This chapter presents the specific method
used for the study. The research method is presented under the following
subheadings: Research design, Area of the study, Population of the study,
sample and sampling technique, experimental procedure, control of extraneous
variable, instrument for data collection, reliability, validation of the
instrument, method of data collection, and method of data analysis.
Research design
This study is a quasi-experimental
study. The design for the study is the pre-test, post-test, non-equivalent
control group design. Intact classes were used for the study so there was no
randomization of subjects. The design is schematically represented thus:
Yb x Ya
Yb ~x Ya
Where
Yb = Pretest
Ya = Posttest
X = Treatment
~x = Control
Area of the Study
The study was carried out in Onueke
education zone of Ebonyi State. This zone comprises of four (4) Local
Government Areas, which are: Ezza South, Ezza
North, Ikwo
and Ishielu. The four local government areas represent the area of study.
Population of the study
There are three hundred and
seventeen (317) public basic school in Onueke education zone and one hundred
and forty-five thousand, two hundred and thirteen (145, 213) pupils in those
public basic schools (SUBEB Ebonyi 2009). All these schools and pupils make up
the population of the study.
Sample and sampling technique
Six basic schools were drawn from
the three hundred and seventeen (317) public basic schools in Onueke Education
Zone through a simple random sampling approach. Out of the six schools, three were
assigned to treatment group while the other three were assigned to control
group. The assignment of schools to treatment and control group was done
through simple balloting. In each school all intact basic six classes was used
for the study. In all therefore a total of six intact basic schools (3 for
treatment and 3 for control) were used for the study.
Instrument for data collection
The instrument that was used for the
study is a basic science achievement test (BSAT). The researcher constructed
the basic science achievement test (BSAT), with the assistance of test
developers in the test development unit of Ebonyi State Universal Basic
Education Board (UBEB). The unit supplied some questions from question bank.
The items were drawn from the four clusters in basic science. The new nine (9)
year basic science curriculum was used in drawing up the clusters.
The clusters
were:
a. You and your environment
b. You and energy
c. You and technology
d. Living and non – living things
Bloom (1971) taxonomy of educational
objectives guided the development of a test blueprint or table of specification
see appendix 4. The table of specification guided the development of the test
items see appendix 6. The items in the BSAT evaluated the lower cognitive
process. Emphasis was placed on the lower cognitive process due to the age
range of the pupils. The BSAT contains 40 multiple-choice objective questions
(see appendix 5). Item analysis was carried out on the BSAT test instrument (see
appendix 3). The nine items that did not survive the initial analysis were
replaced
There are four options in the
objective questions. Three of these options are distractors, while one is the
key. The options are labeled A, B, C; D. Distraction Index (DI) of the options
were carried out (see appendix 3B) the options which did not distract at all
were removed and replaced with other options. Pupils were required to select
the key from the options provided. A model answer to the BSAT items was prepared
by the researcher and group of classroom teachers.
Validation of the Instrument
The BSAT instrument for data
collection was subjected to face and content validations. The face validation
was carried out by four senior classroom teachers who have taught basic six
(six grade) for not less than eight years each. They thoroughly considered each
question in relation to the framing and vocabulary used in writing each item.
They also checked whether the questions actually conveyed the meaning, which
the researcher had in mind. Further face validation was carried on the
instrument by two test developers in the test development unit, Ebonyi State
Universal Basic Education Board (EBSUBEB). They separately scrutinized each
test item. The items that survived the face validation were assembled and
subjected to content validation. The table of specification was used to develop
the items to ensure they are true representative of the content areas. The inputs
and suggestions of the different groups helped to raise the quality of the test
items.
Reliability of the Instrument
The
BSAT instrument was trial tested on a group of pupils in an intact class of
twenty (20) pupils, in basic six (sixth grade) outside the study area. The
spearman correlation co-efficient reliability computed from data collected from
the test and retest carried out within an interval of two weeks yielded an
index of 0.774 stability value see appendix 7. The internal consistency of the
items was determined using the K. R 20 approach. The test yielded an index of
0.87. (See the attached appendix 8).
Experimental
procedure
At the onset of the experiment
pretest was administered to the research subjects in both the treatment and
control groups. After the pretest, the experimental group was given the
treatment, which is to teach the group with the experiential method of
instructional delivery. The control
group was treated with the conventional teaching method. Topics to be taught to
the two groups were the same. Research Assistants administered the experimental
treatment and control treatment. The regular classroom basic six teachers of
the six sampled schools were used as research assistants. A teacher training
programme was organized for the research assistants. They were exposed to all
the essential steps using the experimental teaching approach and the
conventional teaching approach as may be applicable to teachers of
each group.
