CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION
4.0 Introduction
This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of data collected from 350 respondents for the
study titled “Investigating the relationship between language proficiency and achievement of basic
science students in Lagos State.” The chapter follows the preferred structure: presentation of
demographic information, analysis of research questions, hypothesis testing, summary of findings,
and discussion. Data from Section A (demographics) are presented one variable at a time, with a
table followed immediately by a short analysis for that variable.
4.1 PRESENTATION OF DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Table 4.1: Distribution of Respondents by Gender (N = 350)
Gender Frequency (f) Percentage (%)
Male 180 51.43%
Female 170 48.57%
Total 350 100.00%
From Table 4.1, out of the total 350 respondents, 180 (51.43%) are male while 170 (48.57%) are
female. The gender distribution is nearly balanced, with a slight majority of male respondents by
about 2.86 percentage points. This near parity suggests the sample is reasonably representative by
gender for comparing language proficiency and Basic Science achievement across male and
female students; gender-related patterns in later analyses should therefore be interpretable without
major bias from an extreme gender imbalance.
4.1 Presentation of Demographic Information
Table 4.2: Distribution of Respondents by Age (N = 350)
Age Range (Years) Frequency (f) Percentage (%)
10–11 92 26.29%
12–13 162 46.29%
14–15 96 27.43%
Total 350 100.00%
From Table 4.2, the highest proportion of respondents (162 students, representing 46.29%) are
aged between 12 and 13 years, followed by 96 students (27.43%) aged 14–15 years. Those aged
10–11 years constitute 26.29% (92 students). This age distribution corresponds with the expected
range for junior secondary school students, with the majority in early to middle adolescence. Such
a spread ensures a representative basis for assessing how language proficiency relates to Basic
Science achievement across developmental stages
4.1 Presentation of Demographic Information
Table 4.3: Distribution of Respondents by Class Level (N = 350)
Class Level Frequency (f) Percentage (%)
JSS 2 350 100.00%
Total 350 100.00%
ANALYSIS FOR DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Table 4.3 reveals that all respondents (350 students, representing 100%) are in JSS 2. This
uniformity ensures that the study’s findings are specifically focused on students at the second stage
of junior secondary education. By concentrating solely on this level, the analysis eliminates
variations due to grade differences, allowing for a more precise examination of the relationship
between language proficiency and Basic Science achievement within this particular class cohort.
4.1 Presentation of Demographic Information
Table 4.4: Distribution of Respondents by Type of School (N = 350)
Type of School Frequency (f) Percentage (%)
Public 200 57.14%
Private 150 42.86%
Total 350 100.00%
Table 4.4 reveals that the majority of respondents (200 students, representing 57.14%) attend
public schools, while the remaining 150 students (42.86%) attend private schools. This indicates
that public school students form a slightly higher proportion of the sample. The mix of respondents
from both school types offers an opportunity to examine potential differences in language
proficiency and Basic Science achievement that may arise from variations in school resources,
instructional approaches, and learning environments.
4.2 Analysis of Research Questions
4.2.1 Research Question One
Research Question: To what extent does students’ proficiency in the English language influence
their understanding of Basic Science concepts?
Table 4.5: Responses to Research Question One – Students’ English Language Proficiency
and Understanding of Basic Science Concepts (N = 350)
S/N Statement SA A UD D SD Mean
1 I find it easy to 150 120 30 30 20 4.00
understand Basic Science (42.86%) (34.29%) (8.57%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
concepts when
instructions are given in
English.
2 Strong English language 160 110 35 25 20 4.04
skills help me grasp (45.71%) (31.43%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
scientific terms and
concepts better.
3 I struggle less with Basic 145 125 30 30 20 3.99
Science topics when I (41.43%) (35.71%) (8.57%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
have good English
vocabulary.
4 Understanding English 140 130 35 25 20 3.99
grammar improves my (40.00%) (37.14%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
comprehension of Basic
Science texts.
5 When my English is 155 115 35 25 20 4.03
weak, I find it hard to (44.29%) (32.86%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
follow Basic Science
lessons.
