0% found this document useful (0 votes)
1 views9 pages

Chapter Three

This chapter outlines the research methodology for a quasi-experimental study focusing on the impact of different instructional strategies on students' knowledge and attitudes in Basic Science. It details the research design, participant selection, instruments used for data collection, and the procedures for administering treatments and analyzing data. The study involves pretest and posttest assessments across three groups: Cultro-Techno-Contexual, Peer Learning Strategy, and a control group using Conventional Strategy.

Uploaded by

Pelumi
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
1 views9 pages

Chapter Three

This chapter outlines the research methodology for a quasi-experimental study focusing on the impact of different instructional strategies on students' knowledge and attitudes in Basic Science. It details the research design, participant selection, instruments used for data collection, and the procedures for administering treatments and analyzing data. The study involves pretest and posttest assessments across three groups: Cultro-Techno-Contexual, Peer Learning Strategy, and a control group using Conventional Strategy.

Uploaded by

Pelumi
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This chapter focuses on the research methodology; the research design selection of
participants, instrumentation, experimental procedure, data collection, and the method of data
analysis.

3.1 Research Design

A pretest, post-test, control group, quasi quasi-experimental research design was adopted for
this study. This design is schematically represented as follows;

Experimental group I O1 X1 O2

Experimental group 2 O3 X2 O4

Control group O5 C O6

Where O1 and O2 represent the pretest and posttest observ ations for experimental group I,
and

O3 and O4 represent the pretest and posttest observation for experimental group 2

O5 and O6 represent the pretest and posttest observations for the control group

X1 is an experimental treatment for group 1, Cultro-Techno-Contexual

X2 represent experimental treatment for group 2, Peer Learning Strategy

C is control group, Conventional Strategy

3.1 Variables in the study

These are summarized in Table 3.2 below

Independent variable Moderator variable Dependent variable


Cultro-Techno-Contexual Gender Knowledge
a. Male
b. Female

Peer Learning Strategy Motivation Attitude

Figure 3.1: Variables in the study

In this study, the independent variable is instructional strategy manipulated at two levels;

1. Cultro-Techno-Contexual Strategy

2. Peer Learning Strategy

Dependent Variable are:

1. Students’ Knowledge in Genetics


2. Students’ Attitude in Genetics

3.3. Population of the Study

All the senior secondary school three (SSS 3) in Ibadan, metropolis will participate in the
study

3.4 Selection of Participants

A simple random sampling technique was used to select three local government areas
(Akinyele, Lagelu and Ibadan -North) from the existing eleven local governments in the
Ibadan metropolis Two Secondary Schools will be randomly selected from each of the three
local government areas using purposively random sampling, making a total of six public
schools. This six schools will be randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. In
all the schools selected, intact classes of the SSS 3 student were used for the study. Two
schools will be assigned to Cultro-Techno-Contexual, two schools will be assigned to peer
learning strategy and last two schools will be assigned to conventional strategy.

Selection of the Content

The poor achievement of junior secondary school students in Basic science general and in
socio-scientific concepts particularly according to previous researchers has led to the
selection of socio-scientific concepts in line with the Federal Republic of Nigerian Basic
science Curriculum.

3.4 Research Instrument

The following five research instruments were used for the study;

A. Response Instruments

1. Students’ Achievement Test in Basic Science (SATBS)

2. Students’ Decision-Making Questionnaire in Basic Science (SDMQBS)

B. Stimuli Instruments

1. Teachers' Instructional Guide for Context-Based Learning (TIGCBL)

2. Teachers' Instructional Guide for Conventional Lecture Strategy (TIGCLS)

4. Teachers’ Evaluation Sheet (TES)

Students’ Achievement Test in Basic Science (SATBS)

SATBS comprises of 20 multiple choice questions which were self-structured multiple-choice


questions from options A - D was used to test the students’ achievement in Basic science. To
face validity, the twenty (20) items drafted was given to two science educators, and my
supervisor, modifications based on their suggestions, correction was made. The twenty (20)
items were thereafter administered to twenty (20) students in a representative secondary
school outside the sample used. The reactions of the students to the test were noted and the
result was used for item analysis. The reliability coefficient was obtained using Kuder-
Richardson 20 and the reliability index is 0.82.

Table 3.2 Table of Specification for SATBS

Content/Course Remembering Understanding Thinking Total


Environmental sustainability 1,2 3,4 - 4

(2) (2)

Health and Diseases 5,6 7,8 - 4

(2) (2)

Energy and Technology 9,10 11,12 4

(2) (2) -

Genetic and Biotechnology 13,14 15,16 - 4

(2) (2)

Science and Ethics 17,18 19,20 - 4

(2) (2)

Total 10 10 - 20

Students’ Decision-Making Questionnaire in Basic Science (SDMQBS)

A general decision-making questionnaire consist of twenty (20) items graded based on 4


points Likert Scale ranging from Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Disagree (D) and Strongly
Disagree (SD). The positive statements were graded 4,3,2,1 respectively while the reverse
was the case for negative statement thus clearing out the undecided column in order to
commit the students to either the positive or negative side of the issue. The instrument was
given to three experts in the department of the educational psychology for their expert advice
in respect to the language level, sustainability and overall face validity of instrument, based
on their input, corrections were made. Also, the instrument was given to my supervisor who
read through to make the final modifications. Then, the instrument was administered to 20
junior secondary students who were not part of the main study. The reliability coefficient of
the instrument was calculated using the Cronbach Alpha method and value obtained was 0.71
indicating that the instrument was reliable.

