INTRODUCTION
Social psychologists
have noticed that people respond to objects (ideas) with different degrees of
positive or negative evaluations. Responses could be affective (e.g., frown or
smiling); cognitive (e.g., stating rational thoughts) or behavioural (clapping
or running away). Social psychologists conceived a driving force behind these
responses and name it attitude. They proceeded to measure attitude by measuring
what they conceived to be the effects of it (Ajzen, 1989).
According to petty and Cacioppi (1986), attitudes are general evaluation of people
and issues. To Greenwald (1989b), attitudes are pervasive, predict behaviours,
are a force in perception and memory and they serve various psychological
functions. Though there is an ongoing debate about the structure of attitude
(Newbill, 2005), however, instructional designers have long assumed that
attitude is made up of three components; a cognitive component, an emotional
component and a behavioural component (Bednar and Levie, 1993; Kamradt and Kamradt, 1991). The debate of the existence of the component
structure of attitude may never be completely resolved because attitudes are
constructs and are therefore not directly observable (Newbill, 2005). Gagne
(1979) define attitude as an internal state that influences the personal
actions of an individual; he recognized attitude as a major factor in subject
choice. He considers attitudes as a mental and neutral state of readiness
organized through experience, exerting a directive or dynamic influence upon
the individual’s responses to all objects and situations with which it is
related. The measurement of attitude is inextricably tangled with theoretical
debate on the nature of attitude.
A plethora of research
has been carried out in recent years concerning attitudes towards science and
the relationship between these attitudes and science achievements (Gunger et al,
2007; Papanastasion and Zembylas,
2002; Reid and Skyabina, 2002). Several factors have
been highlighted as main contributors to the negative attitudes that students
possess towards the science subjects. These factors are related to school and
science classes, the individual and even external factors relating to the
status and rewards that different countries bestow into physics-based careers (Woolnough, 1994).
Attitudes of students
can be influenced by the attitudes of the teacher and his method of teaching
(Yara, 2009). Keeves (1992), asserted that attitudes
towards science are known to decrease as students’ progress through their
schooling years. He further submitted that attributes such as enthusiasm,
respect for the students and personality traits have been shown to influence
students’ attitude towards science as well as in other subjects. The
implication of Keeves findings is that attention should be given to science
teaching early so as to enable students have favourable disposition towards
science later in life. Review of relevant literature depicts varying opinions
and findings on students’ attitude towards science and their performance.
According to Keeves (1992) and Postlethewaite and
Wiley (1991), attitudes towards science are in general highly favoured,
indicating strong support for science and the learning of science. The
researchers, however, concluded that there is marked decline in attitude
towards science between the ten- years old and fourteen –years old levels.
Greenfield (1995); Parleer, Revinue
and Fraser (1996); Mullis, Bealon, Gonsale, Kelly and Smith (1998), in their findings revealed
that in countries where there was an emergent thirst for industrial and
technological development, there were very favourable attitudes towards
science. However, in countries where a high level of technological and
industrial development had been achieved, the findings showed that attitudes
towards science were more neutral. When students have positive attitudes, they
show positive behaviours and they fulfil their academic necessities (Ali, et.al., 2010).
Attitudes are acquired
through learning and can be changed through persuasion using variety of
techniques. Attitude once established, help to shape
the experiences the individual has with object, subject or person. Although
attitude changes gradually, people constantly form new attitudes and modify old
ones when they are exposed to new information and new experiences (Adersina and Akinbobola, 2005).
Students’ attitudes towards science significantly alter their achievement in
science (Pavol, et.al, 2007). Therefore,
identification and influence of attitudes become an essential part of
educational research. This study has been initiated by the idea that research
in students’ attitude towards science often involves science in general but
particular disciplines like biology, chemistry and physics have been overlooked
this can partly camouflage students’ attitude because science is not viewed as
a homogenous subject. This study is about students’ negative attitudes towards
physics and the role of an effective teacher.