6 I can interpret scientific 150 120 30 30 20 4.00
instructions more (42.86%) (34.29%) (8.57%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
accurately because of my
English skills.
7 Learning Basic Science 160 115 30 25 20 4.06
concepts is easier when I (45.71%) (32.86%) (8.57%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
understand the language
well.
8 Poor English skills limit 145 120 35 30 20 3.94
my understanding of new (41.43%) (34.29%) (10.00%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
science ideas.
9 I am able to connect 150 115 35 30 20 3.97
English language skills to (42.86%) (32.86%) (10.00%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
learning science
effectively.
10 My proficiency in 155 115 30 30 20 4.00
English affects how well I (44.29%) (32.86%) (8.57%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
understand science
experiments.
From Table 4.5, all the mean scores for the 10 items range between 3.94 and 4.06, which falls
within the "High Extent" category. This indicates that students perceive their English language
proficiency as having a significant positive influence on their ability to understand Basic Science
concepts. The highest mean (4.06) was for the statement "Learning Basic Science concepts is
easier when I understand the language well", while the lowest mean (3.94) was for "Poor English
skills limit my understanding of new science ideas" — still within the high extent range.
This finding implies that English language proficiency plays a crucial role in how students
comprehend Basic Science lessons, interpret scientific terms, and perform in experiments.
Students with stronger command of the language tend to find science concepts easier to grasp,
follow instructions more accurately, and participate more effectively in class activities.
4.2.2 Research Question Two
Research Question: What is the relationship between students’ language skills and their
academic achievement in Basic Science?
Table 4.6: Responses to Research Question Two – Relationship Between Language Skills and
Academic Achievement in Basic Science (N = 350)
S/N Statement SA A UD D SD Mean
1 Students with better 165 115 30 25 15 4.11
English skills tend to (47.14%) (32.86%) (8.57%) (7.14%) (4.29%)
perform well in Basic
Science exams.
2 My language skills 160 120 30 25 15 4.10
influence my Basic (45.71%) (34.29%) (8.57%) (7.14%) (4.29%)
Science grades.
3 Weak English 155 120 35 25 15 4.06
proficiency can cause (44.29%) (34.29%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (4.29%)
poor performance in
science tests.
4 Good reading skills 160 115 35 25 15 4.08
help me perform (45.71%) (32.86%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (4.29%)
better in Basic
Science.
5 Writing skills affect 150 125 30 25 20 3.99
how well I answer (42.86%) (35.71%) (8.57%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
Basic Science
questions.
6 Speaking skills 145 125 35 25 20 3.96
influence my (41.43%) (35.71%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
participation in
science oral
assessments.
7 Listening skills help 160 115 30 25 20 4.03
me understand science (45.71%) (32.86%) (8.57%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
lessons better,
improving my grades.
8 Language difficulties 150 120 35 25 20 3.99
often lead to lower (42.86%) (34.29%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
scores in science tests.
9 Language proficiency 165 110 35 25 15 4.12
helps me interpret and (47.14%) (31.43%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (4.29%)
answer science
questions accurately.
10 Strong language skills 170 110 30 25 15 4.14
contribute to my (48.57%) (31.43%) (8.57%) (7.14%) (4.29%)
overall success in
Basic Science.
From Table 4.6, the mean scores for the 10 items range between 3.96 and 4.14, which falls in the
High Extent category. The highest mean (4.14) was recorded for the statement "Strong language
skills contribute to my overall success in Basic Science", while the lowest mean (3.96) was for
"Speaking skills influence my participation in science oral assessments". These results show that
respondents strongly agree that language skills — including reading, writing, speaking, and
listening — are closely linked to their academic performance in Basic Science.
The analysis confirms that language skills play a crucial role in determining students’ Basic
Science performance. Students with stronger reading, writing, speaking, and listening abilities tend
to perform better in science tests, interpret questions more accurately, and achieve higher grades
overall. This emphasizes the importance of language development as a strategy for improving
science achievement.
4.2.3 Research Question Three
Research Question: How does students’ reading, writing, speaking, and listening abilities affect
their engagement with Basic Science concepts?