Teachers’ Instructional Guide for Context-based Learning

This will be divided into stages as reflected in the model of Context-based Learning adapted
from Gilbert (2006);
Step I: The teacher reviews the previous lesson

Step II: Students are presented with the problem

Step III: Students carryout investigation to find solution to the problem

Step IV: Students uses their findings to relate their experience and the new concept

Step V: Students discuss in their groups to share ideas

Step VI: The teacher evaluates the students

Teacher Instructional Guide for Conventional Lecture Strategy.

This was developed from the outline activities given in the curriculum. The purpose was to
give uniformity to the implementation of the traditional lecture method.

Step I: The teacher introduces the lesson

Step II: The teacher explains the theoretical basis for the topic

Step III: The Teacher solves problem with examples and applications

Step IV: The teacher solicits questions from the class and give class work

Step V: The teacher marks the students work

3.5 Procedure for Data Collection

A letter of introduction was obtained from the department of Science and Technology
Education, University of Ibadan and taken to the principals of the senior secondary schools in
Oyo Town. The researcher meets with the Basic science teachers in the schools and gave a
brief them about the programme. Only the schools with qualified and interested teachers were
shortlisted for selection. Four (4) junior secondary schools were finally selected for duration
of ten (10) weeks. The programme was conducted according to the following procedural
steps:

1. Pre-Treatment stage

a. Training of instructors and research assistants

b. Pretest

2. Treatment
3. Posttest

Table 3.3: Work Schedule Template

Weeks Activities

1 Introduction

1 Training of research assistants

1 Pretest

5 Treatment

1 Posttest

Total = 9 weeks

Training of Instructors and Research Assistants

The researcher trained all the basic teachers in the four schools using the instructional guide
and the teachers were given opportunity to practice and they were scored using Teachers’
Evaluation Sheet. In other to ensure uniformity and clarity in the data collection, four
research assistants were trained on how to use the instruments, principles and procedures
governing each group and the use of each treatment. The research assistants were also trained
on how to administer the instruments. The training involved orientation, discussion and
practice and were last for one (1) week. The pretest materials were given to the trained
research assistants shortly after the training.

Pretest

The pretest was administered in the following other;

Students’ Decision-Making Questionnaire in Basic Science (SDMQBS),

Students’ Achievement Test in Basic (SATBS).

This pre-treatment stage lasted for one week

Treatment

Each treatment group used all the periods slated for the subjects that is, two hours per week
and treatment lasted for six weeks after which the post-test was be administered. The trained
research assistants taught the students as directed and in accordance with objectives of the
treatments. Teachers Assessment sheet was used to assess the performance of Basic science
teachers.

Experimental Group 1: Context-based Learning

Pre-treatment stage

Immediately after the pretest administration, the students to be exposed to context-based


learning were introduced to the context.

Teachers’ Instructional Guide for Context-based Learning

This will be divided into stages as reflected in the model of Context-based Learning adapted
from Gilbert (2006);

Step I: The teacher reviews the previous lesson

Step II: Students are presented with the problem

Step III: Students carryout investigation to find solution to the problem

Step IV: Students uses their findings to relate their experience and the new concept

Step V: Students discuss in their groups to share ideas

Step VI: The teacher evaluates the students

Teacher Instructional Guide for Lecture Method.

This was developed from the outline activities given in the curriculum. The purpose was to
give uniformity to the implementation of the traditional lecture method.

Step I: The teacher introduces the lesson

Step II: The teacher explains the theoretical basis for the topic

Step III: The Teacher solves problem with examples and applications

Step IV: The teacher solicits questions from the class and give class work

Step V: The teacher marks the students work

Post-test

Post-test was conducted at the tenth week immediately after the last week of treatment. The
same SATBS and SDMQBS that were used for the pre-testing were also reshuffled and
administered to the students as post-tests. The same procedure and conditions used while
conducting the pre-test was adopted. The research assistants marked and scored the scripts
using the marking guide. The scores were collected and organized for data analysis.

3.6 Procedure for Data Analysis

The data obtained from the pretest and posttest were analysed using Analysis of Covariance
(ANCOVA) with the pretest scores as covariates where the main effect were significant, the
Estimated Marginal Mean (EMM) techniques was used to find the direction of the difference
among the groups. The Bonferroni post-hoc test was to know the specific effect of each
treatment. In the case of significant interaction effect, a separate examination of the
differences among categories of one factor at different levels of the other factors(s) involved
in the interaction was conducted. The simple effect analysis was supported by graphic
illustrations.

You might also like