CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
In the
discipline of biology, researchers increasingly need to collaborate with and
access the knowledge and skills of computer scientists, physicists and
cognitive psychologists to push forward lines of inquiry in fields such as
informatics, nanotechnology, and neuroscience. Indeed the incredible volume of
information in the modern age requires this of most professionals. Science
has been and would continue to be of tremendous importance because of its
ability to explain many natural occurrences and the central role it plays in
the world’s current technology development. In our century, it is the soul of
the prosperity of nations and it is an economic and technological development
as well as improving the quality of life of the individuals and the society at
large. Science, as a school subject, has over the years gained prominence in
the school curriculum worldwide. In the last five decades, the world has
witnessed science curriculum innovations and several changes in the teaching of
the content in different levels of education. Trowbridge and Bybee (2003),
Ajaja (2007) identified the objectives of teaching science to include:- Knowledge
of science academic discipline; to acquire the skills of scientific method;
having clear explanations for societal issues through increasing interest
science literacy and societal goals; for personal needs and for career
awareness. In Nigeria, the sciences are taught in school subjects as Biology,
Chemistry, and Physics. The National Policy on Education in the National curriculum
for secondary schools volume 3 science stated specific objectives to be
achieved by each subject curriculum. Some of the most distinct characteristics
of science are experimentation, observation, and discovery. It provides the
development of skills of students asking questions and making investigations,
making hypothesis, inference of results of experiments to students.(Acikgoz,
Kaygusuz & Oncul, 2004) Laboratory method is often used in science and it
is targeted that students do trial and error activities. Therefore, the
laboratory applications are integral part of science (Orbay, Ozdogan, Oner,
Kara, & Gumus, (2003). The success of science programmes depends largely on
the classroom teachers. They constitute the most important agent in the ongoing
exercise to revolutionize the teaching and learning of science. According to
(Awotua – Efebo, 2004). science Teachers have the potentials for enhancing the
quality of education by bringing life to the curriculum and inspiring students
to curiosity and self directed learning Some definite demands on the teaching of science were made by (STAN) Science
Teacher Association of Nigeria. This means that there are some demands made of
the teacher if he or she is to teach his or her course effectively. So also are
some demands made of the students if they are to benefit maximally from the programme.
Some of these demands, according to (STAN) Science Teacher Association of
Nigeria, are as follows:
Demands of the Teacher are the quality of the teacher-Skills and
successfulness, teacher seeking new idea of science. Science for All Nigerian, Project 2061
(Nigeria Association for the Advancement of Science, 1989) suggests that the
teaching of science and technology should be consistent with the nature of
scientific inquiry and that an essential part of scientific inquiry is
collaboration.
The
collaborative nature of scientific and technological work should be strongly
reinforced by frequent group activity in the classroom. Scientists and
engineers work mostly in groups and less often as isolated investigators.
Similarly, students should gain experiences sharing responsibility for learning
with each other. In the process of coming to understandings, students in a
group must frequently inform each other about procedures and meanings, argue
over findings, and assess how the task is progressing. In the context of team responsibility,
feedback and communication become more realistic and of a character very
different from the usual individualistic textbook, homework and recitation
approach. (Lee & Bonk; 2014) stated that One approach to providing
collaborative opportunities for students of biology is cooperative learning, a
theoretically grounded and well-researched approach in education that can
increase students’ learning of subject matter and improve their attitudes
toward both academics in general and the subject matter specifically (Johnson
et al., 2000). If one knows the definitions of cooperative and learning,
one might
assume that cooperative learning is simply the sum of these definitions. Often,
cooperative learning is portrayed as simply providing students with a group
task or project because of a lack of materials or a low teacher-to-student
ratio in the classroom. These scenarios could not be further from the scholarly
definition of cooperative learning as recognized in the educational research literature
(Johnson et al, 2000). In fact, much like common words used in biology to
connote highly specialized meanings—column, gel, matrix, activity— the
specialized educational term cooperative learning is much more than the sum of
the everyday words that constitute its moniker. The theoretical foundations of