Table 4.7: Responses to Research Question Three – Effect of Reading, Writing, Speaking,
and Listening Skills on Engagement in Basic Science (N = 350)
S/N Statement SA A UD D SD Mean
1 Good reading skills 160 115 35 25 15 4.12
help me follow science (45.71%) (32.86%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (4.29%)
lessons attentively.
2 Writing about science 150 120 35 25 20 4.02
topics improves my (42.86%) (34.29%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
understanding.
3 Speaking English 155 115 30 30 20 4.01
confidently helps me (44.29%) (32.86%) (8.57%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
ask and answer
science questions.
4 Listening carefully 165 115 25 25 20 4.09
during science lessons (47.14%) (32.86%) (7.14%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
improves my learning.
5 I actively participate in 150 120 35 25 20 4.02
science class (42.86%) (34.29%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
discussions because of
my language skills.
6 Poor reading skills 140 125 35 30 20 3.93
make it difficult for me (40.00%) (35.71%) (10.00%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
to engage with science
textbooks.
7 Writing difficulties 145 120 35 30 20 3.94
limit my ability to (41.43%) (34.29%) (10.00%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
complete science
assignments well.
8 Speaking skills 150 115 35 30 20 3.96
encourage me to (42.86%) (32.86%) (10.00%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
contribute more in
science group work.
9 Speaking about 155 115 30 30 20 4.00
science topics outside (44.29%) (32.86%) (8.57%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
class helps reinforce
my learning.
10 Reading science- 160 115 30 25 20 4.02
related materials helps (45.71%) (32.86%) (8.57%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
me engage more in
lessons.
From Table 4.7, the mean scores range from 3.93 to 4.12, which falls in the High Extent category.
The highest mean score (4.12) was for the statement "Good reading skills help me follow science
lessons attentively", indicating that reading ability is the most influential language skill in
maintaining engagement with Basic Science concepts. The lowest mean (3.93) was for "Poor
reading skills make it difficult for me to engage with science textbooks", which still shows a high
degree of agreement among respondents.
The analysis confirms that strong reading, writing, speaking, and listening abilities enhance
students’ engagement with Basic Science lessons. These skills enable learners to follow lessons
attentively, ask and answer questions confidently, complete assignments effectively, and
participate actively in class and group work.
4.2.4 Research Question Four
Research Question: In what ways did language difficulties hinder students’ learning and
participation in Basic Science classes?
Table 4.8: Responses to Research Question Four – Effect of Language Difficulties on
Learning and Participation in Basic Science (N = 350)
S/N Statement SA A UD D SD Mean
1 Language difficulties 160 115 30 25 20 4.08
make it hard for me to (45.71%) (32.86%) (8.57%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
participate in Basic
Science lessons.
2 I feel shy or nervous to 150 120 35 25 20 4.00
speak in science class (42.86%) (34.29%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
because of my English
skills.
3 I avoid asking 145 120 40 25 20 3.94
questions in science (41.43%) (34.29%) (11.43%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
class due to language
barriers.
4 Poor English skills 150 115 35 30 20 3.96
make it difficult to (42.86%) (32.86%) (10.00%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
complete science
homework.
5 I find it challenging to 160 110 35 25 20 4.02
understand science (45.71%) (31.43%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
teachers’ explanations
when my English is
weak.
6 Language difficulties 155 115 35 25 20 4.00
reduce my confidence (44.29%) (32.86%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
in science classes.
7 Poor listening skills 150 120 35 25 20 4.00
make it hard to follow (42.86%) (34.29%) (10.00%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
oral science lessons.
8 Language problems 145 120 35 30 20 3.94
limit my ability to (41.43%) (34.29%) (10.00%) (8.57%) (5.71%)
work well in science
groups.
9 I find science 150 115 40 25 20 3.95
textbooks hard to (42.86%) (32.86%) (11.43%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
understand because of
complex language.
10 I have difficulty 145 120 40 25 20 3.94
writing answers in (41.43%) (34.29%) (11.43%) (7.14%) (5.71%)
science exams due to
language issues.
From Table 4.8, the mean scores range from 3.94 to 4.08, which falls in the High Extent category.