All
the necessary instructional materials for the study were made available to the
research assistants. A model experiential lesson plan was developed (see
appendix 5). A model experimental package and conventional teaching package
were prepared to guide the research assistants of the two groups see appendices
1 and 2. At the end of treatment BSAT was administered again to the two groups
as post-test. Treatments in the two groups were of equal duration. The researcher
visited the two groups periodically to observe and supervise the research
assistants. The study lasted eight weeks.
The research assistants administered all the tests, marked the scripts and
scored them. The researcher regularly visited the schools to monitor the
instructional delivery but did not impose himself on the teachers to avoid the
pupils realizing that they are being used for experimental study:
Control of Extraneous Variables
The
following are extraneous variables that were controlled to ensure that their
effects do not interfere with the results of the study. Hawthorne effects, History, testing, teacher
variables and initial equivalence.
Hawthorne Effects: To
ensure that the pupils are not aware that they were being used for experimental
study, the class teachers were used as the research assistants. Secondly,
intact classes were used. There was no reshuffling or regrouping of subjects
into new groups. The research assistants were duly informed of the dangers of
informing the pupils that they are being used for experimental study.
History: This was
controlled by ensuring that the experiment does not last too long. Moreover, there
was no extraordinary event that occurred that affected the study within the
period of the subject, either in the schools or at homes of the pupils.
Testing: To check the
effect or testing, the items in the instrument (PSAT) were rearranged after the
initial pretest. The colour of the paper was also changed.
Teacher variables: The
teachers of the experimental group were trained on the use of the experimental
package. The teachers of the control group were also trained on the use of the
conventional teaching method. Hence the teachers in the two groups were clearly
directed on when and how to administer the tests and treatments. The researcher
also monitored them closely to ensure uniform approach.
Initial Equivalence: Intact
classes were used for the study. ANCOVA was used to control the initial
differences of the groups.
Method of Data Collection
At
the beginning of the experiment in each group, the pretest was administered to
the pupils. The scores of pupils were recorded and kept for use. At the end of
the experiment, the posttest was administered to the pupils. The scores were
also recorded and kept. The two sets of scores were used to answer the research
questions and the hypothesis after they had been analyzed with relevant
statistical tools.
Methods of Data Analysis
Research
questions were answered using mean and standard deviation while hypotheses were
tested at an alpha level of 0.05 using the Analysis of Co-variance (ANCOVA).
This
chapter presents the results of the study. The results are presented in tables,
according to the research questions and hypotheses that guided the study.
Research questions
Research Question
1
What
is the effect of experiential teaching methods on pupils mean achievements in basic
science?
To answer this
question, reference is made to the data presented on table 3. The data is
obtained from the basic science achievement test administered to both the
treatment and control groups involved in this study. The summary of the result
is shown below.
Table 3: Mean and
standard deviation of achievement scores of pupils taught Basic
Science using the experiential teaching
approach and those taught with the Conventional
method.
|
Groups
|
Mean
|
Standard deviation
|
|
Treatment
|
57.7
|
14.04
|
|
Control
|
41.46
|
13.90
|
The results in table 3 show, that adjusted
mean scores for the treatment group is much greater than the adjusted mean
achievement scores of the control group. But a critical look into the above
scores reveals that pupils taught basic science using the experiential teaching
approach had a mean achievement score of 57.7 with a standard deviation of
14.04 while the pupils taught Basic Science using the conventional method had a
mean achievement score of 41.46 with a standard deviation of 13.90.
Research Question 2
What is the effect of experiential teaching methods
on male and female pupils’ mean achievement scores in Basic science?
|
Table 4: Mean
achievement test scores and standard deviation of male and female
Pupils taught Basic science using
the experiential teaching approach.
|
Gender
categories
|
Mean
|
Standard
deviation
|
|
Male
|
56.58
|
13.68
|
|
Females
|
59.03
|
14.42
|
From the result
presented in table 4, the mean achievement scores of male pupils taught Basic
science with experiential teaching method is 56.58 with standard Deviation of 13,
68 while their female counterpart had a mean achievement score of 59.03 with a
standard deviation of 14.42.
Research Question 3
What is the interaction effect of teaching method
and gender on pupils’ mean achievement in Basic Science.
In a bid to
answer the above question, the results on table 5 are consulted. The means for
the two levels of gender taught Basic Science and technology using the
experiential teaching method and those taught with the conventional method were
used to assess the interaction. The summary of the result is shown in table 5.
