in the company of other students.
Related Emperical Studies
Cooperative learning and achievement in chemistry
Aluko and Olorundare (2002), investigated the relative effectiveness of cooperative
and individualistic abilities in secondary school chemistry in Ilesha Local Government area
of Osun State, Nigeria. The study made use of a quasi-experimental, non-randomized
factorial design. Two hundred and fifty (250) senior secondary two (SSII) chemistry students
were purposely sampled from three public secondary schools in the area of study. Two
research instruments; Researchers instructional packages for solving chemistry problem
(RIP) and chemistry performance test (CPT) were developed, validated and used for the
study. Five hypotheses were raised and tested using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Two
experimental groups cooperative instructional group, individualistic instructional group and a
control group were used. The results of the analysis showed that there was a significant
difference in the performance of chemistry students exposed to cooperative instructional
strategy, individualistic instructional strategy and conventional lecture method. Both the
cooperative instructional strategy and individualistic instructional strategy improved the
performance of the learners. The cooperative instructional strategy was found to be most
effective in enhancing better performance of the learners. The above study is related to the
present study because both of them are in chemistry. Both examined cooperative learning
strategy. They are also experimental studies. However, the study is different from the present
study in some areas. The study is different in terms of location. Though both studies are
interested in determining the efficacy of cooperative learning strategy on students’
achievement in chemistry, but the present study include interest as a variable in order to see if
50
chemistry students really show interest in the method which the review study did not
consider. The researcher identifies this gap in the reviewed study and will seek to fill it.
Oludipe and Awokoyo (2009), investigated the influence of cooperative learning
methods of teaching on senior secondary school students’ anxiety for learning chemistry. One
hundred and twenty (120) students (52 females and 68 males) randomly selected from the
senior secondary schools in south- west Nigeria participated in the study. The study
employed a quasi-experimental design. The design included two treatment groups-
cooperative learning method (Jig Saw II) and the conventional lecture method. Two lesson
notes; one for cooperative learning method and the other for conventional chalk-and-talk
method, and chemistry anxiety scale (CAS) were the instruments used to collect the relevant
data. The data collected was analyzed using on-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The
findings of the study revealed that students in both the cooperative and conventional lecture
group exhibited high level of chemistry anxiety at the pretest level. However, after the
treatment (post test level), the chemistry anxiety level of the students in cooperative learning
group reduced drastically while the chemistry anxiety level of the students in conventional
lecture group increased. It was concluded that since cooperative learning methods of teaching
reduced students chemistry anxiety, chemistry teachers should be encouraged to incorporate
cooperative learning in their methods of teaching. Oludipe and Awokoyo’s work is related to
the present study because both of them share the same teaching technique; both studies are
experimental and are in the same subject area. Also, both studies have two lesson notes based
on cooperative learning and lecture method. However, both studies are different in terms of
method of data analysis, population and method of data collection. In the same vein, the two
studies are different in terms of variable, while the previous study was carried out on effect of
cooperative learning strategy on chemistry students anxiety, the present study is considering
students interests in chemistry. Although both studies are interested in determining the effect
51
of cooperative learning strategy, but the present study is concerned about the interest of
students in chemistry as a variable which the previous study did not consider. The present
study identifies a gap in this area and intends to fill it.
Adekunle (2010), investigated the effects of three strategies (i.e guided discovery,
think-pair-share, and lecture) on senior secondary school students achievement in chemistry.
A quasi-experimental design was adopted for the study. Treatment was at three levels (guided
discovery, think-pair-share, and lecture strategies). Two hundred and forty two (242) senior
secondary schools in Ijebu Ode and Odogbolu local government areas of Ogun State were
randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups. Three instruments were developed
and used to collect data from students during 8-week of treatment program. The collected
data were subjected to analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and multiple classification
analysis. Scheffe test was further used as post hoc measures. It was found that students taught
with guided-discovery and think-pair-share strategies obtained significantly higher post test
mean scores than those in the lecture strategy.
Adekunle’s work is related to the present study because both of them are in
Chemistry, both studies are experimental; both studies use the same method of data analysis.
However, the study is different from the present study in some areas. The study is different in
terms of teaching techniques and number of teaching techniques considered and compared.
They are different in the area of population and location. However, though the two studies are
interested in determining the efficacy of both cooperative and lecture method on students
achievement, but while the previous study is considering an aspect of cooperative learning
strategy, i.e. think-pair-share, the present study while investigate all aspect of cooperative
learning which the reviewed study did not consider.
52
Ibraheem (2010), investigated the efficacy of two modes of student team-achievement
divisions (STAD) a kind of cooperative learning method on senior secondary school two
chemistry students learning outcomes in chemical kinetics. A pre-test, post test control group
quasi experimental design was adopted for the study. A total of three hundred (110 males and
190 females) subjects drawn from six secondary schools in Epe division of Lagos state,
Nigeria took part in the study. Intact classes where used in all the selected schools.
Cooperative learning guide, achievement test on chemical kinetics and students’ attitude to
chemical kinetics questionnaire and lesson notes on chemical kinetics were used as
instruments for data collection. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to analyse data
collected. The result revealed that there was a significant main effect of treatment on
students’ achievements and attitude in chemical kinetics.
Ibraheem’s work is similar to the present study because both of them are in chemistry.
Both studies use the same teaching technique. They are also experimental studies. However,
the study is different from the present study in some areas, the study is different in terms of
location, population of the study and the number of instruments used for data collection.
Also, from the reviewed literature, both studies are interested in determining whether
cooperative learning strategy will enhance students achievement in chemistry, but the present
study also considering interest as a variable in order to see if chemistry students really show
interest in the method which the reviewed study did not consider. The researcher identifies a
gap in this area and intends to fill it.
Dhananjay & Rima, (2013), investigated the effect of cooperative learning on
achievement in social science of secondary schools. The study was an experimental research
design. It was conducted on a sample size of 60 students from Gaya district of Bihar in
Taiwan. Two self-developed tools were used in the form of instructional tool unit wise lesson
planning along with teaching aids and measures tools in the form of a teacher made test and a
53
3-point-scale to study the impact of the method used. Experimental group was taught through
cooperative learning method and controlled was taught through traditional method. Findings
of the study reflected that mean achievement of the students exposed to cooperative method
differs significantly from the mean achievement of the students taught through traditional
method. The above study is related to the present study because both of them use the same
teaching technique. They are both experimental studies. However, the study is different in
from the present study in some areas. The study is different in terms of location. The above
study was carried out in Gaya district of Bihar in Taiwan while the present study will be
carried out in Abakaliki education zone of Ebonyi state Nigeria. Also from the reviewed
study, both studies are interested in determining the impact of cooperative learning strategy
on student’s achievement, but the previous study did not consider interest as a variable which
is one of the major variables in the present study. The researcher indentifies this gap and
intends to fill it.
Gambari & Olumorin (2013), investigated the effect of cooperative, competitive and
individual instructional strategies on the performance of high, medium and low academic
achievers using video instructional package. A total of 120 senior secondary school
mathematics students were randomly assigned into cooperative, competitive, and
individualized conventional teaching methods. Students from each group were stratified into
high, medium and low achievers. Video instructional package (VIP) on mathematics and
Geometry Achievement Test (GAT) were used as test instruments, respectively. Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) and Scheffe test were used for data analysis. The findings indicated that
there was significant difference in the performance of the groups in favour of cooperative
learning strategy. Also, students’ achievement levels had significant influence on their
performance in cooperative and individualized instructional settings. It was recommended
that mathematics teachers should employ cooperative learning strategies, to improve
54
students’ performance as to bridge the gap among high, medium and low achievers. The
above study is related to the present study because both of them share the same technique of
teaching; both of them are experimental studies, both used two instruments for data
collection. However, the studies are different in some areas; the above study is different from
the present study in the area of population, subject area, and method of data analysis. Though
both studies are interested in determining the efficacy of cooperative learning strategy, but
the present study includes interest as a variable to see if chemistry students really show
interest in the method which the reviewed study did not consider. The researcher identifies
this gap in the previous study and will intend to fill it in this present study. All the empirical
studies reviewed so far on effect of cooperative learning strategy on achievement of students
are related to the present study, though some are from other discipline. Also they are related
to the present study because most of them are experimental studies and the targeted subjects
are senior secondary schools. Therefore, it is interesting to find out whether the success
recorded in chemistry and other areas of science using cooperative learning strategy would be
recorded in present study. Also, interest which is a variable in the present study that was not
considered in the previous literature will be investigated in the present study in Abakaliki
Education Zone of Ebonyi State.
Gender and Achievement in Chemistry
Abubakar and Oguguo (2011), investigated age and gender as predictors of academic
achievement of college Mathematics Science students. The purpose of this study was to
determine if there were significant relationship and contributory effect of gender and age on
the academic achievement of Mathematics students. Also, the effect of gender on academic
achievement Mathematics was ascertained. Three research questions and one hypothesis
guided the study. The design for the study was ex-post factor research design. A sample of
three hundred and thirty-two (332) students: two hundred twenty-three (223) females and one
55
hundred nine (109) males were used. Scatter-plot, mean and standard deviation were used for
the descriptive statistics while univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multiple
regressions were used for the inferential statistics. Z-test was used to test the null hypothesis
formulated at 0.05 level of significant. Result revealed a linear relationship between age and
gender. Low positive correlation coefficients were obtained for age. The null hypothesis
tested was accepted implying no significant gender difference in academic achievement of
the students. It was suggested that some more variables be included so as to determine
significant effect of academic achievement of Mathematics students. Result revealed no
significant gender difference in academic achievement of the students. The above study is
related to the present study because both of them considered gender as an important variable
in academic achievement of students. However, the above study is different from the present
study in some areas. The above study is different in terms of population of the study, location
of the study, method of data analysis, research design and subject area. Although both studies
examined the effect of gender on students achievement, but the present study considers the
effect of method and interest on gender which the reviewed study did not consider as
important variable in predicting male and female academic achievement. The researchers
identify this gap and intend to fill it in the present study.
Alao and Abubakar (2010), carried out study on gender and academic performance of
college physics students: a case study of department physics/computer science education,
Federal College of Education (Technical) Omoku, Nigeria. The purpose of the study was to
assess the gender difference in academic performance of Physics students. Four hypotheses
were formulated tested using t-test. A sample of thirty-six (36) students comprising of
eighteen (18) female eighteen (18) male students was used for the study. The results revealed
that there was no statistical significant difference in academic performance between female
and male students. Based on this, it was recommended that teachers in the department of
56
physics/computer should still improve on their pedagogy skills so as to be able to impact on
the students, stressing the importance of Physics in Technology, giving them the necessary
motivation to learn especially in their introductory courses. The above study is related to the
present study because both examined the influence of gender on academic achievement of
students. Nevertheless the above study is different from the present study in some areas. The
above study is different from this study in terms of population of students used, number of
research hypothesis, subject area and level of students. Furthermore, the reviewed literature
did not examine the effect of cooperative learning strategy as a variable in accessing male
and female students’ academic performance which the present study is investigating. The
researches identify a gap in method as a predictor of students’ academic performance in the
reviewed literature and intend to fill it. Hence the present study will determine the effect of
method (i.e. cooperative learning strategy) on students’ achievement in chemistry in
Abakaliki Education Zone of Ebonyi State.
Ayodele (2009), examined gender differences in mathematics and integrated science
achievement among Junior Secondary School Students. The purpose of the study was to
examine gender differences in Mathematics and Integrated Science achievement among the
Junior Secondary school students with particular interest on the interaction effect of gender
and school type on students’ achievement. Three hypotheses were formulated and tested
using Analysis of co- variance (ANCOVA). A sample of 840 students of both sexes drawn
from 2006 and 2007 Junior Secondary School Certificate Examinations (JSSCE) in Ekiti
State, Nigeria was used for the study. The study adopted ex-post factor research design. The
findings from the study revealed that female students outperformed male students in science.
And that the achievement of male students did not differ from female students in
mathematics. The above reviewed study is related to the present study in some areas. Both
studies use the same teaching technique (i.e. interaction effect). Both studies use the same
57
method for data analysis. However, both studies are different in some areas. They are
different in terms of subject areas, population of the study, area of the study and research
design adopted. Also they differ in the level of students used. While the former was carried
out on Junior Secondary School Students, the present study will be carried out on Senior
Secondary School Students. Though both studies are interested in determining the important
of interactions of students on male and female students academic achievement, but the
present study includes interest as a variable in order to see if male and female students really
show interest in the method which the reviewed study did not consider. Hence, the present
study will determine the effects of interest on male and female students’ achievement in
chemistry in Abakaliki Education Zone of Ebonyi State.
Oludipe (2012), investigated gender difference in Nigerian Junior Secondary students’
academic achievement in Basic Science. The main purpose of this study was to investigate
the influence of gender on Junior Secondary students’ academic achievement in Basic science
using cooperative learning teaching strategy. Three hypotheses were formulated for the study.
Sample of one hundred and twenty students (120) students obtained from the intact classes of
the three selected Junior Secondary Schools in the three selected Local Government Areas of
Ogun State, South- west Nigeria was used for the study. The study employed a quasi-
experimental design. The instrument used for data collection was achievement Test for Basic
Science (ATBS). The data collected was analyzed using mean, standard deviation and t-test.
Finding of the study revealed that there was no significant difference in academic
achievement of male female students at the pretest, posttest, and delayed posttest levels
respectively. The above study is similar to the present study in some areas. Both studies use
the same teaching technique, they are both experimental studies. However, they are different
in some areas. They are different in terms of population of the study, number of research
hypothesis, subject area and level of students. Though both studies are interested in
58
ascertaining the influence of cooperative learning strategy and gender on students’ academic
achievement, but the present study includes interest as a variable and a predictor of academic
achievement which the reviewed study did not consider. The researcher identifies a gap in
this area which the present study intends to fill.