cooperative learning grew out of the work of social psychologist Morton Deutsch
who specialized in the study of social interdependence (Deutsch, 2004). Deutsch
studied the effects of different group structures—ones that promote cooperation
versus competition versus individual achievement—on the processes and outcomes
of group efforts in a variety of social and work settings. David Johnson and
Roger Johnson (the former of whom was a student of Deutsch’s), however, have
spent over four decades understanding, developing, and studying effective
cooperative learning in the specific context of K–12 schools and the college
arena (Cooperative Learning Center [CLC], 2003). As co-founders of the CLC at
the University of Minnesota in the 2000, the Johnsons are renowned not only for
their scholarly work in education research but for their commitment to
transforming theory into practice and providing resources and strategies for
teachers, instructors, and faculty to implement cooperative learning in classrooms
in primary and secondary schools, colleges, and universities. As an
introduction, cooperative learning is often contrasted with competitive
learning and individualistic learning, each differing significantly in the
structure of student interactions in the classroom. Traditionally, educational
settings have taken a competitive approach to learning, and many of those who
have succeeded in school and pursued careers in science excel in these
environments.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Cooperative Learning has many problems that could cause the process to be more complicated than first perceived. Sharan (2010) describes the constant evolution of cooperative learning as a threat. Because cooperative learning is constantly changing, there is a possibility that teachers may become confused and lack complete understanding of the method. The fact that cooperative learning is such a dynamic practice means that it cannot be used effectively in many situations. Also teachers can get into the habit of relying on cooperative learning as a way to keep students busy. While cooperative learning will consume time, the most effective application of cooperative learning hinges on an active instructor. Teachers implementing cooperative learning may also be challenged with resistance and hostility from students who believe that they are being held back by their slower teammates or by students who are less confident and feel that they are being ignored or demeaned by their team. Students often provide feedback in the form of evaluations or reviews on success of the teamwork experienced during cooperative learning experiences. Peer review and evaluations may not reflect true experiences due to perceived competition among peers. Students might feel pressured into submitting inaccurate evaluations due to bullying. To eliminate such concerns, confidential evaluation processes may help to increase evaluation strength.
Group hate
Privacy Policy
Cooperative Learning has many problems that could cause the process to be more complicated than first perceived. Sharan (2010) describes the constant evolution of cooperative learning as a threat. Because cooperative learning is constantly changing, there is a possibility that teachers may become confused and lack complete understanding of the method. The fact that cooperative learning is such a dynamic practice means that it cannot be used effectively in many situations. Also teachers can get into the habit of relying on cooperative learning as a way to keep students busy. While cooperative learning will consume time, the most effective application of cooperative learning hinges on an active instructor. Teachers implementing cooperative learning may also be challenged with resistance and hostility from students who believe that they are being held back by their slower teammates or by students who are less confident and feel that they are being ignored or demeaned by their team. Students often provide feedback in the form of evaluations or reviews on success of the teamwork experienced during cooperative learning experiences. Peer review and evaluations may not reflect true experiences due to perceived competition among peers. Students might feel pressured into submitting inaccurate evaluations due to bullying. To eliminate such concerns, confidential evaluation processes may help to increase evaluation strength.
Group hate
Group
hate is defined as "a feeling of dread that arises when facing the
possibility of having to work in a group, when students develop group hate their individual
performance in the group suffers and in turn the group as a whole suffers.
There are many factors that lead students to experience these feelings of group
hate some of the more crucial elements include:
i A past bad
experience
ii Group fatigue (overuse of cooperative
learning)
iii Simply
liking to work alone
iv It is time consuming for new teacher.
Vi Requires adequate facilities and
infrastructure
1.3 Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to:
i. Find out advantages of co-operative learning strategy as it correlating student’s retention academic achievement in biology in the classroom.
ii. To find out how setup objectives can be achieved by using co-operative learning strategy as it correlating student’s retention academic achievement in biology.