When students are
successful, they view the subject matter with a positive attitude because their
self-esteem is enhanced. This creates a positive cycle of good performance
building higher self-esteem which in turn leads to more interest in the subject
and higher performance (Aleinyemi, 2009). Schunk and
Hanson (1985), suggest that, the attitude of pupils is likely to play a
significant part in any satisfactory explanation of variable level of
performance shown by students in their school science subject. Cgunleye (1993), in his findings reports that many students
develop negative attitudes to science learning, probably due to the fact that
teachers are unable to satisfy their aspiration or goals. Alao
(1990), showed that there is a positive correlation
between attitudes and performance in science subjects.
The
first stumbling block for research into attitudes towards physics is that such
attitudes do not consist of a single unitary construct, but rather consist of a
large number of sub constructs all of which contribute in varying proportions
towards an individual’s attitudes towards physics. Studies Breakwell
and Beardsell (1992); Brown (1976); Crawley and Black
(1992); Gardner (1975); Haladyna, et.al (1982);
Koballa, (1995); Oliver and Simpson (1988);
Ormerod and Duckworth (1975); Piburn (1993); Talton and Simpson (1985, 1986, 1987); Woolnough
(1994) have incorporated a range of components in their measures of attitudes
to science and physics in particular which include; the perception of the science
teacher; anxiety towards science; the
value of science ; self-esteem at science ; motivation towards science ; enjoyment
of science ; attitudes of peers and
friends towards science ; attitudes of
parents towards science ; the nature of the classroom environment; achievement
in science ; and fear of failure on subject.
The
second stumbling block towards assessing the significance and importance of
attitudes is that they are essentially a measure of the subject’s expressed
preferences and feelings towards an object. This study is to find out how
teaching methods can influence students’ negative attitudes towards physics.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
This researcher carried out a study on
students’ attitudes towards physics and its effects on their academic
achievements in all the six Divisions of the South West Region of Cameroon in
2009. A Likert survey questionnaire was used. The simple random sampling
technique was used to obtain the sample of the study which consisted of 1167
students in all the co-educational high schools offering Advanced Level
Physics. Data collected were analyzed using the
Chi-square test of independence and the major finding was that most students
have negative attitudes towards physics and this has negative effects on their
academic achievement.
Physics is
one of the most problematic areas within the realm of science, and it
traditionally attracts fewer students than chemistry, biology and other science
subjects (G.C.E ordinary level results booklets, 2020). Exploratory research has
revealed that one of the reasons while students develop negative attitudes
towards physics is the way it is taught and that students’
positive attitudes towards physics highly correlate with their achievement in
physics. (Craker, 2006; Normah
& Salleh, 2006; Hough & Piper, 1982; Long, 1981; Newble, 1998; Ajzen
& Fishbein ,2000; Wilson, et al. 2000 and Gonen &Basaran , 2008). Attitudes, whether positive or negative,
affect learning in science and physics in particular. However, it is well known
that a negative attitude towards a certain subject makes learning or future
learning difficult. Therefore, helping students develop positive attitudes towards
physics is an important step in physics education.
Demystification of
physics requires that teachers vary their teaching methods because, a one-size
lesson fits all usually does not fit all the students because of the fact that
they have different learning styles. It because of the above reasons that this researcher
wants to find out whether, lecture – demonstration – performance, inquiry – teaching
method, cooperative teaching method can
change students negative attitudes towards physics to positive.
THEORETRICAL
REVIEW
This study was
guided by
Gagne's (1979)theory of instruction and Muzafer and Hovland (1961) theory of attitude change.