School Location and Achievement in Chemistry
Nbina and Obomanu (2011), assessed the effects of problem solving instructional
strategies on students’ achievement and retention in chemistry with respect to location in
Rivers State. A pretest, post-test, non-equivalent control group design was adopted for the
study and two research question and two hypotheses were answered and tested. Purposive
and stratified random sampling were used to select the subjects and the results revealed no
significant difference observed on scores of both pretest post-test of urban and rural students
in the achievement and retention tests administered in the course of the study. The findings
revealed no significant difference observed on the scores of urban and rural subjects in the
problem solving. The above is similar to the present study because both of them are
experimental studies. They are both conducted in chemistry. However, the present study is
investigating cooperative learning strategy while the reviewed study assessed the effect of
problem solving instructional strategies on students’ achievement. Also the present study
includes interest as a variable as to ascertain if chemistry students show interest in the method
which the reviewed study did not consider. The researcher identifies a gap in this area which
the present study intends to fill.
Ezeudu and Obi (2013), investigated the effect of gender and location on students’
achievement in chemistry in secondary schools in Nsukka Local Government Area of Enugu
State, Nigeria. The study was guided by three research questions and three hypotheses. The
sample of the study was 827 students comprising 473 males and 354 females. Ex-post factor
design was adopted for the study. The school past records was the instrument used to collect
59
data for the study. Mean and standard deviations were used answer the research questions t-
test statistics were used to analyzed the hypotheses. The findings showed that male students
achieved significantly better than the female students in both urban and rural schools. Also
there was no significant difference in the academic achievement of students in urban and
rural schools. It was recommended among others that adequate incentives from Federal
Government, parents and stakeholders of education should be provided to female students.
The above study is related to the present study because both of them are in chemistry; they
are both experimental studies and used the same scale for data analyses. Though both studies
investigated the effect of gender and school location on students’ achievement, but the
present includes cooperative learning strategy and interest as key variables to really show
their effects on students achievement which the reviewed study did not consider. The
researcher identifies a gap in this area and the present study will seek to fill it.
Interest and Academic Achievement in Chemistry
Chukwu (2002), studied the use of local games in promoting students’ interest in
Mathematics learning. The study employed quasi-experimental, involving the non-equivalent
pre-test, post-test control group design. The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to
analyze the data. The researcher discovered that the game enhanced the students’ interest.
The interest the students developed in the learning helped them achieved higher in the
subject. The results interpreted to be as a result of pupils’ active participation in the
Instructional gaming process. The above study is related to the present study in some areas.
They are both experimental studies. Both studies shared the same method of data analysis,
and interest is another variable similar in both studies. However, they are different in some
areas. They are different in subject area.
60
Omeje (2002), studied the effect of instructional building model on students’
performance and interest in Technical Drawing. Interest was one of the variables studied.
The study was a quasi-experimental non-equivalent control group design analysis.
Hypothesis one was analyzed using analysis of covariance while hypothesis two and three
were analyzed using t-test. The researcher found out that the group taught with the
instructional building model had a higher mean interest score compared with the group taught
with conventional method. The reviewed study is related to the present study in some areas.
They are both experimental studies. Both studies share the same method of data analysis, and
interest is another variable similar in both studies. However, though they are interested in
determining the effect of method and interest on students’ achievement, but the present study
includes gender and location as variables which the reviewed study did not consider. The
researcher identifies a gap in this area and this present study intends to fill it.
Allen (2013) conducted a study to assess the effectiveness of career oriented
performance tasks (COPT) approach against the traditional teaching approach (TTA) in
enhancing student interest in chemistry in higher school in the Philippines. Specifically, it
sought to find out if student exposed to career oriented performance tasks have higher interest
in chemistry than those students exposed to the traditional teaching approach. Career oriented
performance tasks approach aims to integrate career oriented example and enquiry based
activity in general inorganic chemistry. The study used the quasi experimental pretest,
posttest control group design. The sample of the study consisted of two intact sections of first
year college students in a private higher education institution in Manila who are enrolled in
general inorganic chemistry during the second semester of school year 2011 to 2012. Thirty
nine (39) students are in the COPT class, while thirty eight (38) students are in the TTA class.
The instruments use in the study is the chemistry attitude and experiences questionnaire
(CAEQ) to assess student’s interest in chemistry. The study found out that the main posttest
61
score in the chemistry attitude and experience questionnaire was not significantly higher for
students exposed to COPT than for students exposed to TTA. The result of the study also
showed that the integration of career oriented examples in chemistry was not effective in
enhancing students’ interest in the subject given the limited time of intervention and that
longer exposure to intervention is necessary to enhance college students’ interest in
chemistry. The above study is related to the present study because both of them are carried
out in chemistry; they are both experimental studies and consider method and interest as a
key variable in students’ academic achievements in chemistry. However, the two studies
differs in the area of location, population of the study, instruments for data collection,
students level and teaching technique considered. Also, the reviewed study did not consider
the effect of gender and school location as variables which the present study considers as
predictor variables in students achievement in chemistry. The researcher identifies a gap in
the area and the present study will seek to fill it.
From the foregoing, it is seen that interest is a major tool in teaching and learning.
Interest often improves learner’s enthusiasm to learning. It is a major tool that improves
learners’ ego in learning. As a result of this, interest in learning should be considered and
teachers are expected to use a method or strategy that will ginger learner’s interest in
learning.
Summary of Literature Review
The reviews of literature were presented in three broad stages as follows: Conceptual
framework, Theoretical Framework and Emperical Studies. The conceptual framework
discusses the following; concept of chemistry, cooperative learning, methods and strategies,
interest, school location, gender in science and achievement in chemistry.
62
Major theory related to this study was also reviewed. The theory on which this
research work is anchored on is the Vygotsky (1978) constructivist theory of learning of
science and which states that the full development of a student can only be achieved through
learning cooperatively with other students.
The review of emperical studies discussed the effect of cooperative learning strategy
on students’ achievement in chemistry, gender, school location, achievement in chemistry
and interest in learning.
From the above, effective learning of chemistry and students academic achievement
requires a student-centred method in its teaching. Its proper teaching hinges on the teaching
of the learners process of learning. It was discovered that there is no conclusion among the
researchers that any particular method is ranked the best than others in teaching. However,
many attest that cooperative learning strategy is preferable to teaching chemistry and science
than the conventional lecture method.
A lot of emperical studies were carried out to know whether gender determines
students’ achievement in learning. Although different views and opinions were raised in
disciples and subject, some suggested that females are better in learning, while some
conclude d that males are good and achieve better in learning strategies. In the review of
emperical studies on gender and achievement in chemistry, some of the findings shows no
significant gender difference in chemistry, some shows that females outperformed males in
chemistry while some concluded that males achieved better in chemistry than their females
counterpart. All the reviewed work on gender and achievement are inconclusive as to which
sex achieved better in the subject.
Location is another area of argument of the scholars on whether location of school
influences the achievement in chemistry or not. The review shows no significant difference in
the achievement of students in urban and rural schools in chemistry while the research carried
63
out in other disciplines were inconclusive as to whether school location is prediction of
academic achievement in teaching – learning situation. Therefore, this present study will
thoroughly investigate the influence of school location on students’ achievement in
chemistry.
From the literature reviewed, it is clear that many studies have been carried out on
chemistry and on the place of gender and location on students’ achievement in chemistry, but
the researcher observed that most of the reviewed literature on gender and school location did
not consider interest as a major variable. The researcher identifies this gap and this present
study will fill it. Also, many studies have been carried out on the effect of cooperative
learning strategy on students’ achievement in chemistry and most of the findings shows that
cooperative learning strategy improves students’ achievement in chemistry, but the observed
that some of the reviewed literature on achievement in chemistry did not consider interest and
achievement as a variable while some of the reviewed literature only considered one kind of
cooperative learning on students’ achievement. The researcher identifies this gap and the
present study will fill it. Furthermore, the reviewed of literature on gender and achievements
in chemistry, most of the reviewed literature shows that there is no significant gender
difference and achievement while some revealed that males performed better than females in
chemistry. The researcher observed this slight contradictions from the result of the reviewed
literature and intends to ascertain the effect of gender on students’ achievement in chemistry.
Also, the literatures on school location and achievement in chemistry shows some
contradictions, while one revealed no significant difference in achievement of urban and rural
students in chemistry, the other one revealed that male students performed better than their
female counterparts in urban and rural schools. Hence the researcher identifies this
inconsistency and intends to correct it in the present study.
64
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter discusses the methodology of the study under the following headings:
design of the study, area of study, population of the study, sample and sampling technique,
instrument for data collection, validation of the instrument, reliability of the instrument,
experimental procedure and control of extraneous variables and method of data analysis.
Design of the Study
The study is a quasi-experimental design. Specifically, pretest, post test non-
randomized group design was used. The design is considered appropriate because intact
classes was used by the researcher in order to avoid disruption of the normal academic
programme of the schools. The design is symbolically presented in the following figure
Grouping Pre-test Treatment Post-test
E O1 X O2
- - - - - - - - - -
C O1 -X O2
Symbolic representation of the design of the study
Where;
E = Experimental group (cooperative learning strategy)
C = Control group (lecture method)
O1 = Pre-test
O2 = Post-test
X = Treatment of experimental group
-X = Control group
- - - = the two groups are not equivalent
Source: Nworgu B.G. (2006: 42)
6364
65
Area of the Study
This study was carried out in Abakaliki education zone of Ebonyi State. The zone
consists of four local government areas namely: Ebonyi, Ohaukwu, Abakaliki and Izzi local
governments. The choice of this area was based on the fact that the researcher is familiar with
all the locations of the schools for the study and has taught chemistry in both the urban and
rural areas of the education zone. Also, the researcher thought it wise to use the education
zone for the study because of the students’ poor academic achievement in chemistry at the
senior secondary school certificate examination in the zone over the years. In addition, the
education zone is good enough to provide the data for the study because there are rural and
urban areas in the zone and being the largest education zone among the three education zones
in Ebonyi State.
Population of the Study
The population of the study consisted of all the 1175 chemistry students (651 males
and 524 females) in the forty nine (49) governments owned secondary schools in Abakaliki
Education Zone of Ebonyi State in the 2014 – 2015 academic session. (Source: Abakaliki
Education Zonal Office, Ugwuachara, Abakaliki) the choice of SS2 students is made because
students in this level have spent more than four years in secondary school. Also, they are in
the penultimate years of their secondary school. They, therefore, are presumed to have been
exposed to adequate science teaching and learning and have chosen chemistry as one of the
subject to be offered in the senior secondary certificate examination. Also, since they are not
having any internal examination that may trigger off much revision of work done in
chemistry, they are best suited for this research.
Sample and Sampling Technique
The sample of 160 chemistry students consisting 75 males and 85 females was used
for the study. Multi-stage sampling technique was used for the study. First eight co-education
66
schools were drawn from Abakaliki Local Government Area of the zone. The 4 – co-
educational schools (two from rural and two from urban areas) was drawn from the eight co-
educational schools by random sampling technique. Intact classes were used for the study so
that all the students can benefit from the lessons. Simple random sampling technique was
used to name the schools in relation to experimental and control groups.
Instrument for Data Collection
Two instruments were used for this study. The data was collected through the
Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT). The CAT consisted of 25-item. The test items were
developed using SSCE past question papers. The items covered the following contents that
were taught in the lesson. The contents are: Periodic table of elements, rates of chemical
reactions, oxidation – reduction reactions, energy and chemical reaction. The CAT was
developed from the above unit topics first by constructing a test blue print for the different
content specified above. The objectives of the topics in SS 2 chemistry curriculum served as a
guide for developing the questions. Also, Chemistry Interest Inventory scale developed by the
researcher was used. It is a thirty (30) item with four point rating scale. The respondents are
expected to indicate their degree of agreement or disagreement on a number of statements,
positive and negative about chemistry.
Validation of Instruments
The types of validity established for the instrument were face, construct and content
validity. Three experts from the University of Nigeria Nsukka (One in Psychology, and two
in Science Education) validated the instruments. Content validity of the chemistry
achievement test was carried out by preparing a test blue print which rates the questions on
the achievement test based on knowledge, comprehension and application of the selected
chemistry topics which was validated by three the experts. This is to ensure that the questions
that forms the test items are in the senior chemistry curriculum and that they are appropriate
67
to the level of the students. Chemistry Interest Inventory (CII) underwent construct validity.
This was to ensure proper working, understanding and also determine the extent to which the
inventory measures student’s interest. The comments and suggestions of the experts were
used by the researcher in making the final draft of the instruments.
Reliability of the Instrument
The reliability of the instruments was established through trial testing on a group of
20 SS2 chemistry students in Afikpo High School in Afikpo North Local government Area of
Ebonyi state. The Chemistry Interest Inventory (CII) was administered first to the students by
the regular teacher. The response was collated by the researcher and the regular teacher. The
Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) was immediately administered to the students of the
same school by the regular teacher. The Chemistry Achievement Test was marked by the
researcher and the regular teacher of the school. The Chemistry Interest Inventory and the
Chemistry Achievement Test was given to a measurement and evaluation expert in the
University of Nigeria Nsukka, for analysis of estimates of internal consistency. The analysis
of the inventory was done using the Cronbach Alpha and value obtained was 0.914,
indicating the high reliability of the instrument. The reliability of the CAT was done by the
same expert using the Kuder-Richardson (K-R20) method and the estimate gave 0.861, which
shows that the instrument is relatively reliable.
Experimental Procedures
Training of Teachers or Research Assistants: The researcher trained the chemistry
teachers that was used to carryout the study. The training included the purpose of the study, a
rehearsal on how to conduct the study by the regular teachers of the schools handling both the
control and experimental groups, and the procedure to administer the instrument. Before the
commencement of the experiment, the researcher had four days training session with the
68
chemistry teachers. The training lasted for 2 hours daily. The training involved the chemistry
teachers from the four schools for the study. The purpose of this is to:
Enable the teacher acquire the necessary competence for implementing experimental
conditions.
Enable the teachers to enhance minimum standard in the implementation of the
experimental conditions.
Educate the teachers on how to regulate the students activities during the instruction.
