Greener Journal of Educational Research Vol. 11(1), pp. 1-5, 2021 ISSN: 2276-7789 Copyright ©2021, the copyright of this article is
retained by the author(s) |
|
Effect of
5 Step Constructivist-Based Instructional Model on Student’s Achievement in
Biology
Amaefuna, A.I.1; Ezeliora,
B.A.2
1Department
of Science Education, Nnamdi Azikiwe
University, Awka.
2Department
of Science Education, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu
Ojukwu University, Uli.
ARTICLE INFO |
ABSTRACT |
Article No.: 040721034 Type: Research |
The study was
carried out to investigate the effect of 5 step constructivist-based
instructional model on student’s achievement in biology in Anambra State. Three hundred and eighty-five students
were sampled using multi stage sampling technique. The study adopted a
quasi-experimental research design. The control group was taught using
conventional method while the experimental group was taught using constructivist-based
model. Data was collected using biology achievement test (BAT). Mean and
standard deviation were used to answer the research questions while analysis
of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to test the null hypothesis at .05 level of significance. Data obtain revealed that
there is a significant difference in the achievement of constructivist
method, also male students taught with CBM perform better than female
students. Based on the findings, recommendations were made among which is
that teachers should engage students in constructivist classes, since it
improved students with different intelligent levels, encouraged the ability
to analyze facts and helped in divergent thinking
towards biology in particular and science in general. |
Accepted: 08/04/2021 Published: 15/05/2021 |
|
*Corresponding Author Amaefuna,
A.I. E-mail: Ia.amaefuna@ unizik.edu.ng Phone: 08067254503 |
|
Keywords: |
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION
Science is a
systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge by virtue of testable
explanations and predictions about the universe. The role of science,
particularly biology in the development of a nation cannot be over-emphasized.
Science is highly valued in every part of the world and has been the bedrock of
modern technological breakthrough. Biology is one of the core subject in Nigeria secondary school curriculum, mostly
preferred by many students because it has less mathematical calculations and
deals with non-abstract things. It is the key to economic, intellectual,
sociological, human resources development and wellbeing of any society (Ezuike & Ayo Vaughan, 2020). Biology has a very high
enrolment of students in Senior Secondary School Certificate Examination (SSCE)
than physics and chemistry.
A sound knowledge of
biology is a prerequisite factor for entrance into such profession like
medicine, pharmacy, nursing, agriculture, forestry, biotechnology,
nanotechnology and so on (Maduabum, 2014). Despite
the importance of biology as one of the key subjects in realizing any nations
scientific and technological aspirations, evidence of low achievement in the
subjects by Nigeria students abound (Ige, 2010; Opara, 2011; Akinfe, Olofunmiyi & Fashiku, 2012; Anyaegbunam, Nwodo & Enibe 2015; Arokoy & Chukwu, 2017). Considering the importance and roles played
by the knowledge of biology, the teaching of biology should be planned in a way
that it would be taught to help the students to achieve greatness in science
and technology in this 21st century.
Students achievement
is influenced by the teacher’s teaching method as observed by (Nwagbo, 2015; Akpan, 2013; Jajapraba, 2013; Akanwa & Ovute, 2014; Aydishel &Gharibi, 2015; Semerci & Batdi, 2015) when they opined that teacher’s teaching
methods increased students achievement in subject area. According to Umar
(2011), the method used in teaching contributes significantly to the academic
achievement of the students. Problem solving and decision-making skills also make
them to underachieve in science. There is need to use an innovative teaching
method which is more activity-based using questioning, explanation,
demonstration and collaborative technique such as constructivism.
Constructivism is
activity based, student’s centered and interactive learning strategy which
upholds the view that knowledge should be constructed by the learners through
active mental developmental processes (Ekon & Nwosu, 2016). Nworgu (2016)
developed an instructional model based on constructivism adopted from Stofflet and Stoddart (1994),
which is a five-step instructional model comprising prior knowledge,
exploration, discussion, dissatisfaction and application (PEDDA). It upholds
that knowledge should be constructed by the learners through active mental
developmental processes (Ekon, 2018). It is problem
solving oriented allowing students to explore and work in groups.
Constructivist-based model is all inclusive for teacher and students. It is
against this background that this research was carried out in order to
establish the effect of 5 step constructivist-based instructional model on
student’s achievement in biology.