1.4 Research Questions
To realize the objective of the study, the following research questions were raised:
i. What is the major problem being faced with cooperative learning in teaching biology?
ii. To what extent does co-operative learning strategies affects the achievement of students using co-operative learning strategy in biology?
iii What is the extent of utilization of co-operative method for teaching and learning of biology in senior secondary schools in Gwagwalada Area Council, FCT Abuja, Nigeria?
1.5 Scope of the Study
The main focus of this research study centered on cooperative learning strategy correlating student’s retention academic achievement in biology of co-operative learning instruction on teaching and learning academic performance of students in the classroom; other instructional strategies are not within the scope of the study. The study only covers co-operative learning.
1.6 Significance of Study
The result obtained from the study will benefit the following people: Government, Teachers, Students, Curriculum planners and Researchers
- Government:- The study will help to motivate the Government to equip secondary schools with necessary instructional equipment for the teaching of Biology in Junior Secondary Schools.
- · Teachers:- This will assist classroom teachers in the organization of strategies that would help to develop skills and knowledge in the students. It will also enable trained teachers to adopt those teaching and learning methods that would aid them in organization of their subjects matter for the students.
- · Students:- When students understand more, the importance of Science skills will bring development to the society.
- curriculum planners:- The study would be of interest to curriculum planners because it would inform them on their roles in recommending methods to use in teaching certain topics in biology
- Researchers:- Findings of this study would serve as additional information to the available information as regard to teaching methods with special references to enhance the effective teaching in biology. It would boost literature review of future researchers.
1.7 Operational Definition of Terms
The following terms have been defined for easy understanding within the context they are used in the study:
Cooperative:- working or acting together willingly for a common purpose or benefit.
Learning:- is the act of acquiring new, or modifying and reinforcing existing, knowledge, behaviors, skills, values, or preferences which may lead to a potential.
Strategy: A method or plan chosen to bring about a desired future, such as achievement of a goal or solution to a problem.
Correlating:- This is to place in or bring into mutual or reciprocal relation; establish in orderly connection: to correlate expenses and income
Students:- A student or pupil is a learner or someone who attended educational institution.
Retention:- the act of retaining.
Academic:- It is an institution or a course of study, placing a greater emphasis on reading and study than on technical or practical work.
Achievement:- A thing done successfully with effort, skill, or courage.
Biology:- is a natural science concerned with the study of life and living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, evolution, distribution, identification and taxonomy.
1.8 Abbreviations
CL - Cooperative Learning
TBL - Team- Based Learning
CI - Cooperative Instruction
CLC - Cooperative Learning Centre
NRC - National Research Centre
CLAS - Co-operative Learning Assessment Scale
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction
The main objective of this chapter is to critically examine opinion of scholars and researchers as regards the topic under review.
The chapter is broadly discussed under the following subheadings:
2.2 Theoretical Frame Work
2.2.1 Behavioral Learning Theory
2.2.2 Elements of Cooperative Learning
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
3.1 Introduction
This chapter is concerned with the description of the methods adopted to achieve the goal of the research study. It is presented under the following headings:
3.2. Research Design;
3.3. Population of the Study;
3.4. Sample size and Sampling Procedure;
3.5. Instrumentation
3.6. Validity of the Instrument;
3.7. Reliability of the Instrument;
3.8. Data Collection Procedure; and
3.9. Method of Data Analysis.
3.2 Research Design
The survey research design will be adopted for the study. According to Sapsford (2007), survey research design is the collection of quantifiable data from a population for purposes of description on identifies verifications that may point to casual relationships. It is the systematic method of collecting data from a defined area which involves collection of necessary information that will present a good.
3.3 Population of the Study
The entire Senior Secondary Schools in Gwagwalada Area Council constitute the population of the study. Population of senior secondary Schools in Area Council was estimated at fourteen (14) with students’ population estimated at about five thousand, three hundred and twenty-one (5,321) (Education Board, 2017).