Enable the teachers to evaluate the students during and after the instruction
Educate the teachers on the procedure needed to administer the instrument before and
after treatment.
Educate the teachers or research assistants on the use of the lesson notes especially the
lesson note on group learning since most of the teachers are familiar with the lecture
based method of teaching and learning.
Intact Classes: Since the schools have intact classes, the teachers made use of the school time
table. Intact classes are assigned to experimental and control groups. Pretest was administered
before the experiment commences. The same regular teachers in each school taught the
control and experimental groups. This is to reduce teacher’s variable. In each of the selected
schools, the control group was taught using the conventional lecture method while the
experimental group was taught using the cooperative learning strategy. The experiment lasted
for four weeks.
Data Collection: The instruments were administered to all the students by the research
assistants or teachers. The pretest of the Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) was
administered to the students by the research assistants and the scores were collated. The
research assistants will then carry out the treatment on both control and experimental group
69
using the lesson note prepared by the researcher. At the end of the teaching, the post test for
the Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) was carried out and the scores were collated.
The chemistry interest Inventory was then administered before and after the achievement test.
This is to enable the students to tick a response on their feelings about the interest statements.
Control of Extraneous Variables
Experimental Bias: The actual teaching of the control and the experimental groups
were not done by the researcher. The regular chemistry teachers carried out the teaching. This
is to avoid possible bias by the researcher. Also, the regular chemistry teachers that handled
the control and the experimental groups were given lesson plans that were developed by the
researcher.
Test Effect: The experiment lasted for four weeks and it is expected that the period was long
enough to disallow pretest from affecting post test scores and to eliminate the possibility of
becoming test wise. Also, the questions were re-arranged before administering the post test.
Control of Hawthorns Effect: Hawthorns effect occurs when the students’ performance is
affected by virtue of being aware that they are subjects of an experiment. To control this, the
regular teachers were used for the control and the experimental groups.
Lesson Plans: To ensure the uniformity of the lesson contents, the researcher developed
lesson plans for teachers that handled both the control and experimental groups.
Control of Mortality: The chemistry teachers carrying out the teaching and testing informed
the students that the score of the test will form 10marks of the class continuous assessment
scores for the term. This is to ensure that there is no mortality as a result of absenteeism or
drop out.
Novelty Effect: To avoid novelty effect, which might give rise to increased interest,
motivation or participation on the part of the students, just because they were doing
70
something different or new, pretest and post test were administered to all intact classes used
for the study.
Method of Data Analysis
The research questions were answered using mean and standard deviation. The null
hypotheses were tested using Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), at an alpha level of 0.05
level of significance.
71
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
This chapter presents the analysis of the data collected in accordance with the
research questions and hypotheses that guided the study.
Research Question One: What are the mean achievement scores of students taught
chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with the lecture method?
Table 1: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with the lecture method
Group Pre-test Post-test
n Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain
Cooperative Learning 80 35.32 6.17 46.15 12.78 10.83
Lecture Method 80 34.52 8.15 37.60 7.80 3.08
Table 1 shows that the students who were taught chemistry using cooperative learning
strategy had mean achievement score of 46.15 with a standard deviation of 12.78 at the post-
test while those who were taught using lecture method had mean achievement score of 37.60
with a standard deviation of 7.80. Mean gain scores of 10.83 and 3.08 for the two groups
respectively imply that the students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy
achieved higher than their counterpart who were taught using lecture method.
Research Question Two: What are the mean achievement scores of male and female
students in chemistry?
71
72
Table 2: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of male and female students in chemistry
Gender Pre-test Post-test
N Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain
Male 75 28.61 7.06 45.00 14.34 16.39
Female 85 31.08 9.58 39.11 6.94 8.03
Table 2 reveals the achievement mean scores of male and female students in chemistry. It
shows that male students had post-test mean achievement score of 45.00 with a standard
deviation of 14.34 while their female counterpart had post-test mean achievement score of
39.11 with a standard deviation of 6.94. Mean gain scores of 16.39 and 8.03 for the male and
female students respectively may have indicated that male students achieved higher than their
female counterpart.
Research Question Three: What are the mean achievement scores of urban and rural
students in chemistry?
Table 3: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry
Location Pre-test Post-test
N Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain
Urban 78 30.39 8.40 42.83 12.23 12.44
Rural 82 29.47 8.73 40.96 10.53 11.49
Table 3 reveals the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. It
shows that urban students had post-test mean achievement score of 42.83 with a standard
73
deviation of 12.23 while their rural counterpart had post-test mean achievement score of
40.96 with a standard deviation of 10.53. Mean gain scores of 12.44 and 11.49 for the urban
and rural students respectively may have indicated that urban students achieved higher than
their rural counterpart.
Research Question Four: What is the effect of cooperative learning strategy on the interest
of chemistry students?
Table 4: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using lecture method
Group Pre-test Post-test
n Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain
Experimental 80 41.35 5.78 61.72 7.55 20.37
Control 80 41.85 6.82 51.85 8.45 10.00
Analysis of data in Table 4 shows that the students who were taught chemistry using
cooperative learning strategy had post mean interest score of 61.72 with a standard deviation
of 7.55 while those that were taught using lecture method had post mean interest score of
51.85 with a standard deviation of 8.45. Mean interest gain scores of 20.37 and 10.00 for the
two groups respectively imply that the students who were exposed to cooperative learning
strategy had higher post interest score than their counterpart exposed to lecture method.
Research Question Five: What is the effect of gender on the interest of chemistry students?
74
Table 5: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of male and female students in chemistry
Gender Pre-interest Post-interest
n Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain
Male 75 41.96 6.16 60.16 8.91 18.20
Female 85 41.28 6.45 53.81 8.82 12.53
Table 5 reveals the interest mean scores of male and female students in chemistry. The
analysis shows that male students had post interest mean score of 60.16 with a standard
deviation of 8.91 while their female counterpart had post interest mean score of 53.81 with a
standard deviation of 8.82. Mean interest gain scores of 18.20 and 12.53 for the male and
female students respectively may have indicated that male students had higher interest score
than their female counterpart.
Research Question Six: What is the effect of school location on the interest of chemistry
students?
Table 6: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of urban and rural students in chemistry
Location Pre-test Post-test
N Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain
Urban 78 41.00 6.33 56.64 8.32 15.64
Rural 82 42.17 6.31 56.52 10.35 14.35
Table 6 reveals the interest mean scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. The Table
shows that urban students had post interest mean score of 56.64 with a standard deviation of
8.32 while their rural counterpart had post interest mean score of 56.92 with a standard
deviation of 10.35. Mean interest gain scores of 15.64 and 14.35 for the urban and rural
75
students respectively may have indicated that urban students had slightly higher interest score
than their rural counterpart.
Research Question Seven: What is the interaction effect of method and gender on students’
mean achievement scores in chemistry?
Table 7: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students for the interaction effect of method and gender
Pre-test Post-test
Group Gender n Mean SD Mean SD
Cooperative Male 40 36.37 5.44 52.75 14.21
Female 40 34.27 6.12 39.55 6.31
Lecture Male35 31.17 7.87 36.14 8.03
Female45 37.13 7.45 38.73 7.51
Table 7 shows the interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in
chemistry. It shows that male students who were exposed to cooperative learning had a post-
test achievement mean score of 52.75 with a standard deviation of 14.21 while the male
students who were exposed to lecture method had a post-test achievement mean score of
36.14 with a standard deviation of 8.03. The female students who were exposed to
cooperative learning had a post-test achievement mean score of 39.55 with a standard
deviation of 6.31 while the students who were exposed to lecture method had a post-test
achievement mean score of 38.73 with a standard deviation of 7.51. This by implication
shows that both male and female students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy
had higher post-test achievement mean scores than the male and female students who were
exposed to lecture method.
Research Question Eight: What is the interaction effect of method and school location on
students’ mean achievement scores in chemistry?
76
Table 8: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students for the interaction effect of method and location
Pre-test Post-test
Group Location N Mean SD Mean Std. Deviation
Cooperative Urban 42 35.54 5.83 47.45 13.44
Rural 38 35.07 6.60 44.71 12.03
LectureUrban 36 36.05 7.38 37.44 7.87
Rural 44 33.27 8.61 37.72 7.83
Table 8 shows the interaction effect of method and location on students’ achievement in
chemistry. It shows that students in urban schools who were exposed to cooperative learning
had a post-test achievement mean score of 47.45 with a standard deviation of 13.44 while the
students in urban schools who were exposed to lecture method had a post-test achievement
mean score of 37.44 with a standard deviation of 7.87. The students in rural schools who
were exposed to cooperative learning had a post-test achievement mean score of 44.71 with a
standard deviation of 12.03 while those in rural schools who were exposed to lecture method
had a post-test achievement mean score of 37.72 with a standard deviation of 7.83. This by
implication shows that both urban and rural students who were exposed to cooperative
learning had higher post-test achievement mean scores than the urban and rural students
exposed to lecture method.
HO1: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of students
taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the lecture
method.
77
Table 9: Analysis of covariance of the effect of method on students’ achievement in chemistry
Source Type III Sum of
Squares
df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 6541.015a 4 1635.254 17.953 .000
Intercept 14018.913 1 14018.913 153.907 .000
Pre-test .001 1 .001 .000 .998
Group 2132.366 1 2132.366 23.410 .000
Gender 1095.353 1 1095.353 12.025 .001
Group * Gender 2276.658 1 2276.658 24.994 .000
Error 14118.485 155 91.087
Total 301222.000 160
Corrected Total 20659.500 159
a. R Squared = .317 (Adjusted R Squared = .299)
The analysis of data in Table 9 shows that the probability associated with the calculated value
of F (23.410) for the effect of teaching method on students’ achievement in chemistry is
0.000. Since the probability value of .000 is less than the .05 level of significance (p < .05),
the null hypothesis was rejected meaning that there is a significant difference in the mean
achievement scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and
those taught using the lecture method in favour of those exposed to cooperative learning
strategy.
HO2: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of male and
female students in chemistry.
Table 9 shows that the probability associated with the calculated value of F (12.025) for the
influence of gender on students’ achievement in chemistry is 0.001. Since the probability
value of 0.001 is less than 0.05 level of significance (p < .05), the null hypothesis was
rejected. Thus, there is a significant difference in the mean achievement scores of male and
female students in chemistry in favour of the male students.
HO3: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of urban and
rural students in chemistry.
78
Table 10: Analysis of covariance for the influence of location on students’ achievement in chemistry
Source Type III Sum of
Squares
df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 3164.931a 4 791.233 7.010 .000
Intercept 12772.432 1 12772.432 113.162 .000
Pre-test 89.268 1 89.268 .791 .375
Group 2498.840 1 2498.840 22.139 .000
Location 44.004 1 44.004 .390 .533
Group * Location 105.403 1 105.403 .934 .335
Error 17494.569 155 112.868
Total 301222.000 160
Corrected Total 20659.500 159
a. R Squared = .153 (Adjusted R Squared = .131)
Table 10 reveals that the calculated value of F (0.390) for the influence of school location on
students’ achievement in chemistry had an associated probability value of 0.533. For the fact
that the probability value is greater than the 0.05 level of significance (p > .05), the null
hypothesis was accepted. This implies that there is no significant difference in the mean
achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry.
HO4: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of students taught
chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the lecture method.
Table 11: Analysis of covariance of the effect of method on students’ interest in chemistry
Source Type III Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 5379.729a 4 1344.932 24.108 .000
Intercept 5580.251 1 5580.251 100.027 .000
Pre-interest 143.789 1 143.789 2.577 .110
Group 3690.988 1 3690.988 66.162 .000
Gender 1256.525 1 1256.525 22.523 .000
Group * Gender 32.597 1 32.597 .584 .446
Error 8647.046 155 55.787
Total 529998.000 160
Corrected Total 14026.775 159
a. R Squared = .384 (Adjusted R Squared = .368)
79
Table 11 shows that the calculated value of F (66.162) for the effect of teaching method on
students’ interest in chemistry is 0.000. Thus, there is a significant difference between the
mean interest scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and
those taught with lecture method in favour of those taught using cooperative learning
strategy. This is for the fact the probability value of 0.000 is less than the 0.05 level of
significance (p <.05).
HO5: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of male and female
students in chemistry when taught using cooperative learning strategy.
Data analysis in Table 11 reveals that the probability associated the calculated value of F
(22.523) for the influence of gender on students’ interest is 0.000. Thus, there is a significant
difference in the mean interest scores of male and female students in chemistry since the
probability value of 0.000 is greater than the 0.05 level of significance (p < .05).
HO6: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of urban and rural
students in chemistry.
Table 12: Analysis of covariance for the influence of location on students’ interest in chemistry
Source Type III Sum of
Squares
df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 4166.482a 4 1041.620 16.374 .000
Intercept 5463.768 1 5463.768 85.888 .000
Pre-interest 156.233 1 156.233 2.456 .119
Group 3961.200 1 3961.200 62.269 .000
Location 28.352 1 28.352 .446 .505
Group * Location 52.981 1 52.981 .833 .363
Error 9860.293 155 63.615
Total 529998.000 160
Corrected Total 14026.775 159
a. R Squared = .297 (Adjusted R Squared = .279)
80
Analysis of data in Table 12 reveals that the calculated value of F (0.446) for the influence of
school location on students’ interest in chemistry had an associated probability value of
0.505. For the fact that the 0.505 probability value is more than the 0.05 level of significance,
the null hypothesis was accepted. Thus, there is no significant difference in the mean interest
scores of urban and rural students in chemistry.
HO7: There is no significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ mean
achievement scores in chemistry.
Table 9 reveals that the calculated value of F (24.994) for the interaction effect of method and
gender on students’ achievement in chemistry had a probability value of 0.000. Hence, there
is a significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in chemistry
since the probability value of 0.000 is less than the 0.05 level of significance (p < 0.05).
HO8: There is no significant interaction effect of method and school location on students’
mean achievement scores in chemistry.