Statement
of the Problem
Poor academic
achievement of science students especially in biology at senior secondary school
certificate examination by Nigeria students had been a cause of concern for
biology teachers and other stake-holders in education. This has been blamed on
many factors especially the way biology is being taught in schools. A lot of
teaching methods have been tried but more has been able to make sufficient
impact on student’s achievement in biology. Literature revealed that the
predominant method used by teachers does not allow active participation of
students. It is against this backdrop that this study sought to find out the
effect of five step constructivist-based instructional model on secondary
school student’s achievement in biology.
Objective
of the Study
The objectives of the study are as follows;
i.
To determine mean achievement scores of students
taught biology using a 5 step constructivist-based instructional model and
those taught using conventional teaching model (CTM).
ii.
To find out mean achievement scores of male
and female students taught biology using CBM.
Research
Questions
The following research questions were
answered;
i.
What are the mean achievement scores of
students taught biology using constructivist-based instructional model (CBM)
and those taught using conventional teaching model (CTM)
ii.
What are the mean achievement scores of male
and female students taught biology using CBM.
Hypothesis
H01: There is no significant different in the
mean achievement scores of students taught biology using CBM and those taught
using CTM.
H02: There is no significant difference in the
mean achievement scores of male and female students taught biology using CBM.
H03: There is no significant difference in the
interaction effect of treatment and gender on the mean achievement scores of
students taught biology using CBM.
Research
Design
The research design used in this study is the
quasi-experimental research design. This is because randomization tended to
disrupt the school activities.
Population
The population of the study comprises 138,910
SS1 biology students (18,272 males and 120,637 females) in all the 150
co-educational secondary schools in six education zones of Anambra
State.
Sample
Size and Sample Technique
The sample of the study was made up of a
total of 385 senior secondary 1 biology students and was drawn from the study,
sampling was done in stages firstly purpose random sampling technique was use
to select two co-educational schools from the six education zones. Then the
next stage was simple random sampling technique to select six schools for
experimental and six again for control groups respectively, while the third
stage was the use of simple random sampling again to select intact classes from
each of the schools. All the students in each of the intact classes were used
for the study. The experimental group was taught the selected biology concept
using the 5 step constructivist-based instructional approach while the control
group was taught the same concepts using the conventional lecture method.
Instrument
for Data Collection
The study was carried out using one
instrument, Biology Achievement Test (BAT). The face validity and reliability
of the instrument was equally obtained. Kuder
Richardson K-20 formular was used and 0.77
reliability co-efficient was obtained.
Again, difficulty
index was carried out and 93.8% was obtained meaning that most items fell
within acceptable range and fit for any predictive purpose. Also 63.1
discrimination index was obtained which signifies that most item
are within excellent range.
Data Analysis
Descriptive statistic using mean and standard
deviation were used to answer research questions while Analysis of Covariance
(ANCOVA) was used to test the hypothesis at .05 level of significance using
SPSS version 20.0.
Research
Question 1: What is the mean achievement
scores of students taught biology using constructivist-based instructional
model and those taught using conventional teaching method?
Table 1:
Mean Achievement and Standard Deviation scores of Students Taught Biology using
Constructivist-based Instructional Model.
Teaching
Approach |
Pre-test |
Post-test |
Mean
Gain Score |
||||
|
N |
Mean |
SD |
N |
Mean |
SD |
|
CBM |
176 |
17.92 |
6.49 |
176 |
51.45 |
5.98 |
33.53 |
CTM |
209 |
15.11 |
5.19 |
209 |
42.76 |
6.43 |
27.65 |
The data in table 1:
shows that the pretest and post-test mean achievement scores of students taught
biology using constructivist-based instructional model was 17.92 and 51.45 with
standard deviation 6.49 and 5.98 respectively. On the other hand, their counterpart
taught using conventional model had 15.11 with standard deviation 5.19 as their
pretest and 42.76 and standard deviation 6.43 as post-test. The result
signifies that CBM is efficacious in improving student’s achievement in
biology.
Research
Question 2: What is the mean achievement
scores of male and female students taught biology using CBM?
Table 2:
Mean Achievement and Standard Deviation Scores of Male and Female Students
taught Biology using Constructivist-based Instructional model
Teaching
Approach |
Gender |
Pre-test |
Post-test |
Mean
Gain Score |
||||
|
|
N |
Mean |
SD |
N |
Mean |
SD |
|
CBM |
Male |
73 |
19.22 |
6.72 |
73 |
53.59 |
6.20 |
34.37 |
CTM |
Female |
103 |
17.00 |
6.19 |
103 |
49.94 |
5.36 |
32.94 |
In table 2 above, the
pre-test and post-test mean achievement scores of male and female taught
biology with constructivist-based model are 19.22, 53.59 and standard deviation
6.72 and 6.20 for male and 17.00, 49.94 with standard deviation 6.19 and 5.36 respectively.