3.4 Sample Size and Sampling Procedure
Five schools were randomly selected from the entire Senior Secondary Schools in Gwagwalada Area Council. The simple sampling technique was adopted for the sample. These are:
3.5 Instrumentation
A self-designed questionnaire titled: Biology Assessment Scale (CLAS) was used for data collection. CLAS was a close-ended questionnaire constructed in a 4-point Likert scale format with the following options:
i. Strongly Agree (SA) – 4 points,
ii. Agree (A) – 3 points,
iii. Disagree (D) – 2 points, and
iv. Strongly Disagree (SD) – 1 point.
It is designed to obtain data from the teachers on their views on the subject matter. It contained two sections – A and B. Section A is concerned with respondents’ bio-data; while Section B is concerned with the questionnaire items.
3.6 Validity of the Instrument
Face and content validity of the instrument were ensured by the project supervisor and two experts in science education. Adequacy and brevity of the items of the test instrument were checked to ensure it is good enough for the objective of the study. The marking scheme for the test was checked against the test items. The modified version of instrument was then used for the data collection.
3.7 Data Collection Procedure
Copies of the questionnaire were distributed to the respondents in their various schools with the consent of the school principals. The exercise was carried within five (5) weeks. All the distributed copies were correctly filled and returned, hence, the study enjoyed 100% return rate.
3.8 Method of Data Analysis
The descriptive statistics of frequency count mean and simple percentage were used for analyzing data and answering the research questions. Since the questionnaire is a 4-point, a mean score cut-off point of 2.50 and above for any item (statement) was regarded as accepted; while a mean score cut-off point that is below 2.50 was regarded as rejected. This is obtained thus:
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1 Introduction
This chapter is concerned with presentation, analysis and interpretation of data collected for the study.
4.2 Presentation and Analysis of Data
Data collected were presented in tabular form, followed by analyses to the data.
4.2.1 Analysis of Respondents’ Demographic Data
Table 4.1: Bio-Data of the Respondent
Variable Class Frequency Percentage
Male 12 42.7
Sex Female 43 57.3
Total 75 100
20 - 35 7 9.3
Age (year) 36 – 50 44 58.7
Above 50 24 32
Total 75 100
Academic BSc/equivalent 53 70.7
Qualification PG Degree 22 29.3
Total 75 100
Working 5 – 10 12 16
Experience 11 – 16 32 42.7
(year) Above 16 31 41.3
Total 75 100
Table 4.1 showed respondents’ information; the respondents consisted of thirty-two (32) males and forty-three (43) females. Seven (7) of them were between the ages of 20 – 35 years; forty-four (44) were between the ages of 36 – 50 years; while twenty-four (24) were above 50 years. Fifty-three (53) were BSc.(ed) or equivalent certificate holder, while twenty-two had additional certificates to their BSc.(ed) certificates. In term of their working experiences, only twelve (12) had between 5 – 10 years, thirty-two had between 11 – 16 years, while thirty-one (31) had more than sixteen years working experiences.
4.2.2 Analysis of Research Questions
Research question one: Are there adequate tools for teaching and learning of mathematics in senior secondary schools in Gwagwalada Area Council, FCT Abuja.
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter deals mainly with the summary of the research study, conclusions reached by the researcher and recommendations drawn based on the results of the investigation carried out.
5.2 Summary
This study investigated the effect of co-operative learning stratagy resources in teaching and learning biology in senior secondary schools in Gwagwalada Area Council, FCT Abuja. To realize the objective of the study, the following research questions were raised:
i. Are there adequate tools for teaching and learning of biology in senior secondary schools in Gwagwalada Area Council, FCT Abuja, Nigeria?
ii. Are there adequate educational software of co-operative learning resources for teaching and learning of biology in senior secondary schools in Gwagwalada Area Council FCT Abuja, Nigeria?
iii. What is the extent of utilization of co-operative learning resources for teaching and learning of biology in senior secondary schools in Gwagwalada Area Council, FCT Abuja?