Table 10 reveals that the associated probability for the calculated value of F (0.934) for the
interaction effect of method and school location on students’ achievement in chemistry is
0.335. Since the probability value of 0.335 is greater than the 0.05 level of significance (p >
0.05), the null hypothesis was accepted. Hence, there is no significant interaction effect of
method and school location on students’ achievement in chemistry.
Summary of the Findings
The following are the findings of the study;
1. Students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy achieved higher than
their counterpart who were taught using lecture method. Further analysis showed that
there is a significant difference in the mean achievement scores of students taught
chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the lecture
method in favour of those exposed to cooperative learning strategy.
81
2. Male students achieved higher than their female counterpart. Besides, there is a
significant difference in the mean achievement scores of male and female students in
chemistry in favour of the male students.
3. Urban students achieved higher than their rural counterpart. However, there is no
significant difference in the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in
chemistry.
4. Students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy had higher post interest
score than their counterpart exposed to lecture method. It was further found that there
is a significant difference between the mean interest scores of students taught
chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with lecture method in
favour of those taught using cooperative learning strategy.
5. Male students had higher interest score than their female counterpart. Thus, there is a
significant difference in the mean interest scores of male and female students in
chemistry.
6. Urban students had higher interest score than their rural counterpart. However, there
is no significant difference in the mean interest scores of urban and rural students in
chemistry.
7. Male and female students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement
mean scores than the male and female students of the control group. Besides, there is
a significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in
chemistry.
8. Urban and rural students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement
mean scores than the urban and rural students of the control group. It was further
found that there is no significant interaction effect of method and school location on
students’ achievement in chemistry.
82
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUMMARY
The chapter presents the discussion of findings; conclusions reached from the findings
of the study; educational implications of the study; recommendations; limitations of the study
and suggestions for further research and the summary of the study.
Discussion of Findings
The discussion of the findings was done under the following subheadings;
Effect of cooperative learning method on the achievement and interest scores of students in chemistry
Effect of cooperative learning method on the interest scores of students in chemistry
Effect of gender on achievement and interest scores of students in chemistry
Effect of gender on interest scores of students in chemistry
Effect of location on achievement and interest scores of students in chemistry
Effect of location on interest scores of students in chemistry
Interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement scores of students in chemistry
Interaction effect of method and location on students’ achievement scores of students in chemistry
Effect of cooperative learning method on the achievement and interest scores of students in chemistry
The findings of the study showed that students who were exposed to cooperative learning
strategy achieved higher than their counterpart who were taught using lecture method.
Further analysis showed that there is a significant difference in the mean achievement scores
of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using
lecture method in favour of those exposed to cooperative learning strategy. This finding is in
line with the findings of Uwameiye and Ogunbameru (2005) who discovered in their study
82
83
that students exposed to cooperative learning strategy significantly performed better than the
students exposed to lecture method of teaching. This result also agrees with the result of
Okwor (2007) whose study also revealed a significant difference in the mean achievement
scores of students taught with guided discovery method. Ozioko (2015) obtained similar
result in her study. Nbina (2013) also found that cooperative learning strategy was
significantly superior to the demonstration method in enhancing the cognitive achievement of
students. These confirmed the fact that cooperative learning strategy is more effective than
the lecture method in enhancing students’ achievement in chemistry. Buttressing this finding,
Gambari and Olumorin (2013) & Dhananjay and Rima (2013) found that there is a significant
difference in the performance of students taught mathematics using two instructional
approaches in favour of those taught using cooperative strategy. Besides, it has been shown in
literature review that cooperative learning strategy plays important roles in enhancing a
balanced development of the child, that is in both cognitive, effective and psychomotor skills.
Effect of cooperative learning method on the interest scores of students in chemistry
The findings of the study revealed that students who were exposed to cooperative learning
strategy had higher post interest score than their counterpart exposed to lecture method. It
was further found that there is a significant difference between the mean interest scores of
students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with lecture
method in favour of those taught using cooperative learning strategy. This finding agrees with
the findings of Chukwu (2002) and Omeje (2002). Chukwu (2002) found in a similar study
that the use of innovative strategy enhances the interest of students more than the
conventional method of teaching. Omeje also found that students taught using instructional
building model had higher interest score than those taught using conventional method.
84
Influence of gender on achievement scores of students in chemistry
The findings of the study revealed that male students achieved higher than their female
counterpart. Further statistical analysis showed that there is a significant difference in the
mean achievement scores of male and female students in chemistry in favour of the male
students. In line with the findings of this study is the finding of Titilayo (2015). Titilayo
(2015) found that the academic performances of both male and female students in accounting
differ significantly when exposed to cooperative learning strategy. On the other hand, the finding
of this study disagrees with the findings of Okeke (2013) and Okonkwo (2014). Okeke
(2013) found that project-based method favours both male and female students alike in
Government curriculum instruction. Okonkwo (2014) found that there is no significant
influence of gender on students’ achievement in Government in secondary schools when
taught using guided discovery method.
Influence of gender on interest scores of students in chemistry
The findings of the study showed that male students had higher interest score than their
female counterpart. Thus, there is a significant difference in the mean interest scores of male
and female students in chemistry. This finding agrees with the findings of Titilayo (2015)
who found that the interest scores of both male and female students in accounting differ
significantly after being exposed to cooperative learning strategy. However, the finding
disagrees with the findings of Oludipe (2012) who found that there is no significant
difference in the interest scores of male and female students in Basic science.
Influence of location on achievement scores of students in chemistry
Urban students achieved higher than their rural counterpart. However, there is no significant
difference in the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. This
finding disagrees with findings of Okoro (2011), Ezeudu and Obi (2013) and Ozioko (2015).
Okoro (2011) concluded that school location had a moderating influence upon the
85
achievement of students in cognitive and non-cognitive instruments in favour of the urban
students. Ezeudu and Obi (2013) found that male students achieved significantly better than
the female students in both urban and rural schools. Ozioko (2015) found that school location
is found to have a significant effect on the students’ achievement in Foods and Nutrition
when taught using cooperative learning strategy. The explanation for the observed differential
achievement in favour of urban schools may be that the surrounding of rural schools is
generally unstimulating or insufficiently stimulating unlike urban areas which have lots of
fascinating and stimulating materials for teaching. That was not the case for the present study
as location was found not to be a significant factor on the achievement of students in
chemistry.
Influence of location on interest scores of students in chemistry
The findings of the study revealed that students in urban schools had higher interest score
than their rural counterpart. However, there is no significant difference in the mean interest
scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. Buttressing this finding, Nbina and Obomanu
(2011) found no significant difference in the interest scores of students in urban and rural
schools.
Interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement scores of students in chemistry
Male and female students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement mean
scores than the male and female students of the control group. Besides, there is a significant
interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in chemistry. Contrary to
the findings of this study are the findings of Okeke (2013) and Okonkwo (2014). Okeke (2013)
found that project-based method favours both male and female students alike in Government
curriculum instruction. Similarly Okonkwo (2014) found that there is no significant influence of
gender on students’ achievement in Government in secondary schools when taught using guided
discovery method.
86
Interaction effect of method and location on students’ achievement of students in chemistry
Urban and rural students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement mean
scores than the urban and rural students of the control group. It was further found that there is
no significant interaction effect of method and school location on students’ achievement in
chemistry. This finding disagrees with the finding of Ozioko (2015). Ozioko (2015) found
that school location was found to have a significant effect on the students’ achievement in
Foods and Nutrition when taught using cooperative learning strategy.
Conclusions
Based on the findings of this study the following conclusions were drawn. Cooperative
learning strategy significantly enhanced academic achievement and interest of students in
chemistry more than the conventional lecture method. Gender had a significant influence on
the achievement and interest of students in chemistry. This means that male students achieved
higher in chemistry more than the female students when exposed to cooperative learning
strategy. Location of school was not a significant factor on students’ achievement and interest
in chemistry when taught using cooperative learning strategy.
Educational Implications of the Findings
The findings of this study have some obvious educational implications for Teachers, students,
curriculum planners and school administrators.
The findings of the study showed that cooperative learning strategy had significant effect on
students’ achievement and interest in chemistry than the conventional lecture method. This
implies that the continuous use of conventional lecture method may not improve the
achievement and interest of students in chemistry.
This finding has implication for the teachers in the sense that the application of the strategy
will reduce the teachers’ stress in the classroom as most of the learning activities will be
87
carried out by the students while the teachers serve as facilitators. The implication of the
findings to students is that cooperative learning strategy is activity oriented and student-
centered strategy which demands seriousness, practice and hardwork on the part of the
students.
For the curriculum planners, the findings imply that they can develop appropriate Curriculum
that will make provision for the teacher to adopt cooperative learning strategy that will
encourage active participation of the students in teaching and learning. The findings of the
study equally imply that school administrators need to organize workshops and seminars to
disseminate the information on the efficacy of cooperative learning strategy on students’
achievement and interest in chemistry.
The findings equally showed that cooperative learning strategy is gender biased in favour of
the male students. This implies that frantic efforts should be made by the school authorities to
enable the female students improve their chemistry abilities when taught using cooperative
learning strategy. The findings of the study showed that cooperative learning strategy is
location friendly implying that equal attention should be given to both urban and rural school
students when adopting the strategy. This means that cooperative learning is not location
biased.
Recommendations
Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations were proffered:
1. Teachers of chemistry should adopt the use of cooperative learning strategy in the
teaching of the subject since its efficacy has been confirmed.
88
2. Teacher training institutions such as colleges of education and the universities should
adopt cooperative learning strategy as a teaching strategy for teaching their students,
since those students will turn out to be chemistry teachers in secondary schools.
3. Cooperative learning strategy should be integrated into the curriculum of chemistry at
secondary school level as one of the effective teaching approaches for use.
4. Government authorities both State and Federal should organize short time training,
workshops or seminars on how to make use of cooperative learning strategy for
teaching chemistry effectively.
5. Frantic efforts should be made by the school authorities to enable the female students
improve their chemistry abilities when taught using cooperative learning strategy.
Limitations of the study
The findings of this study may have been affected by the following factors;
1. Only few schools in the study area were used for the study. The sample of the study
may have not been good enough to represent the whole schools in the study area.
2. The content covered were only few units of the SS II chemistry curriculum
Suggestions for Further Research
The following suggestions were made for further research
1. The study can be replicated by future researchers in which large sample size will be
used for the sake of generalizability of the findings.
2. The study can also be replicated using various contents of chemistry curriculum.
Summary of the Study
The study investigated the effect of cooperative learning strategy on students’ Achievement
and interest in chemistry in Abakaliki Education Zone of Ebonyi State. Eight research
questions and eight null hypotheses which were tested at the 0.05 level of significance guided
89
the study. Quasi experimental research design was adopted for the study. The study was
carried out in Abakaliki Education Zone of Ebonyi State. The population of the study was
1175 SS II students in the said zone. The sample of the study was of 160 SS I1 students.
Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) and Chemistry Interest Inventory (CII) were used for
data collection. Three experts validated the instrument. The reliability coefficients of 0.914
and 0.861 were obtained for CAT and CII respectively. Mean and standard deviation were
used to answer research questions and ANCOVA was used to test research hypotheses at 0.05
level of significance. The findings of the study showed that;
1. Students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy achieved higher than
their counterpart who were taught using lecture method. Further analysis showed that
there is a significant difference in the mean achievement scores of students taught
chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the lecture
method in favour of those exposed to cooperative learning strategy.
2. Male students achieved higher than their female counterpart. Besides, there is a
significant difference in the mean achievement scores of male and female students in
chemistry in favour of the male students.
3. Urban students achieved higher than their rural counterpart. However, there is no
significant difference in the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in
chemistry.
4. Students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy had higher post interest
score than their counterpart exposed to lecture method. It was further found that there
is a significant difference between the mean interest scores of students taught
chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with lecture method in
favour of those taught using cooperative learning strategy.
90
5. Male students had higher interest score than their female counterpart. Thus, there is a
significant difference in the mean interest scores of male and female students in
chemistry.
6. Urban students had higher interest score than their rural counterpart. However, there
is no significant difference in the mean interest scores of urban and rural students in
chemistry.
7. Male and female students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement
mean scores than the male and female students of the control group. Besides, there is
a significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in
chemistry.
8. Urban and rural students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement
mean scores than the urban and rural students of the control group. It was further
found that there is no significant interaction effect of method and school location on
students’ achievement in chemistry.
Based on the findings of the study and the educational implications, recommendations were
highlighted. Some limitations that could have undermined the external validity of the study
were also highlighted from where suggestions for further studies were proffered.
91
REFERENCES
Ababio, O.Y. (2013). New school chemistry for senior secondary school: Africa Feb publishers (6th edition).
Abubarkar, R.B. & Oguguo, O.D. (2011).Age and gender as predictors of academic achievement of college mathematics and science students. Proceedings of 2011 International Conference on Teaching, Learning and Change. International Association for Teaching and Learning, 736 – 748.
Adams, A.R. (2013). Cooperative learning effects on the classroom. Unpublished M.Ed. Thesis, Faculty of Arts Education, Northern Michigan University.
Adekunle O.B. (2010). Effect of guided discovery and think – pair – share strategies on secondary school students’ achievement in chemistry. (Unpublished) Ph.D. Thesis, Olabisi Onabanjo University Ago-Iwoye.
Adeyemi B.A. (2008). Effects of cooperative learning and problem solving strategies on junior secondary school students’ achievement in social studies. Journal of Research in Education Psychology.16(3), 2008, 691 – 708.
Aguele, L.I. & Uhumniah (2008). Female Participation in Science, Technology and Mathematics (STM) Education in Nigeria and National Development. Journal of Social Science, 15(2), 121 – 126.
Agugu, C.U. (2012). Ethical issues in scientific and technological practices, UNN, department of science education. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nigeria Nsukka.
Allen A. (2013). Career – oriented performance tasks: Effects on students’ interest in chemistry. Asia – Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching. 14 (2), 12.