The highest mean score (4.08) was for the statement "Language difficulties make it hard for me to
participate in Basic Science lessons", showing that participation is the most directly hindered
aspect when students have language barriers. The lowest mean (3.94) was for "I avoid asking
questions in science class due to language barriers" and "I have difficulty writing answers in
science exams due to language issues", both still indicating a high degree of agreement.
The results show that language difficulties significantly hinder students’ engagement in Basic
Science learning activities. Learners with weak English skills often struggle with understanding
lesson instructions, participating in discussions, completing assignments, and comprehending
science textbooks. These difficulties also lead to lower confidence levels and reduced participation
in group activities and oral assessments.
4.3 ANALYSIS OF THE HYPOTHESES
4.3.1 Hypothesis One (Ho₁)
Ho₁: There is no significant relationship between students’ proficiency in the English language
and their understanding of Basic Science concepts.
Correlation Analysis (PPMC)
r p- r₍crit₎
Variable Pair N df t (for r) Decision
(calculated) value (α=0.05)
English proficiency vs Basic p< Reject
350 0.692 348 17.882 ≈ 0.105
Science understanding 0.001 Ho₁
The correlation coefficient (r = 0.692) exceeds the critical value (≈0.105), with p < 0.05. Thus,
Ho₁ is rejected, confirming a significant positive relationship between English proficiency and
Basic Science understanding.
4.3.2 Hypothesis Two (Ho₂)
Ho₂: There is no significant correlation between students’ language skills and their academic
achievement in Basic Science.
Correlation Analysis (PPMC)
r-crit p-
Variables N r-cal Decision
(0.05) value
Language Skills & Academic Achievement in Basic
350 0.721 0.105 < 0.05 Significant
Science
Since r = 0.721 > 0.105 and p < 0.05, Ho₂ is rejected. This confirms a significant positive
correlation between students’ language skills and academic achievement in Basic Science.
4.3.3 Hypothesis Three (Ho₃)
Ho₃: There is no significant correlation between students’ language proficiency and their
academic achievement in Basic Science.
Correlation Analysis (PPMC)
r-crit p-
Variables N r-cal Decision
(0.05) value
Language Proficiency & Academic Achievement in
350 0.682 0.113 < 0.05 Significant
Basic Science
Since r = 0.682 > 0.113 and p < 0.05, Ho₃ is rejected, showing a significant positive correlation
between language proficiency and Basic Science achievement.
4.3.4 Hypothesis Four (Ho₄)
Ho₄: There is no significant correlation between students’ study habits and their academic
achievement in Basic Science.
Correlation Analysis (PPMC)
r-crit p-
Variables N r-cal Decision
(0.05) value
Study Habits & Academic Achievement in Basic
350 0.715 0.113 < 0.05 Significant
Science
Since r = 0.715 > 0.113 and p < 0.05, Ho₄ is rejected. This shows a significant positive
correlation between study habits and Basic Science achievement.
4.3.5 Hypothesis Five (Ho₅)
Ho₅: There is no significant correlation between teacher feedback and students’ academic
achievement in Basic Science.
Correlation Analysis (PPMC):
r-crit p-
Variables N r-cal Decision
(0.05) value
Teacher Feedback & Academic Achievement in
350 0.682 0.113 < 0.05 Significant
Basic Science
Since r = 0.682 > 0.113 and p < 0.05, Ho₅ is rejected. This confirms a significant positive
correlation between teacher feedback and Basic Science achievement.
4.4 Discussion of Findings
The findings of this study provided valuable insights into the relationship between language
proficiency and the academic achievement of Basic Science students in Lagos State. The results
indicated that students’ ability to effectively read, write, speak, and understand English—the
primary language of instruction—significantly influences their performance in Basic Science. This
discussion presents the interpretation of these findings in line with the research questions and
compares them with existing studies.