The result showed a remarkable difference in mean gain score of male and female
students taught biology using CBM with male students having higher mean gain
score.
Hypothesis
1:
There is no significant difference in the mean achievement scores of students
taught biology using CBM and those taught using CTM.
Table 3:
Analysis of Covariance of Students’ Mean Achievement Scores in Biology
Source |
SS |
Df |
Ms |
F |
P |
Pre-test |
146.35 |
1 |
146.35 |
3.79 |
.052 |
Group |
6365.83 |
1 |
6365.83 |
165.07 |
.000 |
Error |
14731.31 |
382 |
38.56 |
|
|
Total |
863003.00 |
385 |
|
|
|
Table 3: Showed that there is a statistically
significant difference in mean achievement scores of students taught biology
using constructivist-based instructional model and those taught with
conventional instructional model, F
= 165.07. The obtained P-value
(.000) is less than the stipulated level of significance (.05). The null
hypothesis of no significant difference between the two groups was there
rejected.
Hypothesis
2: There
is no significant difference in the mean achievement score of male and female
students taught biology using CBM.
Table 4:
Analysis of Covariance of Male and Female Students’ Mean Achievement Scores in
Biology
Source |
SS |
Df |
Ms |
F |
P |
Pre-test |
666.51 |
1 |
666.51 |
12.80 |
.000 |
Group |
1217.60 |
1 |
1217.60 |
23.39 |
.000 |
Error |
19879.52 |
382 |
52.04 |
|
|
Total |
863003.00 |
385 |
|
|
|
Table 4 shows that
there is a statistically significant difference in mean achievement scores of
male and female secondary school students taught biology using
constructivist-based instructional model and those taught with conventional
instructional model F = 23.39. The
obtained P-value (.000) is less than the stipulated level of significance
(.05). The null hypothesis of no significant difference between the two groups
was rejected.
Hypothesis
3:
There is no significant interaction effect of treatment and gender on the mean
achievement scores of students taught biology using CBM.
Table 5:
Analysis of Covariance of Interaction Effect of Gender and Treatment on
Students Achievement in Biology
|
Source |
SS |
Df |
Ms |
F |
P |
|
Pre-test |
42.64 |
1 |
42.64 |
1.2 |
.273 |
|
Group |
6103.38 |
1 |
1610 |
0172.34 |
.000 |
|
Gender |
1250.24 |
1 |
1250.4 |
35.30 |
.000 |
Group* Gender |
4.33 |
1 |
4.33 |
.12 |
.725 |
|
|
Error |
13457.34 |
380 |
35.41 |
|
|
|
Total |
863003.00 |
385 |
|
|
|
Table 5 shows there
is no statistically significant interaction between the mean achievement scores
of male and female students taught biology using constructivist-based
instructional model, F = .12, the obtained P-value (.727) is greater
than the stipulated .05level of significance. The null hypothesis was therefore
not rejected.
DISCUSSION
OF FINDINGS
From the results, it
was found out that there existed a significant difference between the academic
achievement of students taught biology with constructivist-based instructional
model and those taught using conventional teaching model. The result showed
that the experimental group had a higher mean than the control group. Thus, the
use of constructivist-based model facilitates the learning of biology concepts.
The constructivist steps provide an opportunity for students to take active
role in building their own knowledge. The results are consistent with the
findings of Bimbola & Daniel (2010), Bagar, Kalender & Serika (2012), Ekoh & Nwosu (2016), Muligo & Owin (2016) that showed significant difference in
achievement between the experimental and control groups when exposed to
constructivist model. Again, Abdul-Raheem (2012) pointed out that male students
performed better than their female counterparts after treatment.
RECOMMENDATIONS
From the study, the following recommendations
were made;
1.
Biology teachers are encouraged to use
constructivist model because it has been found to construct student’s knowledge
positively, allowed active participation and social interaction in the
classroom with peers and facilitators.
2.
Teachers should engage students in
constructivist classes, since it improved students with different intelligent
level, encouraged the ability of analysis, divergent thinking towards biology
in particular and science in general.
REFERENCES
Abdul-Raheem, B. O. (2012). The influence of
gender on secondary school students’ academic performance in South West,
Nigeria Journal of Science 31(1), 93-98.