Allen, A.E. (2013). Career – oriented performance task in chemistry: Effects on students’ critical thinking skills. Education Research International, 2(2), 81 – 90.
Alokan, F.B. (2010). Influence of sex and location on student academic performance. The Social Sciences (TSS), 5(4), 340 – 345.
Aluko, K.O. & Olorundare, A.S. (2002). Effects of cooperative and individualistic instructional strategies on students problem solving abilities in chemistry. African Research Review. 1(1), 44.
Aronson, E; and Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes. I., & Snapp, M. (1978).The Jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Awoniyi, S.A. (2000). Sex differences in academic performance. Nigerian Journal of Gender and Development, 1(1 & 2), 35.
91
92
Ayodele, M.O. (2009). Gender differences in mathematics and integrated science achievement among junior secondary school students, Malaysia Journal of Learning and Instruction, 6, 41 – 53.
Azikiwe U. (1998).Language teaching and learning. Onitsha: Africa Fep. Publishers Ltd. Azikiwe, U. (2005). Language influence on achievement in Language. Paper presented at the
conference of the association of English language teachers in the colleges of Education and polytechnics held at the federal college of Education, Omoku, Rivers State.
Balarabe, M. (1999). Motivation, learning and performances among Nigerian students. A seminar paper presented in Faculty of Education, Zaria Ahamadu Bello University.
Barnes, S.L. (2012). Achievement, motivation for teacher education analysis of attitude about future. Success for residence in poor urban neighbourhood. Sociological Focus, 35(2), 201 – 208.
Bilesanmi-Awoderu, J.B. (2006). Effect of computer-assisted instruction, simulation/games on the academic achievement of secondary school students in Biology, Sokoto Educational Review, 8(1), 49 – 60.
Billings, D. (2000). Women’s way of knowing and the Digital Divide. Presented in an interactive paper presentation.
Bodunde, H.A. (1991). Factors influencing adolescent attitude to school rules and regulations in Zaria secondary school. Unpublished Masters Degree Thesis, Zaria Faculty of Education, Ahmedu Bello University.
Bosede, A. F. (2010). Influence of sex and location on relationship between students problems and academic performance. The Social Science, 5(4) 340 – 345.
Chukwu, C.R. (2012). Effects imagery and gender on secondary school students’ achievement and interest in essay writing in Anambra State, Nigeria. Unpublished M.ed. Thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Nigeria Nsukka.
Chukwu, J.O. (2002). Promoting interest in mathematics learning through local games, International Journal of Arts and Technology Education 2(1) 124 – 136.
Cohen, E. (1986). Designing group work. Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
Cohen, E. (1987). Statistical power analyses for the behaviour (2nded) Hillsdale: New Jersey Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cohen, E. G. &Aronson, E. (1994). Designing group–work. Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom (2nd Edition). New York, Teachers College Press.
Cohen, J., Kennedy-Justice, M., Pai S., Torres, C., Toomey, R., & DePierro, E. (2000), encouraging meaningful quantitative problem solving. Journal of Chemical Education, 77, 1166 – 1173.
93
Coleman, J. (1961). The adolescent society. New York: Free Press.
Damon, W. & Phelps E. (1989). Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education. International Journal of Educational Research. 58(2), 9 – 19.
Damon, W. (1984). Peer education: The untapped Potential. Journal of Applied Development Psychology 5, 331 – 343.
Dhananjay. D. & Rima. K. (2013). Effect of cooperative learning on achievement in environmental science of school students’. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications 7, (2), 2250 – 2258.
Dienye & Gbamanja (1990). Science education, theory and practice.
Dooly, M. (ed) (2008). Constructing knowledge together. Telecollaborative language learning. A Guide Book to Moderating Intercultural Collaboration Online. Bern: Peter Lang.
Ekeh, P.U. (2003). Gender bias and achievement in science and mathematics among school pupils. Implication for human resource development, Journal of Curriculum Organization of Nigeria, 10(1), 30 – 33.
Erinoso, Y.E. (2005). Women and Science. 36thInangural Lecture, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago – Iwoye, 1 – 37.
Ezeh, D.N. (2013). Science without women: a paradox. And inaugural lecture of the University of Nigeria, delivered on May 30th.
Ezeudu, F.O. & Obi T.N. (2013). Effect of gender and location on students’ achievement in chemistry in secondary schools in Nsukka Local Government Area of Enugu State, Nigeria. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences. 3(15), 50 – 55.
Ezeudu, S.A. (2003). Classroom environment as correlate of students’ cognitive achievement in senior secondary school geography. The Journal of World Council for Curriculum and Instruction Nigeria chapter, 4(2), 65 – 73.
Fantuzzo, J.W., K. Polite and N. Grayson (1990). “An evaluation of reciprocal peer tutoring across elementary school settings”, Journal of School Psychology. 28 (4), 309 – 323.
Federal Government of Nigeria (2008). Millennium development goals’ report.
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004). National Policy on Education. Lagos: NERDC.
Gambari & Olumorin, (2013). The effectiveness of Video-Based Cooperative Learning Strategy on high, medium and low Academic Achievers in Mathematics. An online Journal of the African Educational Research work. 13,(2).
Garuba. M.A. Agweda, F.E. & Abumere I. (2012). The contributions of science and technology education to national development. The Nigerian Experience. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(7), 250-257
94
Goodwin, M. W. (1999). Cooperative learning and social skills: What skills to teach and how to teach them. Interventions in School & Clinic, (35) 29 – 34.
Habibian, F. (2012). Usage pattern, perceived use fullness and ease of use of computer games among Malaysian elementary school students. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 4 (23), 5285 – 5297.
Hallak, J. (1977). Planting the location of schools: An instrument of educational policy. Paris: UNSECO-LLEP.
Huang, F, & Su, J. (2010). Study of teaching model based on cooperative learning. Studies in Literature and Language. 1 (6), 3-5
Ibe, F. N. (2006). Multilingualism and translation as necessary factors for Nigerian language policy. International Journal of research in Arts and social sciences, 4, 842 – 451.
Igboanugo, B.I.K. (2013). Effects of peer-teaching on students’ achievement and interest in senior secondary school difficult chemistry concepts. International Journal of Educational Research, 12 (2), 61-71.
Igbokwe, U.L. (2007).Effects of the cognitive academic language learning approach (CALLA) on students’ achievement in essay writing. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Nigeria Nsukka.
Ibraheem, T.L. (2011). Effects of two modes of student steam achievement division (STAD) strategies on senior secondary School Students’ learning outcomes in chemical kinetics. Asia – Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 12 (2), 7.
John, D. Johnson R. and Holubee, E. (1994a). Cooperative learning in the classroom. Virginia Association for supervisions and curriculum development. 9 (7), 31 – 35.
Johnson, D.W., R. Johnson, and K. Smith. (1991). Cooperative learning: increasing college faculty instructional productivity. ASHE – ERIC higher education report, 20, (4), The George Washington University, Graduate School of Education and Human Development.
Johnson, D.W. and R.T. Johnson (1999). Learning together and alone (5thed), Englenood Cliffs, N. J.: Pretice – Hall.
Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1986). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R. and Smith, K. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Holubec, E.J. (1993). Cooperation in the classroom (6 thed). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
95
Johnson, D., Johnson, R, Holubec, E., (1984). Circles of Learning: Cooperation in the classroom .Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum development.
Johnson, D.W. and Johnson, R.T. (1993). Implementing cooperative learning education digest.
Johnson, G.M. (1998). Principles of instruction for at-risk learners preventing school failure. (42), 167 – 181.
Kagan, S. (1985). Cooperative learning resources for teachers. River Side: University of California at Riverside.
Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative learning. San Clemente: Resources for Teachers.
Kagan, S. (2009).Theory of cooperative learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing, 2009.
Kardia, D.S. (2004). Instructor identity: The impact of Gender and Race on facility experiences with teaching. Machigan. University of Machigan Press.
Kennedy, H.L. (2000). Society cannot continue to exclude women from the field of Science and Mathematics. Marks Education, 120 (3), 529.
Kossau, S. (2006) Gender difference in motivation to learn French. Canadian Modern Language Review. 62(3), 65 – 96.
Kolawole, E.B. (2007). Effects of competitive and cooperative learning strategies on Academic Performance of Nigerian Students in Mathematics. Educational Research Review, 3(1), 33 – 37.
Kuliman, A., Fair Weather, H. and Batterworth, G. (1977). Sex Difference in Verbal Performance Discrepancies, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 47 (1), 85 – 90.
Marja, R.R. (2008). Effect of cooperative learning method on students’ Achievement in Reading comprehension. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Meizeobi, D.I. (2009). Managing instruction in the classroom. In Igbokwe, U.L &Eze U.N. (eds). Classroom management for curriculum implementation: Applying psychological principles. Enugu: Timex.
National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, (1994). Trends in academic progress. Retrieved from nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?
Nbina, J.B., &Obomanu, B.J. (2011).Assessment of effects of problem solving instructional strategies on students’ achievement and retention in chemistry with respect to location in Rivers state. World Journal of Education, 1(2), 74.Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/wje.vln2p74.
96
Nelson, J. R. & Johnson A. (1996). Effects of direct instruction, cooperative learning and independent learning practices on the classroom behaviour of students with behavioural disorders: A comparative analysis. Journal of Emotional & Behavioural Disorders (4), 53 – 63.
Njoku, Z.C. (2003). Development and preliminary validation of scale for the assessment of students’ interest in o’ level chemistry activities. Journal of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 38 (152), 64 – 70.
Njoku, Z.C. (2013) Lesson note on science & society. Department of Science Education. University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Nigeria.
Nnamani, B.I. & Audu, U.D. (2005). Breaking gender barriers in science technology and mathematics education (STME): Problem and prospect. Unpublished Seminar Paper Presented to the Department of Science Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Nwachukwu, T.A. (2004). Psychology of learning. De Sandax Limited, Enugu.
Nwankwo, I.O. (2004). Science and scientific knowledge stand on its class as the best discovery of mankind but its abuse is fatal. Science for man. An Annual Publication by Science Education Students’ Association, UNN. 6(1), 52 – 56.
Nworgu, B.G. (2006): Educational research: Basic issues and methodology. University Trust Publishers Nsukka.
Nwosu, I.E. (2012).Gender role perceptions and changing the role of women in Nigeria. International journal of Agriculture and rural development. 15 (3), 1240-1246.
Ogbu, C. (2008). Effects of cooperative and product learning strategies on senior secondary school students’ achievement in essay writing in Afikpo education zone. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki.
Ogundokun, M.O. (2007). Personological factors, school location and types as pridictors of Academic Performance among Senior Secondary School Students in South Western Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ibadan.
Ogundokun, M.O. & Adeyemo, D.A. (2010). Emotional intelligence and academic achievement: The moderating influence of age, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The African Symposium, 10 (2), 127 – 141.
Ojebisi, A.O; Olosunde, G.R., & Isola, O.M. (2011). Instructional material and academic achievement in physics: Some policy implication. European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2(1), 2220 – 2425.
Ojoawo, A.O. (1990). An empirical study of factors responsible for poor academic performance in secondary schools in Oyo State. African Journal of Education Management, 4 (1 & 2), 140 – 148.
Okeke, E.C. (2008). Clarification and analysis of gender concept. Focus on research, reproduction health education, and gender sensitive classrooms. Science teachers association of Nigeria. Gender and STM Education series, 2, 5-8.
97
Okoro, N.Z. (2006). Effects of school location on problem solving among secondary school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 10(4), 307 – 312.
Oludipe, D. & Awokoyo, J. O. (2009). Effects of cooperative learning teaching strategy on the reduction of students’ anxiety for learning chemistry. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(1), 31.
Oludipe, D.I. (2012). Gender difference in Nigeria junior secondary students’ academic achievement in basic science. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 2 (1), 93 – 99.
Omeje, H.O. (2002). Effect of instructional building model on students’ performance and interest in technical drawing. International Journal of Arts and Technology Education, 2(1), 85 – 86.
Onah, E.F. (2011). Influence of sex and school location on students’ achievement in agricultural science. African Journal of Science, Technology and Mathematics Education. (AJSTME), 1(1), 96 – 102.
Onuigbo, L.N. (2009). Managing diversity in the classroom. In Igbokwe, U.L. & Eze U.N.N. (eds). Classroom management for curriculum implementation: Applying Psychological Principles. Enugu. Timex.
Onyilo, B.D. & Onyilo, O.G. (2010). Academic achievement and self-concept of secondary school students. Journal of Research in National Development, 8(2), 67 – 68.
Opara, J.A. (2004); Refocusing research in science, technology and mathematics (STM)
education in Nigeria issues challenges and the way forward. Preceding of the 45th
Annual Conference of STAN, 43 – 49.
Osokoya, M.M. (1998). Some determinant of Secondary School Students’ Academic achievement in Chemistry in Oyo State. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Owoeye, J.S. (2011). The effect of integration of location, facilities and class-size on academic achievement of secondary school students in Ekiti State, Nigeria, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan.
Owoeye, J.S. and Yara, P.O. (2011).School location and academic achievement of secondary school in Ekiti State, Nigeria. Asian Social Science (ASS). 7 (5), 170 – 173.
Ozioko, E.A. (2003). Effect of word attack skills on the achievement of senior school students in reading comprehension in Nnewi Education Zone of Anambra State, Unpublished M.Ed. thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Pandian, S. S. (2004).Cooperative learning in biology. The effect of computers. Department of Education, Arunachi University, India.
Panitz, T. (2000).The motivational benefits of cooperative learning. In M. the all (Eds.) motivation from within: Approaches for Encouraging faculty and students to Excel, 8, 20 – 45, San Francisco, C. AiJossey Bass publishers.
98
Paul, A.M. (2013). How the power of interest drives learning. Retrieved from: blogs.Kqued.Org/mindshift/2013/how-the-power-of-interest-drives-Learning.
Piaget, J. (1926). The language and thought of the child. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. New York: Harcourt Brall.
Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. New York: Viking. Piaget, J. (1972). The Psychology of Intelligence, New York: Harcourt Brall.
Prado, L. & Plourde, L.A. (2005). Increasing reading comprehension through explicit teaching of reading strategies: Is there a difference among the genders? Reading improvement, 32 – 43.
Prater, M.A; Bruhl, S. & Serna, L. A. (1998) Acquiring social skills through cooperative learning and teacher – directed instruction. Remedial and Special Education (19) 160 – 172.
Pressley, M. (2006).Verbal protocols of reading. The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, Ndi Lawrence Erlbaum.
Raimi S. M. & Adeoye, F. A. (2006).Gender differences among College Students’ as determinants of performance in Integrated Science. African Journal of Educational Research, 8(1&2), 41 – 49.
Saage.O. (2009).Causes of mass failure in chemistry examination among students. A commissioned paper presented at Government Secondary Schools Science day, Karu, Abuja. 1st March, 2009.
Salami, S. O (2004). Affective characteristics as determinant of academic performance of school going adolescents: Implications for counseling practice. Sokoto Educational Journal. 3 (2), 20-25.
Salami, S. O. (1998). The influence of causal attribution, level of academic performance and gender on achievement related behaviour of science students. Journal of Research in Education, 2 (2), 67 – 76.
Salu; Y. (2000).Video card games as a learning design for teacher education. International Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences. HelSink, Finland: 45(3), 370 – 380.
Samuel, W. W. & John, G. M. (2004).Effects of cooperative class experiment teaching method on secondary school students’ chemistry achievement in Kenya’s Nakuru District. International Education Journal, 5(1), 26 – 35.
Sapan – Shevin, M. (2004). Introduction, in E. G. Cohen, C. M; Brody & M. Sapon – Shevin (Eds) Teaching Cooperative Learning: the Challenges for Teacher Education. Albany, NY, State. University of New York Press. 1 – 10.
99
Shield, B. & Dockrell, J. (2008). The effects of classrooms and environmental noise on children’s academic performance, 9th International congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem (ICBEN), Foxwoods.
Slavin, R.E. (1983). When does Cooperative Learning increase student achievement? Psychological Bulletin, 94 (3), 429 – 445.
Slavin, R.E. (1994). Cooperative learning. In T. Husen& T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds), The International Encyclopedia of Education (2): 1094 – 1099. Kidlington, Oxford: Elsevier Science.
Slavin, R.E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research and practice. Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster Company.
Slavin, R.E. (1995). Co-operative learning: theory, research, and practice. (2nd edition). Cooperative learning. In G. McCulloch & D. International Encyclopedia of Education. Abington, UK: Routledge.
Slavin, R.E., & N.L. Karweit, (1985). Effects of whole-class, ability – grouped, and individualized instruction on mathematics achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 22: 351 – 367.
Slavin, R.E., Karwelt, N.L. & Madden, N.A. (1989) Effective programs for students At – Risk. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Slavin, R.E. (1991). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning Educational Leadership, 48(5), 71 – 82.
Slavin, R.E. (1994). School and classroom organization in beginning reading Classroom: Aids and instructional grouping. In R.E. Slavin, N.L. Kareint and B.A. Wasik, (eds). Preventing early school failure: Research on effective strategies. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Slavin, R.E. (1995b). Research on cooperative learning and achievement what we know, what we need to know http:www.Scovcsos.WhatEd/sfa/coop/ear.Html.
Slavin, R.E. and Oickle, E. (1981). Effect of learning teams on students achievement and race relations. Treatment by race interaction. Sociology of Education, 54, 173 – 180.
Slavin, R.E., and N. A. Madden (eds) (2009). Two million children: Success for all, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Springer, L. M. Stanne, and S. Donovan. Meta-analysis of Small group learning in science, Math, engineering and technology disciplines, Madison, WI: National Institute for Science Education, 1997.
Stonehouse, A. (2012). Interest based learning. Retrieved from: http://Sorden.com/multimedia2012Pdf.
100
Subramamian P. R. (2009). Motivational effect of interest on students’ engagement, and learning in physical education. Retrieved from: www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens.
The West African Examination Council (2012). Senior School Certificate Examination May/June 2012, Chief Examiners Reports. Nigeria.
Umanah, M.K. (2005). Comparative study of urban and rural chemistry students in secondary schools, Journal of Research in Science Teachings, 1(1), 162 – 170.
Umback, P.D. (2004). Aligning faculty and students’ Behariourism: Realizing the Promise of Greater Expectation. 90 (4), 24 – 31.
Umo, U.C. (2007).Effect of games on the achievement and interest of junior secondary school students in Igbo grammar. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Umoh, C.G. (2003). A theoretical Analysis of the effects of gender and family education on human resource development, Journal of Curriculum Organization of Nigeria.10(1), 1 – 4.
UNESCO, (2009). First international conference on girls and women in science and technology in Africa, Bamako Mali, 13-15 July, 2009.
Uwah, C. (2005). De-emphasizing gender difference in human resource development. The need for family education. Nigerian Journal of Curriculum Studies.2(1), 60 – 63.
Uzoegwu, P. N. (2004). The effect of the cooperative learning method on students’ achievement in English essay writing. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Viann, E. (2004). Gender difference and the effects of cooperative learning in college level mathematics. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Curtin University of Technology.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Webb N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research. 13(1), 21 – 40.
Webb, N. (1985), “Student interaction and learning in small groups: A research summary” In R. Slavin, et al. (eds). Learning to Cooperate, Cooperating to Learn, New York: Plenum.
Webb, N. (2008) Co-operative learning, in T. L. Good (ed), 21st Century Education: A Reference Handbook. Thousand Oaks, C. A: Sage.
West African Examination Council (2014). Executive summary of entire results and chief examiners’ report on the West African Senior Secondary School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) Conducted in Nigeria in 2014.
101
Yamarik, S. (2007). Does cooperative learning improve students learning outcomes? Journal of Economic Education, 38 (3), 275
Yusuf, M. A. & Adigun J. T. (2010). The influence of school sex, location and type on students academic performance. International Journal of Science Education. 2 (2), 81 – 85.
102
LESSON NOTE BASED ON COOPERATIVE LEARNING
Week: 1st Week
Subject: Chemistry
Topic: The Periodic Table
Sub-topics: Brief history of the periodic table, definition of the period table,
periodic law, electronic configuration as basis of the periodic table,
groups and periods et the periodic table.
Class: SS2
Duration: 80 minutes
Date:
Instructional Materials: Chart of modern periodic table of elements, worksheet/cardboard
sheets.
Instructional Objectives: At the end of the lesson, the students should be able to:
1. State the periodic law
2. Define electronic configuration
3. List the characteristics of elements in the same group and period of the periodic table.
4 Using the cardboard sheet arrange the first twenty elements into groups and periods.
Entry behaviour: Students are familiar with some of the elements on the periodic table.
Entry Behavior Test: The teacher asks the students to list the first ten elements in the
periodic table.
Instructional Procedure:
Content Development Teacher’s Activity Students’ Activity Strategy Introduction The teacher divides the
students into groups of four.
He/she introduces the lesson by directing the students on the activities for the day.
He/she moves round each group to supervise the group activities after the introduction.
The students in their various groups choose one of the members as the group leader. The students listen to the teacher as he/she introduces the topic for discussion and they all copied down the topic in their notes. The students went further to discuss the new topic in their various groups with each member giving his/her opinion to the group on the topic.
Set-induction and Familiarization.
Listening.
Discussion and Supervision.
103
The Periodic Law The teacher use the chalkboard, ask the students to state the periodic law.
He/she moves from group to group to supervise the learning activities. He/she encourages the group to write down the opinion of the sub-topic.
The group leaders of the various groups lead the discussion by asking each members of their opinion of what the period law is all about.Each members of the group state the periodic law to the hearing of other members.The group leader summarized the group discussion by combining the opinions of the group on the sub-topic under discussion.
Discussion, Stimulus variation and Summary.
Electronic Configuration
The teacher asks the students to define electronic configuration by sketching a chart of periodic table on the chalkboard.
He/she moves round each group to supervise the learning activity.
The students in their various groups brainstorm on the sketch and give definitions of the concept of electronic configuration. The group leader collates each member’s response and summarizes the definition giving by the group. The group a leader goes on to give the group definition of electronic configuration to all members of the class.
Listening,Discussion and Supervision.
Characteristic of Elements in Groups and Periods of the Periodic Table
The teacher writes on the chalk board asking the students to list the characteristics of elements in the same group and period of the periodic table.
He /she move round to supervise and encourage group participation and interaction. The teacher listened to each group leaders and correct was necessary.
The group leaders in their various in their various groups ask each member to give one characteristics each of group and periodic elements. Each members of the group write down one characteristic of elements in the same group and period. The group leader collated the member’s responses and all members discussed them one after the other. The group leader goes further to list the characteristics of elements
Discussion, Questioning, Explanation.
Note taking.
104
in the group and periods for their various groups. All members of the class write down the characteristics of elements as present by each group leaders for further discussions after the lesson.
Arrangement of the first Twenty Elements into Groups and Periods
With the empty table on the chalkboard. Each groups are ask to fill in the first twenty elements into boxes in order of atomic number. The teacher goes further to make necessary corrections on the arrangement of elements presented by each groups.
The group leader asks each group member to copy the sketch and fill in the elements according to their atomic number. Each member used the worksheet giving to them to sketch the periodic table and fill in the elements. All members of the group submitted their worksheet to the group leader and they discuss together on their arrangement. The group leaders presented the arrangement of elements of their group to all members of the class. All members of the group copied the table and arrangement of elements into their notebooks for further discussion during group meeting.
Drawing, Discussion and Summary.
Evaluation The teacher evaluates the group learning outcome by asking the following questions.
1. State the periodic law.
2. Define and briefly explain electronic configuration.
3. List three characteristics each of elements in the same
Each group members of each group discusses the questions and reached an agreement on the answer. The group leaders of each group collated the responses of each group collated the responses of each group members and present the answers to the question on behalf of the group
Face to Face interaction, Discussion, Questioning and Closure.
105
group and period of the periodic table.
4. Using the worksheet, draw periodic table and arrange the first twenty elements.
He/she moves round each
group to ensure that each
member is participating in
providing answer to the
question asked.
He/she encouraged the
students to further discuss
on all the sub-topic treated
in the class.
members.
All members of the class copy the evaluation questions in their notebooks for further discussion during group meeting. The group leader of each group agreed with the members on when to meet for further discussion on the learnt topic.
Assignment: Using the S, P, D, F, notation, arrange the electrons of the first five elements on
the periodic table.
106
Week: 2nd Week
Subject: Chemistry
Topic: Rates of Chemical Reactions
Sub-topics: Rate of reaction and mathematical expression, ways of measuring
reaction rates. Rate curve, collision theory, factors affecting rates of
reaction.
Class: SS 2
Duration: 80 minutes
Date:
Instructional Materials: Marble chips, conc. HCL, beakers, measuring balance, charts of
reaction rates
Instructional Objectives: By the end of the lesson, students should be able to:
1. Define rate of chemical reaction
2. List simple ways of measuring the rate of chemical reaction
3. List the factors affecting the rate of chemical reaction
4. Carryout simple experiment on reaction rates of some compounds
Entry Behaviour: Students are familiar with time measurement of athletes in track and field
events.
Entry Behaviour Test: The teacher asks the students to comment on the time it takes to run
100 metre and 200 metre race in track and field events
Instructional Procedure
Content Development Teacher’s Activity Students’ Activity Strategy Introduction The teacher coordinates
the students by ensuring they are in their various groups. He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to attempt a definition of rate of chemical reaction.
He/she moves round each group to supervise
The students still maintaining their group of four, sits together in preparation for the day’s activities. The group leaders of the various groups ask each member of their group to give one definition of rate of reactions. The group leaders write down each member’s response and all members discussed on the various definitions giving by individuals. All members of the group reached a consensus of the
Set induction.
Group interaction, Individual response, Discussion.
Discussion, Supervision and
107
the various group learning activities. He/she listen to various group leaders and make necessary corrections on their definitions.
definition of rate of reaction. The group leaders read out the definition of the rate of reaction on behalf of other group members/the entire students. The group leader asks one of the group members to write down the teachers corrections for further discussion during group meeting.
Note-taking.
Measuring Reaction Rates
The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to mentions ways of measuring the rate of chemical reaction.He/she moves round each group to supervise the group discussion and also encourage active participation of individual group members in the learning activity.He/she ask groups to list the various ways of measuring reaction rate as agreed by the members. He/she went further to make necessary corrections on group responses.
The group leader ask each member of their groups to mention one way of measuring reaction rates while another member of the group write down their responses.All members of the group brainstorm about each members responses and arrived at a consensus on ways of measuring rates of chemical reactions.
The group leaders of each group read out the ways of measuring rates of chemical reaction as agreed by the entire group. Another member of the group writes the corrections made by the teacher for further discussion during group meeting.
Individual response,
Discussion, Explanation and Questioning,
Group presentation, Listen Note-taking, and Corrections.
Factors Affecting the Rate of Chemical Reaction
The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to list the factors that can affect the rate of chemical reaction.
He/she moves round the class to supervise the group learning activities.
The group leader asks each group members to give one factor that can affect the rate of chemical reaction. Each members of the group give one factor that may affect reaction rates while another member of the group writes down their points. The group leader collates each member’s response and lead the group in discussing on the points
Directing, Individual response and Group interactions,
108
He/she ask each group leader to read out the factors affecting the rate of reaction as discussed in the groups.
He/she makes necessary corrections on group presentation.
listed.Members of the group reached a consensus on the factors affecting the rate of chemical reaction and the group leaders of each group present their points as agreed in their groups.The group leader asks one of the members to write down the teacher’s correction and contribution for further discussion during group meeting.
Corrections, Explanations and Note-taking.