Table 5: Summary of interaction
between gender and teaching method on pupils’
mean achievement in Basic Science
and technology.
|
Gender/group
|
Mean
for experiential group
|
Mean
for conventional group
|
|
Male
|
56.58
|
41.32
|
|
Females
|
59.03
|
41.58
|
The
result presented in table 5 reveals that male and female pupils taught basic
science with experiential teaching method had mean achievement scores of 56.58
and 59.03 respectively while those taught with conventional method had mean achievement
scores 41.32 and 41.58 respectively. The experiential teaching method is therefore
superior to the conventional method at the two levels of gender (males and
females). This implies that there is no interaction between method and gender
on achievement in Basic Science and technology.
Hypotheses
Ho1: There
is no significant difference in the mean achievement scores of pupils taught
Basic science using experiential teaching method and those taught using the
conventional method.
HO3:
There is no significant interaction
between teaching methods and gender on pupils’ mean achievements in basic
science.
These two
hypotheses were tested using analysis of co-variance. Summary of the analysis
for these two null hypotheses is shown in table 4.
Table
6: Analysis of Co-variance for pupils’
overall basic science achievement
scores by teaching methods and gender.)
|
(Source of variations)
|
Sum of squares
|
DF
|
(Mean square)
|
F.cal
|
F. cv
|
Decision of P<0.05
|
|
Covariates (pretest)
|
55200.459
|
1
|
55200.459
|
906.567
|
|
|
|
Main effects
|
29415. 591
|
2
|
14707.795
|
241.557
|
|
|
|
Teaching methods
|
29407.440
|
1
|
29407.440
|
482.98
|
3.84
|
S
|
|
Gender
|
75.015
|
1
|
75.015
|
1.232
|
|
|
|
2-Way Interaction
|
61.585
|
1
|
61.585
|
1.011
|
3.84
|
NS
|
|
Teaching methods and gender
|
61.585
|
1
|
61.585
|
1.011
|
3.84
|
NS
|
|
Explained
|
84677.635
|
4
|
21169.409
|
347.681
|
|
|
|
Residual
|
25633.623
|
421
|
60.887
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
110311.258
|
425
|
259.556
|
|
|
|
Key S = significance,
NS = Non-Significant, P = probability level.
For
hypothesis 1, analysis of co-variance of the pupils’ overall achievement scores
presented in table 6 shows that the F-cal value of 482.98 is greater than the
critical F.cv of 3.84 at P>0.05 Alpha. The null hypothesis which stated that
there is no significant difference in the mean achievement score of pupils
taught basic science using experiential teaching method and those taught using
the conventional teaching method is rejected. The significant difference
observed between the mean achievement scores of the treatment and the control
groups is statistically significant in favour of the experimental group.
For hypothesis 3, the results
presented in table 6 shows that the observed difference in the two-way
interaction effect is not statistically significant. This is because the
calculated F value of 1.011 is less than critical F.cv of 3.84, at P<.05
alpha levels; then the null hypothesis of non significant is retained. It was
therefore concluded that there is no significant interaction between gender and
teaching method on pupils’ achievement in basic science.
HO2:
These is no significant difference in the
mean achievement scores of male and female pupils’ taught basic science using
experiential teaching method.
This hypothesis was tested using Analysis
of Co-Variance for overall achievement score by experiential teaching method by
gender. The summary is as shown in table 5.
Table 7: Analysis of Co-Variance for overall
achievement for experiential
teaching method by gender.
|
Source of variation
|
Sum of squares
|
DF
|
Mean square
|
F-cal
|
F. cv
|
Decision of P<0.05
|
|
Covariates (pretest)
|
24877.065
|
1
|
24877.065
|
397.29
|
|
|
|
Main effects
|
132.850
|
1
|
132.850
|
2.122
|
|
|
|
Gender
|
132.850
|
1
|
132.850
|
2.122
|
3.84
|
NS
|
|
Explained
|
25009.915
|
2
|
12504.957
|
199.707
|
|
|
|
Residual
|
11458.822
|
183
|
62.617
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
36468.737
|
185
|
197.128
|
|
|
|
Key: NS = Non- significant at P<.05
alpha, P = probability level.
In
table 7, the difference observed in the mean achievement scores of male and
female is not statistically significant. This is as a result of the fact that
the calculated value of F cal 2.122 is less than the critical F value of 3.84.
Hence the null hypothesis of no significant was retained.
Therefore
it was concluded that the differences between the mean achievement scores of
male and female pupils taught basic science using the experiential teaching
method is not significant.
Summary
of Findings
Results presented in this chapter reveal
the following:
1.
Experiential teaching method
enhanced higher achievement in basic science and technology than the
conventional teaching method.
2.
The female pupils had slightly
higher mean achievement scores than the male pupils but the difference was not
significant.
3.
There is no interaction between
teaching method and gender on pupils’
Achievement in basic science and technology