Akinfe,
E. Olofinniyi, O. E. & Fashiku,
C. O. (2012). “Teachers quality as correlates of
student’s academic performance in biology in senior secondary school in Ondo State, Nigeria”. Journal of
Education research 1(16), 108-114.
Akanwa,
U. N. & Ovute, A. O. (2014). The
effect of constructivist teaching model on SSS physics students’ achievement
and interest. Journal of research and method in education
(IOSR-JRME) 1, 35-38. Available online on www.iosrjournals.org
Akpan,
B. (2013). Science education: A global perspective
information. Spinger international publisher.
Anyaegbunam,
N. J. Nwodo, B. I. & Enibe,
D. E. (2015). Effective application of
constructivist theatre instruction (CTI) procedure for improving achievement
and attitudes of biology students. Proceeding 56th
Annual conference of science teachers association of Nigeria (STAN) 102-111.
Arokoyu,
A. A. & Chukwu, J. C. (2017). Biology teacher’s methods of teaching and academic performance of
secondary school students in Abia State Nigeria.
Journal of emerging trends in educational research and policy studies 8(4),
228-231.
Aydisheh,
F. & Gharibi, H. (2015).
Effectiveness of constructivist teaching method on students’ mathematics
academic achievement: Mediterranean Journal of social sciences MCSER Publishing
Rome – Italy 6(6), 572.
Bimbola,
O. & Daniel, O. (2010). Effect of
constructivist-based teaching strategy on academic performance of students in
integrated science at the junior secondary level. Edue
Ros Rev. 5(7), 347-353. Available online @
http//www.academicjournals.org/ERLS
Ekon,
E. E. & Nwosu, A. A. (2016). Utilizing pedda as an effective teaching
strategy for better cognitive achievement and interest in biology. Proceedings 5th annual conference of science teachers
association of Nigeria, 410-418.
Ekon, E. E. (2018).
Effect of five-step conceptual change instructional model on students’
perception of their psychosocial learning environment, cognitive achievement
and interest in biology, unpublished Ph.D thesis,
University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Ezuike,
C. P. & Ayo-vaughan, A. F. (2020). Influence
of teacher-centered and student-centered teaching methods on the academic
achievement of post-basic students in biology in Delta State, Nigeria. Teacher education and curriculum studies 5(3) 120-124.
Ige, A. (2010). Strategies for improving biology teachers for optimum performances
(online) available @ http//en.obonlo.com/strategies for improving
biology-teacher joropt.
Jayapraba, G. (2013). Effect of metacognitive instruction and cooperative learning
strategies for promoting insight learning in science. International
journal on new trend in education and their implication (yante)
4(5), 165-172. Retrieved from www.ijonle.org.
Maduabum,
M. (2014). Student’s interest and achievement in biology.
Some correlates. Journal of curriculum and instruction 3(1
& 2) 10-19.
Nwagbo,
C. R. & Aham, A. (2015). Utilizing the 5E’s constructivist instructional approach for
effective classroom delivery of genetic concepts. 56th
Annual conference STAN proceeding, 166-172.
Nwanda,
G. M., Odundo, P. Midigo,
R. & Owino, S. M. (2016). Adoption
of the constructivist learning approach in secondary schools in Kenya: Focus on
learner achievement in biology by class. Education review 6(1), 31-44.
Nworgu, L. N. (2016). Modern techniques of teaching biology. A paper presented for
open university.
Opera, J. A. (2011). Inquiring
method and students’ academic achievement in biology: Lessons and policy
implications. American Eurasian Journal of scientific research 6(1), 28-31.
Semerci,
C. & Batdi, V. (2015). Meta analysis of
constructivist learning approach on learner’s academic achievement, retention
and attitudes. Journal of educational training studies 3(2), published
by Redframe publishing. Available online URI: http://jets.realfame.com.
Stofflet,
R. T. & Stoddart, T. (1994). The ability to understand and use conceptual change pedagogy as a
function of prior content learning experience. Journal
of research in science teaching 31(1), 31-51.
Umar,
A. A. (2011). Effect of biology practical activities on
student’s process skill acquisition in Mina, Niger State, Nigeria JOSTMED,
7(2), 118-126.
Cite this Article: Amaefuna, AI; Ezeliora, BA (2021). Effect of 5 Step
Constructivist-Based Instructional Model on Student’s Achievement in Biology.
Greener Journal of Educational Research,
11(1): 1-5. |