The survey research design was adopted for the study. The entire teachers in the fourteen (14) senior secondary schools in the Area Council constituted the population of the study. Five (5) schools were randomly selected from where fifteen (15) teachers were sampled for the study. The sample size of the study is made-up of seventy-five (75) teachers. Co-operative learning Assessment Scale (CLAS) was used for data collection. CLAS was a close-ended questionnaire constructed in a 4-point Likert scale format, and contained two sections – A and B. Section A is concerned with respondents’ bio-data; while Section B is concerned with the questionnaire items. The instrument was face validated by the research supervisor, who scrutinized the instrument to ascertain their suitability for objectives for which they were designed. After his observations and corrections, the instrument was modified as directed and used for data collection. The descriptive statistics of frequency count, mean and simple percentage were used for analyzing data and answering the research questions. Since the questionnaire is a 4-point, a mean score cut-off point of 2.50 and above for any item (statement) was regarded as accepted; while a mean score cut-off point that is below 2.50 was regarded as rejected. The study revealed inadequate instruments and educational software for teaching and learning of biology in Gwagwalada Area Council, FCT Abuja and irregular utilizatition of co-operative learning strategy instruction.
5.3 Conclusion
Based on the findings of the study, the following were deducted:
i. There are insufficient tools for teaching and learning process in our schools, there are no labs classrooms for teaching and learning in our school, student ratio to available tools is not encouraging, there are no tools informatics laboratory for teaching and learning activities in our school, and there are inadequate practical facilities in our school in Gwagwalada Area Council, FCT Abuja.
ii. Educational tools is lacking in senior secondary schools in Gwagwalada Area Council, FCT Abuja. The schools are lacking access to the tools, essential educational tools for teaching and learning of biology are inadequate, some of the available education tools is outdated, and lab resource centre for collaboration between schools are not in place.
iii. Utilization of co-operative learning resources for teaching and learning of biology in Gwagwalada Area Council FCT Abuja is irregular. This is due to inadequate lab, insufficient educational materials, lack of expertise with the subject among the teachers, and lack of adequate training on uses of practical resources for teaching and learning activities.
5.4 Recommendations
In line with the findings of the study, the following are recommended:
i. Government should ensure availability of lab centre in senior secondary schools to ensure easy utilization for teaching and learning exercise.
ii. School management should ensure that available instructional resources and lab with related devices for teaching and learning are safeguarded and proper handled.
i. Training opportunities for teachers should be geared towards equipping them with skills for application in discharging their professional responsibilities.
ii. iv. Teachers should endure to utilize co-operative collaborative method for teaching and learning exercise, and improvise when necessary for the benefit of the students and to facilitate students’ academic performance.
5.5 Limitations of the Study
It is true that success cannot be achieved without challenges. This study was confronted with numerous challenges which in turn strengthened the researcher’s determination to carry on with the research. Major among these challenges is stress of obtaining information from the sampled schools. However, despite these challenges, the researcher was able to achieve the objective of the research study within the timeframe.
5.6 Suggestion for Further Study
Based on the experience of the researcher during the course of this study, the following areas are recommended for further research:
i. Assessment of the Effects of co-operative learning Strategy on Students’ Academic Achievement and Retention in Gwagwalada Area Council, FCT Abuja.
ii. Comparative Study between co-operative learning and teacher-directed instructional strategies on Students’ Academic Achievement and Retention in Gwagwaladan Area Council, FCT Abuja.
REFERENCES
Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T.; Stanne, M. E. Cooperative Learning Methods: A meta- analysis. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis: Cooperative Learning Center, 2000; http://www.cooperation.org/pages/cl-methods.html (accessed October 5, 2006).
Smith, K. A.; Sheppard, S. D.; Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T. Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-based practices. J. Engr. Education 2005, 94, 87-101.
Springer, L.; Stanne, M. E.; Donovan, S. Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. National Institute for Science Education: Madison, WI, 1997; http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/CL1/CL/resource/R2.htm (accessed October 5, 2006).
Terenzini, P. T.; Cabrera, A. F.; Colbeck, C. L.; Parente, J. M.; Bjorklund, S. A. Collaborative learning vs. lecture/discussion: Students' reported learning gains. J. Engr. Education 2001, . How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School;
Bransford, J.; Brown, A. L.; Cocking, R. R., Eds.; National Academy: Washington, DC, 2000; http://www.nap.edu/books/0309070368/html/ (accessed October 6, 2006).