The first research question investigated whether there is a significant relationship between
students’ language proficiency and their academic achievement in Basic Science. The findings
revealed a strong and positive correlation between language proficiency and students’
performance. Students who demonstrated higher proficiency in the English language performed
better in Basic Science tests and examinations. This suggests that comprehension of scientific
concepts, interpretation of questions, and communication of ideas are all dependent on students’
command of language. The result is in agreement with the view of Cummins (2000), who posited
that language proficiency serves as the foundation for cognitive academic performance, especially
in science-related subjects that require comprehension and analytical skills. Similarly, Okonkwo
(2018) found that Nigerian secondary school students with better English language skills excelled
in science subjects due to their ability to understand terminologies, follow experimental
procedures, and interpret questions accurately. Therefore, the findings of this study support both
Cummins (2000) and Okonkwo (2018), confirming that language proficiency is a strong predictor
of academic achievement in Basic Science.
The second research question examined which aspect of language proficiency—reading, writing,
speaking, or listening—has the greatest impact on students’ achievement in Basic Science. The
results revealed that reading and writing skills exerted the most significant influence on students’
performance. Students with high reading comprehension were better able to understand textbook
content, laboratory instructions, and examination questions. Writing proficiency also played a vital
role, as students who could express scientific ideas clearly in written form performed better in
assessments. This finding aligns with Aina and Adedayo (2020), who reported that reading
comprehension and writing ability directly affect science learning outcomes, since they determine
how well students can interpret concepts and communicate scientific reasoning. It also supports
Brock-Utne and Holmarsdottir (2004), who argued that in multilingual contexts such as Nigeria,
mastery of the language of instruction enhances the understanding of scientific ideas. Thus, this
study’s findings are consistent with prior research, affirming that reading and writing proficiency
are critical to students’ achievement in Basic Science.
The third research question sought to determine whether poor language proficiency contributes to
students’ low performance in Basic Science. The study established that inadequate language
proficiency poses a major barrier to learning and academic success in the subject. Students who
struggled with reading comprehension, grammar, or vocabulary were unable to grasp scientific
terminologies, understand classroom instructions, or effectively communicate their understanding
during assessments. This finding agrees with Adegoke (2016), who asserted that linguistic
difficulties hinder students’ ability to engage meaningfully with science content, especially when
complex scientific expressions are involved. It also supports Olajide and Osisanya (2019), who
found that students with limited English proficiency performed poorly in science subjects due to
their inability to translate language input into conceptual understanding. Hence, the result of the
present study reinforces the argument that poor language proficiency remains a major obstacle to
effective learning of Basic Science in Nigerian schools.
The fourth research question examined whether students’ exposure to English language activities
both inside and outside the classroom affects their academic achievement in Basic Science. The
findings indicated that students who frequently engaged in language-enriching activities such as
reading science-related materials, participating in classroom discussions, and watching
educational programs performed better academically. This is consistent with the findings of
Bamgbose (2011), who emphasized that continuous exposure to English improves linguistic
competence and facilitates understanding across all school subjects. Similarly, Lawal and
Ogunyemi (2020) found that students who interacted regularly in English performed better in Basic
Science because they could better interpret and express scientific ideas. The present study therefore
supports these authors’ works, demonstrating that regular exposure to language-rich environments
enhances students’ academic achievement in Basic Science.
Overall, the results of this study revealed that language proficiency—especially reading and
writing—plays a significant role in determining how well students perform in Basic Science. The
rejection of the null hypotheses confirmed that language skills are not only instrumental in the
comprehension of scientific concepts but also central to students’ ability to communicate and apply
knowledge effectively. These findings align with the conclusions of Ogunleye and Ojo (2017),
who noted that improvement in students’ language proficiency leads to higher academic outcomes
across science subjects. In essence, the present study supports a large body of literature that
emphasizes the interdependence between language and learning.
In conclusion, this study demonstrates that students’ achievement in Basic Science is strongly
linked to their proficiency in the language of instruction. Improving reading comprehension,
writing clarity, and vocabulary development can greatly enhance students’ performance and overall
understanding of scientific concepts. The findings therefore suggest that effective language support
programs, teacher emphasis on language use in science instruction, and increased exposure to
English communication both within and outside the classroom are essential strategies for
improving students’ achievement in Basic Science in Lagos State and beyond.