Determination of the Rate of Dissolution of Marble Chips in conc. HCl
The teacher presents each group with the following materials for the experiments. (a)a beaker.(b) giving amount of
marble chips.(c)a known volume of
hydrochloric acid.(d) stop watch.He/she writes the chalkboard asking each group to dissolve the marble chip in the acid and measure the rate of dissolution of the chips. He/she moves round each group to supervise the experiment been carried out by each group.
He/she moves round to supervise the group discussion and checking the result of their experiment.
He/she ask the group to present the result of the
The group leaders of each group collected the materials for their group and distributed each of every member of the group. The group leader coordinates the experiment as follows. One member to pour the acid
in the beaker. Another member should
operate the stop watch while noting the time for dissolving the marble in the acid.
Another member was asked to pour the marble chips into the acid.
The group leader observed the dissolution of the marble chips in the acid while alerting the member handling the watch to stop after the marble chip have completely dissolved in the acid.
The group discussed about the experiments with each member making response while a member of the group writes down the responses of each group members.
The group leaders of each group present their results to the class
Stimulus variation,
Experimentation, Individual contributes and Observation.
Group discussion, Explanation, Questioning and Observations.
Listening, Presentation,
109
experiment to the class.
He/she make necessary contributions and corrections on the results of the group experiment.
giving some explanations about the experiment while each student writes down the explanations of each group leaders. The group leader asks one of the members to write down the teacher’s contribution and correction for further discussion during group meeting.
Note-taking.
Listening, Explanation, Rewarding and Note-taking.
Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the students the following questions:(1) Define rate of
chemical reaction.(2) List four simple
ways of measuring the rate of chemical reactions.
(3) List five factors that can affect the speed of chemical reaction.
(4) What time does it take for a 5grams of marble chips to dissolve in 100ml of concentrated hydrochloric acid
The students in their various group’s works cooperatively to provide answer to the questions ask by the teacher. The group leader went further to copy the question for further discussion during group meeting.
Questioning, Explanation and Note-taking and Closure.
Assignment: Define the following:
1. Heat of neutralization.2. Heat of reaction.3. Energy.
110
Week: 3rd Week
Subject: Chemistry
Topic: Energy and Chemical Reactions
Sub-topics: Rate of reaction and mathematical expression, ways of measuring
reaction rates. Rate curve, collision theory, factors affecting rates of
reaction.
Class: SS 2
Duration: 80 Minutes
Date:
Instructional Materials: Sodium hydroxide pellets, Beakers thermometers, water, energy
profile chart, working/sheet cardboard.
Instructional Objective: At the end the lesson, student should be able to
1. Define the concept of energy
2. Define heat of reaction
3. Define exothermic and exothermic reaction
4. Draw the energy diagram for exothermic and exothermic reaction.
Entry Behaviour: Students have little knowledge of the concept of energy and energy
conversion.
Entry Behavior Test:
1. State the law of conservation of energy
2. List five forms of energy
Instructional Procedure
Content Development Teacher’s Activity Students’ Activity Strategy Introduction The teacher introduces
the new topic by giving each group a beaker half-filled with water and some quantity of sodium hydroxide pellets.
He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to feel the beaker containing water and record the
The group leaders of each group coordinate the other members in preparation for the days learning activity. The group leaders of each group ask each group members to feel the beaker containing water and record the temperature. Each members of the group feel the beaker of water and recorded the temperature.
Set Induction.
Experimentation, Individual accountability and Discussion.
111
temperature. He/she went round to supervise the students as they feel the beaker of water in their respective groups. He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to pour the sodium hydroxide pellets into the beaker of water and record their observations. He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to define energy from their observations from the simple experiment they have carried out. He/she moves round each group to supervise the group discussion and encourage active participation of every group members.
He/she listened to their definitions and make necessary corrections.
All members of the group submitted their values to the group leader and discussed about their observations.
Starting with the group leader each members of the group feel the beaker after pouring the sodium hydroxide pellets and recorded their observations.
All members of the group discussed about their observations and came to a common conclusion. The group leader and all members of each group discuss about the observations from the experiment and reached a consensus on the definition of energy. The group leader for each group defined energy as agreed by the group members.The group leader asks one of the members to write down the correction for further discussion after the lesson.
Observation and Discussion.
Listening, Explanation and Note-taking.
Heat of Reaction The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to define heat of reaction with reference to the experiment they have carried out. He/she moves round each group to supervise and ensure that all members of the group are contributing to the
The group leader asks each members of the group to define heat of reaction individually based on the experiment.
All members of the group discuss on their various definitions and reached a consensus of the definition of
Discussion, Explanation, Individual accountability and Group interaction.
112
learning. He/she listens to each group leader’s definition of heat of reaction.He/she goes further to make necessary corrections and contributions on the concept of heat of reaction.
heat of reaction.
The group leaders of each group present the definition of heat of reaction of their group to the entire class.The group leader asks one of the members to write down the teacher’s correction and contribution for further discussion during group meeting.
Listening, Explanation.
Explanation, Listening and Note-taking.
Exothermic and Endothermic Reaction
The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to define exothermic and endothermic reaction with reference to the simple experiment they have carried out. He/she moves round the groups to guide and supervise the group learning activities.
He/she listens to their definitions and makes corrections and contributions. He/she also answers the questions ask by the students
The group leader coordinates the members. He/she ask the individual students to define exothermic and endothermic reactions. All members of the group submitted their individual definitions to the group leader and they brainstorm on their definition before reaching a consensus of the definition.
The group leaders of the various groups defined exothermic and endothermic reaction to the hearing of the entire class while the students write down their definitions. The group leaders ask members of their group to write down the corrections and contributions made by the teacher for further discussion during group meeting.
Individual accountability.
Discussion, Explanations and Questioning. Guiding, Discussion and Encouraging.
Listening, Presentation and Note-taking.
Listening, Explanation and Note-taking.
Energy Diagram for Exothermic and Endothermic Reaction
The teacher gives worksheet to the group leaders to be shared among group members.He/she writes on the
The group leaders distributed the worksheet to every members of the group.The group leaders coordinate the group members and ask
Listening, Explanation, Demonstration and Note-taking.
113
chalkboard asking the students to draw the energy profile diagram for exothermic and endothermic reaction from their theoretical knowledge of the terms.He/she moves round each group to guide and supervise the learning activity while also encouraging group work among members.
He/she listens to the group leader’s explanation and went further to make necessary corrections and contributions on the diagram.
them to sketch a raw diagram of exothermic and endothermic reactions on their work sheet. After some minutes all members come together to examine individual sketch and discuss on the final outlook of the two diagrams. All members of the consensus on how the energy profile diagram should look like. The group leaders of each group presented the energy level diagram of their groups to the entire class explaining the meaning of each curves on the diagram. The group members write down the teacher’s corrections and contributions for further discussion during group meeting.
Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the following questions from the students: 1. Define energy.2. Define heat of
reaction.3. Define exothermic
and endothermic reaction.
4. Draw the energy profile for exothermic and endothermic reactions.
The group leaders of each group shares the evaluation questions among the group members and they individually made attempt to provide answers to each them. The group leader of each group summarizes the questions by making contributions on behalf of their group.
Closure
Assignment:
1. List two oxidizing agents.2. List two reducing agents.
Week: 4th Week
114
Subject: Chemistry
Topic: Oxidation and Reduction Reaction
Sub-topics: Definition of oxidation and reduction, oxidizing and reducing agent,
oxidation number, rules for determining oxidation numbers.
Class: SS 2
Duration: 80 Minutes
Date:
Instruction Materials: Bottled concentrated potassium iodide, concentrated tetra
oxosulphate (vi) acid.
Instruction Objective: At the end of the lesson, students should be able to:
1. Define oxidation and reduction reaction.
2. Distinguish between, oxidizing and reducing agent.
3. Give examples of oxidizing and reducing agent.
4. Calculate the oxidizing number of element in a compound
Entry Behaviour: Students are familiar with the concept of oxidation number from their
lower class (i.e. SS1).
Entry Behaviour Test:
i. Calculate the oxidation number of chromium (cr) in K2 Cr2Or.
ii. Manganese (Mn) KMnO4.
Instructional Procedure
Content Development Teacher’s Activity Students’ Activity Strategy Introduction The teacher asks the
students to seat together with their various group members as they prepare for the learning activity for the day.
The students sit together in their normal group with each students waiting for the commencement of the day’s learning activity.
Set-Induction.
Oxidation and Reduction Reaction
The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to define oxidation and reduction making reference to their previous knowledge of oxidation number.The teacher moves
The group leaders of the various groups ask each member of their group to give the definition of oxidation and reduction. All members of the group come together to discuss about the definitions given by individual member. They
Individual accountability, Group Interactions.
Discussion, Explanation.
Supervision,
115
round the class to supervise the learning activity and interactions of members in their groups.He/she listens to the definitions of oxidation and reduction presented by the group leaders. He/she goes further to make necessary corrections and contributions on their definitions.
went further to reach a consensus on the definition of oxidation and reduction.
The group leaders present the definition of oxidation and reduction on behalf of their groups. Group members listened to the teacher’s correction and contributions. They went further to write them in their notebooks for further discussion during group meeting.
Discussion and Group Interaction.
Listening, Explanation Corrections and Contributions.
Oxidizing and Reducing Agents.
The teacher give two reagent bottles containing: - concentrated
potassium Iodide (KI).
- concentrated tetraoxosulphate (vi) acid (H2SO4) to the group leaders of each group.
He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to identify which one is reducing agent and which one is oxidizing agents. He/she moves round each group to supervise the students learning activity and group discussion.He/she listens to the group leaders comments.
He/she goes further to make necessary
The group leaders of each group collected the reagents bottles for their groups. The group leaders ask each group members to identify and write down which of the chemical is reducing agent and which one is the oxidizing agent. All members of the group submit their response to the group leader and they went further to discuss among themselves. The group reached an agreement on which chemical are oxidizing and which one is reducing and the definitions of the terms. The group leaders present their result to the entire class.All members of the class listened attentively to the teacher’s contribution on oxidizing and reducing agent. The group leader asks one of the members to write down
Observation, Inferences.
Individual task.
Discussion, Group Interactions and Supervision.
Listening, Explanation, Correction and Contribution.
Note-taking.
116
contributions on the students’ observations and definitions giving about oxidizing and reducing agent.
the teacher’s corrections and contributions for further discussion during their group meeting.
Examples of Oxidizing and Reducing Agents.
The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to list more examples of oxidizing and reducing agents.
He/she moves round the class to supervise and guide the students in their group discussion of the sub-topic.
He/she listened to the group response of examples of oxidizing and reducing agent as listed by the group leaders.He/she goes further to comment on their results, make necessary corrections and contributions.
The group leaders in their various groups ask each member to write down two examples each of oxidizing and reducing agents.
All members of the group submitted their responses to the group leader and they discuss about their responses with each member contributing to the group discussion. The group reached a consensus on examples of oxidizing and reducing agents from the response of individual students. The group leaders of each group listed other examples giving by their group to the entire class.The group members write down the teacher’s comment and contribution for further discussion during group meeting.
Individual contributions, Group discussion and Supervision.
Note-taking.
Calculation of Oxidation Number
The teacher write the following compound on the chalkboard and ask the students to calculate the oxidation number of oxygen in each of them:i. CaCO3
ii. SO4
iii.CO2
iv.HNO3
(Ca = +2, C = -4, S = -
The group leader directs each members of the group to copy the compounds and calculate the oxidation number one of them. Each member picked his/her own compound and calculated the oxidation number of oxygen in the compound. All members submitted their individual answers to the group leader and all group
117
2, H = +1, N = +3).He/she moves round each group to supervise and guide them to solving the questions given to the group.
He/she listened to their answers, make necessary corrections and reward the group that scored the highest.
members discussed together and cross-checked their various calculations for any mistake.
The group leaders of reach group present the answers of their group to the class.The students listened to the teacher and write down the corrections made for further discussion after the lesson.
Listening, Encouraging, Rewarding and Note-taking.
Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the following questions from the students. 1. Define oxidation
and reduction.2. Distinguish
between oxidizing and reducing agents.
3. Give four examples each of oxidizing and reducing agents.
4. Calculate the oxidation number of Sulphur (S) in the following compounds:i. H2SO4
ii. K2SO4
(Note: H = +1, K = +1, O = -2).
The students in the various group work cooperatively, and discussed on the questions asked by the teacher and provide answers one after the other.
Closure
Assignment: List the first twenty elements on the periodic table given their symbols.
118
LESSON PLAN FOR THE CONTROL GROUP BASED ON LECTURE METHOD
Week: 1ST Week
Subject: Chemistry
Topic: The Periodic Table
Sub-topics: Brief history of the periodic table, Definition of the Period table,
periodic law, electronic configuration as basis of the periodic table,
groups and periods et the periodic table.
Class: SS 2
Average age of Learners: 15 years and above
Date:
Duration: 80 minutes
Instructional Materials: Chalk boards, chalk, and the modern periodic table on chart.
Specific Objectives: By the end of the lesson, the students should be able to:
i. State the periodic law
ii. Define electronic configuration
iii. List 3 characteristics of elements in the same group and period of the periodic table.
iv. Using the cardboard sheet, arrange the first 20 elements into groups and periods.
Entry Behaviour: Students are familiar with some elements on the periodic table.
Test on Entry Behaviour: The teacher asks the students to list the first ten elements on the
periodic table.
Instructional Procedure
Content Development Teacher’s Activities Students’ Activities Strategies Introduction The teacher introduces the
lesson by asking students to list the first ten elements on the periodic table.
The studentsresponded by listing to the first ten element on the periodic table.
Set induction
The periodic law The teacher states the periodic law He/she want further to explain how the law governs the arrangement of elements on’ the periodic table by stating that the periodic law clearly states that elements do vary regularly not with their atomic mass but with their atomic number.
The students listenthe teacher’sexplanations of theperiodic law.
Listening and explanation
119
Electronic configuration
The teacher defines the electronic configuration as the arrangement of electrons in atoms of elements in increasing order of atomic number at various distances from the nucleus. He/she further explain that the electrons and their arrangement in the atoms of an element are responsible for the many properties of the element hence the key (basis) to the periodicity (i.e. regular repeating properties) of elements lie, in the electronic configuration of their atoms.