McKeachie, W. J. Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for College and University Teachers (11th ed.); Houghton Mifflin: Boston, MA, 2002.
Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T.; Smith, K. A. Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom, (2nd ed.); Interaction Book: Edina, MN. 1998.
Dougherty, R. C. Grade/study-performance contracts, enhanced communication, cooperative learning, and student performance. J. Chem. Ed. 1997, 74, 722–726.
Hanson, D.; Wolfskill, T. Process workshops: A new model for instruction. J. Chem. Ed. 2000, 77, 120–130.
Wolfskill, T.; Hanson, D., LUCID: A New Model for Computer-Assisted Learning. J. Chem. Ed. 2001, 78, 1417–1424.
Bowen, C. W. A Quantitative Literature Review of Cooperative Learning Effects on High School and College Chemistry Achievement. J. Chem. Ed. 2000, 77, 116–119.
Hake, R. R. Interactive-Engagement vs. Traditional Methods: A Six-Thousand-Student Survey of Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses. Am. J. Phys. 1998, 66, 64–74. 13
Cabrera, A. F.; Crissman, J. L.; Bernal, E. M.; Nora, A.; Terenzini, P. T.; Pascarella, E. T. Collaborative Learning: Its Impact on College Students’ Development and Diversity. J. Coll. Stud. Development 2002, 43(1), 20–34.
Towns, M. H.; Kreke, K.; Fields, A. An Action Research Project: Student Perspectives on SmallGroup Learning in Chemistry. J. Chem. Ed. 2000, 77, 111–115.
Felder, R. M.; Brent, R. Cooperative Learning in Technical Courses: Procedures, Pitfalls, and Payoffs, ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 377038, 1994, http://www.ncsu.edu/felderpublic/Papers/Coopreport.html (accessed October 6, 2006).
Felder, R. M.; Brent, R. Effective Strategies for Cooperative Learning. J. Cooperation & Collaboration in College Teaching 2001, 10(2), 69–75, http://www.ncsu.edu/felderpublic/Papers/CLStrategies(JCCCT) .pdf (accessed October 6, 2006).
Oakley, B.; Felder, R. M.; Brent, R.; and Elhajj, I. Turning Student Groups into Effective Teams. J. Student Centered Learning 2004, 2(1), 9–34, http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/Oakleypaper(JSCL) .pdf (accessed October 6, 2006).
Effectiveness (CATME): A New Peer Evaluation Instrument. Proceedings of the 2006 ASEE Annual Conference, Chicago, IL, June 2006. Information about CATME may be found at http://www.catme.org (accessed October 6, 2006).
Felder, R. M.; Brent, R. Learning by Doing. Chem. Engr. Education 2003, 37, 282–283, http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/Active .pdf (accessed October 6, 2006).
Felder, R. M.; Brent, R. Navigating The Bumpy Road to Student–Centered Instruction. College Teaching 1996, 44 (2), 43–47, http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/Resist.html (accessed October 6, 2006).
Felder, R. M. A Longitudinal Study of Engineering Student Performance and Retention. IV. Instructional Methods and Student Responses to Them. J. Engr. Education 1995, 84, 361–367, http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/long4.html (accessed October 6, 2006).
Felder, R. M.; Felder, G. N.; Dietz, E. J. A Longitudinal Study of Engineering Student Performance and Retention. V. Comparisons with Traditionally-Taught Students. J
e learning as a threat. Because cooperative learning is constantly
changing, there is a possibility that teachers may become confused and lack
complete understanding of the method. The fact that cooperative learning is
such a dynamic practice means that it cannot be used effectively in many
situations. Also teachers can get into the habit of relying on cooperative
learning as a way to keep students busy. While cooperative learning will
consume time, the most effective application of cooperative learning hinges on
an active instructor. Teachers implementing cooperative learning may also be
challenged with resistance and hostility from students who believe that they
are being held back by their slower teammates or by students who are less
confident and feel that they are being ignored or demeaned by their team.Privacy Policy
No comments:
Post a Comment