The students listen tothe teacher’sexplanation
Listeningexplanation
Groups and Periods The teacher defines Group as: the arrangement of elements with the similar chemical properties on the vertical column of the periodic table. He/she went .further to define period as: the arrangement of elements with similar physical properties on the horizontal row of the periodic table. The teacher states that the Group is numbered in roman numeral from O – VllA while the numbers from I – 7.
The students listening to the teachers definition and explanation of the Group and periods using the chat
Listening andExplanation
120
Characteristic of elements in the same group and period
The teacher mentions two characteristics of elements in the same group as follow: (i) they have the same number of electron shells e.g. elements in period 2 have two electron shells etc. (ii) the numbervalence electrons of the elements increases progressively by one across the period from left to right. (iii) they show similar physical properties.
The students listensthe teacher’sexplanation of each characteristic of elements in the same group and period
Listening and explanation
Question and Answer The teacher allows the students to ask questions on every area of the topic. He went further to write the notes on the chalk board for the students
The students ask questions from the teacher on every areas of the topic. They went further to copy their note
Question and answer, note-taking.
Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the students the following questions:
i. State the periodic law of elements.
ii. Define briefly electronic configuration
iii. List 3 characteristics each of elements in the same group and period of the periodic table.
iv. Using the worksheet draw a table and arrange the first 20 elements into groups and periods
Closure.
Assignment: Using the S,P,D,F, notation, arrange the electrons of the first five elements on
the periodic table
121
Week: 2nd Week
Subject: Chemistry
Topic: Rates of Chemical Reactions
Sub-topics: Rate of reaction and mathematical expression, ways of measuring
reaction rates. Rate curve, collision theory, factors affecting rates of
reaction.
Class: SS2
Age: 15 years and above
Date:
Duration: 80 minutes
Instructional Materials: Chalkboard, measuring balance, conc. HCL, Marble chips, cotton
wool, breaker, charts showing reaction rate curves.
Specific Objectives: By the end of the lesson, students should be able to:
i. Define rate of reaction
ii. List simple ways of measuring reaction rates
iii. List the factors affecting reaction rates
iv. Carry out a simple experiment on reaction rates of some compounds
Entry Behaviour: Students are familiar with the speed at which athlete runs in a race.
Test on Entry Behaviour: The teacher ask the students to compare the time it takes for a nail
to rust and for leaves to decay.
Instructional Procedure
Content Development
Teacher’s Activities Students’ Activities Strategies
Introduction The teacher explains to the students that different reactions proceed at different rates. Some are slow while some occurs at intermediate speeds. He went further to give the reaction rates of some reactions e.g. rusting of iron nails and reaction between Ag No 3 and HCl.
The students listing to the teachers explanation
Explanation and Discussion
Definition ofRate ofFraction
The teacher defines the term rates of reaction s the number of moles of reactant converted or product formed per unit time. It is the speed at which reactants are used up or products are formed. He went further to state the mathematical expression of rate of
The students listen to the teacher’s explanation
Explanation and discussion
122
reaction as follows: (i) Rate of reaction:Amount of substance (Moldm3 time taken (mm)(ii) Rate of reaction is the change in concentration of reactant/product time taken for the change
Ways of measuring reaction rates
The teacher list two simple ways of measuring the rates of chemical reactions as follows:(i) when the reactants taken parts in the reaction is decreasing
The student listen to the teachers explanation
Explanation
Factors affecting the rate of chemical reaction
The teacher list the factors affecting the rate of chemical reaction as including the following: (i) the nature of reactant(ii) the concentration of the reactant (iii) the surface area of context of reactants (iv) Temperature (v) pressure for gasecus reactants (vi) Light and (vii) catalyst. He went further to briefly explain each of the factors giving relevant examples.The teacher allowed the students to ask questions on every aspect of the topic. He goes further to answer their questions.
The students listen to the teacher’s explanation.
Explanation
Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson byasking the students to answer thefollowing questions:(i) Define the term rate of reaction (ii) List four simple ways of measuring reaction rates (iii) List four factors affecting the rates of chemical reactions (iv) what time does it take for a 5grams of marble chips to dissolve in 100ml of conc. hydrochloric acid.
The students listen to thequestions and respond by providing answers
Closure.
Assignment: Define the following:
1. Heat of neutralization 2. Heat of reaction 3. Energy.
123
Week: 3rd Week
Subject: Chemistry
Topic: Energy and Chemical Reactions
Sub-topics: Definition of energy, energy changes in chemical reactions, Heat
content (H)
Heat of reaction, exothermic and exothermic reactions. Heat of
formation
Class: SS 2
Age: 15 years and above
Date:
Duration: 80 minutes
Instructional Materials: Sodium hydroxide pellet Ammonium chloride salt, energy profile,
glass wares distilled water, thermometers etc.
Specific Objectives: By the end of the lesson, students should be able to:
i. Define the concept of energy
ii. Define heat of reaction
iii. Define Exothermic and endothermic reactions
iv. Draw the energy level profile for exothermic and endothermic reactions
Entry Behavior: Students have been taught rates of chemical reactions.
Test on Entry Behavior: Teacher asks the students to define reaction rate and list some of
the factors affecting the rates of chemical reaction.
Instructional Procedure
Content Development Teacher’s Activities Students’ Activities
Strategies
Introduction The teacher introduces the lesson by asking the students to define energy. He considers the students definition and went further to define energy as theability or capacity to do work
The studentsanswer the teachersquestion by definingenergy.
Question and Discussion
Concept of Energy changes in chemical reaction
The teacher explains the concept of energy changes during a chemical reaction as follows: as reactants changes to product in chemical reactions, energy changes also occur. This is because the reactant and the product of a chemical
The students listento the teacher’sexplanations
Explanation
124
reaction possesses different amount of chemical energy. He went further to state how the energy can be measured as follows (i) In the form of Heat e.g. reaction of a strong acid and a strong base (ii) light and heat e.g. when magnesium is burnt in air.
Heat of Reaction The teacher define Meat content (H) as the energy possessed by substance as a result of it’s structure and physical state. Also in a chemical reaction, heat is either absorbed or evolved because the heat contents of the substances involved in the reaction is different. He went further to define heat of reaction as the amount of heat or energy,evolved (released) or absorbed (collected) when a chemical reaction occurs between molar quantities of the substances as represented in the equation of the reaction under standard conditions. Energy changes associated with chemical reactions are usually in thousands of Joules.
The student listen tothe teachersdefinition andexplanation
Explanation and discussion
Exothermic and Endothermicreaction
The teacher define Exothermic reaction and explain briefly as follows Exothermic reaction:- isa reaction In which heat energy is librated (or given off) to the surrounding of the reaction system. The total heat content of the product is less than that of the reactant; hence the excess heat energy will be given off to the surrounding as the reaction goes into completion. Endothermic reaction:- is a reaction which heat energy is absorbed (or taken in) from the surrounding of the reacting system. The total heat
The students listento the teacher’sexplanation
Explanation and discussion
125
content of the product is more than that of the reactant; hence heat energy must be absorbed from the surrounding for the reaction to proceed to completion. He went further to give some examples of exothermic and endothermic reactions (i) Exothermic reactions CaO(s) + H2O(-) Ca(OH)2(s) - HcL ÷ Nao(aq)
NacL(aq) + H2O (L).(ii) Endothermic reactions – CaCo3CaO(S) + CO2(a)
- NH4CL(s) → NH3 (g) + HCL (g). He went further to briefly explain each of the factors giving relevant examples.
Energy profilefor exothermicandendothermicreaction
The teacher pasted the energy profile. chart for both, exothermic and endothermic reactions on the chalkboard using thumb pin, He went further to explain the energy profiles using the previous definitions of exothermic and endothermic reactions.
The students listento the teacher’sexplanations usingthe energy profilediagrams
Explanation and discussion.
Evaluation The evaluates the lesson by asking the students thefollowing questions(i) Define energy(ii) Briefly explain energy changes in chemical reaction (iii) Define heat of reaction and heat content (iv) Define exothermic and endothermic reactions(v) sketch the energy profile for endothermic reaction(vi) Define the term heat of formation.
The students listento the questions andgive their answers
Closure.
Assignment:
1. List two existing agent
2. List two reducing agent
126
Week: 4th Week
Subject: Chemistry
Topic: Oxidation – Reduction Reactions
Sub-topic: Definition of oxidation and reduction oxidizing and reducing agents,
oxidation number, rules for determining oxidation numbers etc.
Class: SS 2
Age: 15 years and above
Date:
Duration: 80 minutes.
Instructional Materials: Oxidizing and reducing agents e.g. H2S04, HNo3, NH3, Co etc
chalkboard, chalk.
Specific Objectives: By the end of the lesson, students should be able to:
i. Define oxidation and reduction reaction
ii. Distinguish between oxidizing and reducing agents
iii. Give examples of oxidizing and reducing agents
iv. Calculate the oxidation number of elements in a compound
v. State the rules for determining oxidation number
vi. Balance simple redox-reaction
Entry Behaviour: Students already have a knowledge of oxidation number from the
Test on Entry Behaviour: The teacher asks the students to – define oxidation number and
determine the oxidation number of oxygen in H2SO4.
Instructional Procedure
Content Development Teacher’s Activities Students’ Activities Strategies Introduction The teacher give the old
definitions of oxidation and reduction as follows: (i) oxidation is the addition of oxygen to a substance e.g. burning of magnesium in air 2Mg + 02(g) → mgO(S)
(ii) Reduction is the removal of hydrogen from a substance e.g.2H2S(g) O2(g) → 2H2O(L) + 2S(S)
The students listen to the teachers explanation of the old definitions
Explanation and Discussion
Oxidation and oxidizing agents
The teacher define oxidation and oxidizing agent as follows (i) oxidation: is a process
The students listen to the teachers explanations on oxidation and oxidizing
Explanation and discussion
127
involving a loss of electron e.g. 2mg(s) ÷ O2(g)
→ 2mgO(s). Each magnesium atom in the reaction above losses two electron to oxygen to 2MgO(s) (ii) oxidation is the process involving an increase in oxidation number of an atom or ion e.g. H2(g) + CL2(g) 2HCL(g)
- oxidizing agent: are substances which accept electron, They undergo oxidation and are reduced during redox – reaction examples include: conc H2SO4, HNO3 etc.
agent
Reduction and reducing agents
The teacher define reduction and reducing agents as follows: (i) Reduction is a process involving the gain of electron e.g. 2Mg + O2(g) 2MgO(S). in the above reaction, each oxygen atom gained two electrons to form an oxide i.e O2 + 4e- 2O2-
(ii) Reduction is a process involving a decrease in oxidation number of an atom(s) e.gH2(g) + Cl2(g) → HCL(g). In the above reaction the oxidation number of each chlorine atom has decreased from zero to – 1 - Reducing agent: Are substances which donate electrons. They are oxidized in an oxidation - reduction reaction.
Explanation and copy their notes.
Explanation and Discussion.
Oxidation number and rules for DeterminingOxidation Number of Atoms
The teacher define oxidation number as follow oxidation number:Also called the oxidation state is defined as the electrical
The students listen to the teacher and calculate the oxidation number of some atoms in compounds giving by
Explanation and discussion.
128
charge an atom appears to have in a molecule as determined by a set of arbitrary rules. He went further to state the rules for calculating the oxidation number of an atom in a molecule as follows:(i) The oxidation, number of all elements in the free state is zero e.g Na = 0, CL2 0 mg = 0(ii) The oxidation number of simple ion (i.e. consisting of a single element) has the same size and sign as the charge on the ion hence Na+ = +1, mg2+ = +2(iii) The algebraic sum of the oxidation number of all the elements in a compound is zero e.g. MgCL2 = 0.
the teacher.
Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the students the following questions:(i) Define oxidation and reduction(ii) Distinguish between oxidizing and reducing agent(iii) Give four examples each of oxidizing ‘reducing agent (iv) calculate the oxidation number of S in the following compounds: (a) H2SO4
(b) K2SO4
Note; H= +1
The students listen the teacher and responded to the questions by providing answers
Closure.
Assignment: List the first twenty elements on the periodic table.
129
CHEMISTRY INTEREST INVENTORYName:ClassSex: Female: Male:Instruction: This inventory is designed to help you indicate the level of interest in chemistry.
Indicate your extent of agreement or disagreement with the following
statements about chemistry interest questions by ticking right (√) in the
appropriate box.
S/N ITEMS SA A D SD
1 I enjoy studying chemistry
2 Chemistry is a subject I enjoy a great deal
3 I am happier studying chemistry than other science subjects
4 Carrying out solutions to chemistry practical is very interesting
5 Participating in chemistry activities is very boring
6 I am always happy whenever I’m doing chemistry assignments
7 I enjoy studying chemistry because it relates to the course I want to
study.
8 I do not like going to the class when lessons on chemistry are taught
9 I do not like taking part in discussions about chemistry
10 I like chemistry because it improve my problem solving skills
11 I like telling my friends and parents what I learnt in chemistry
12 I like to attempt any question based on chemistry
13 I feel happy copying notes on any topic in chemistry
14 When I get to higher institution, I will choose a course that will involve
chemistry always
15 I have never liked studying chemistry
16 I do not like chemistry because it is difficult to understand
17 I like chemistry because I would want to be a good chemist
18 I like chemistry because I love scientific inventions
19 I like chemistry but I can’t tell if I’m good at it
20 I like chemistry because I score high mark in it
21 I make out time to study chemistry
22 I don’t study chemistry at all
23 Whenever we are study chemistry I become angry
130
24 Whenever we are study chemistry I become happy
25 I prefer other science subjects to chemistry
26 Chemistry is difficult
27 I don’t learn chemistry because it is not necessary
28 I am unable to express ideas when solving chemistry problems
29 I am more of a follower than a leader in chemistry learning situations
30 I lack self-confidence in chemistry learning situations