Robert Gagne's theory of
instruction has
provided a great number of valuable ideas to instructional designers, trainers,
and teachers. Driscoll (1994) breaks Gagne's theory into three major areas -
the taxonomy of learning outcomes, the conditions of learning, and the events
of instruction. This study is focused on each of these three areas while
briefly describing the theory of instruction. This study attempts to turn this
theory "back upon it" while examining the strengths and weaknesses of
its various assumptions. As previously explained Gagne's theory of instruction
is commonly broken into three areas. The first of these areas that will be
discussed is the taxonomy of learning outcomes. Gagne's taxonomy of learning
outcomes is somewhat similar to Bloom's taxonomies of cognitive, affective, and
psychomotor outcomes (some of these taxonomies were proposed by Bloom, but
actually completed by others in 1956). Both Bloom and Gagne believed that it
was important to break down humans' learned capabilities into categories or
domains. Gagne's taxonomy consists of five categories of learning outcomes -
verbal information, intellectual skills, cognitive strategies, attitudes, and
motor skills. Gagne, et.al (1992) explain that each of
the categories leads to a different class of human performance. Essential to
Gagne's ideas of instruction are what he calls "conditions of
learning." He breaks these down into internal and external conditions. The
internal conditions deal with previously learned capabilities of the learner.
Or in other words, what the learner knows prior to the instruction. The
external conditions deal with the stimuli (a purely behaviourist term) that are
presented externally to the learner. For example, the type of
instruction that is provided to the learner.
To tie Gagne's theory of instruction
together, he formulated nine events of instruction. When followed, these events
are intended to promote the transfer of knowledge or information from
perception through the stages of memory. Gagne based his events of instruction
on the cognitive information processing learning theory. The way Gagne's theory
is put into practice is as follows. First of all, the instructor determines the
objectives of the instruction. These objectives must then be categorized into
one of the five domains of learning outcomes. Each of the objectives must be
stated in performance terms using one of the standard verbs (i.e., states,
discriminates, classifies, etc.) associated with the particular learning
outcome. The instructor then uses the conditions of learning for the particular
learning outcome to determine the conditions necessary for learning. And
finally, the events of instruction necessary to promote the internal process of
learning are chosen and put into the lesson plan. The events in essence become
the framework for the lesson plan or steps of instruction. Changing students’
negative attitudes to positive towards physics will require that teachers apply
this Gagne's theory in their teaching – learning process.
Another important theory guiding this
study is the theory of attitude change
developed by Muzafer and Hovland (1961). As its name suggests,
it is a model of judgement, which means that it declares that the audience
interprets (judges) a message. Specifically, a listener judges how much the
message agrees or disagrees with his or her own attitude. Second, Social
Judgement/Involvement theory holds that a listener’s involvement in the topic
of the persuasive message -- that is, how important a topic is to a listener --
is an important factor in attitude change. In the fifth century, Pythagoras was
a Greek sophist, or travelling teacher. He rebelled against the idea that there
were absolute truths. Instead, he declared (in the gender-biased language of
the time) “Man is the measure of all things” (Schiappa,1991). Two friends can see the same movie and
one will like it and the other will hate it. And two people can hear the same
persuasive message but have quite different reactions to it. Social
Judgement/Involvement theory explains how two people can react so differently
to the same message.
When this researcher
uses this theory during teaching in class, the researcher brings three
buckets of water: hot, cold, and room temperature. Two students are asked to
volunteer to participate in a “science experiment.” One is asked to put
his or her hand into the hot water and the other places his or her hand into
the cold water -- but they aren’t told anything about the temperature of the
water in any of the three buckets. They are then asked to put their hands into
the third bucket of tap water at the same time and then describe the
temperature of the water in the third bucket. What do you think happens? The
student whose hand was in the hot water says, “cool”
while the student whose hand was in the cold water says, “warm.” These students
both put their hands into the same bucket of water, yet they described it
differently. The reason they gave different answers is that they had different
comparison points or anchors. The water felt warm to the student whose hand had
just been in the cold water (this is his anchor point), and that water felt
cool to the student whose hand had just been in the hot water (This is his own
anchor point). This process is just what Social Judgement/Involvement theory
says happens when people hear or read a persuasive message. Each listener or
reader judges the main idea of the message, how much it agrees or disagrees
with him or her, by comparing the message with his or her anchor point, which
in Social Judgement/Involvement theory is his or her existing attitude on the
message topic.
If the researcher really wanted to know
the temperature of the water in the three buckets, a thermometer would have been
used. This is a simple device that accurately and objectively measures
temperature. It could easily tell us that the water in one bucket was 10
degrees, the other was 40 degrees, and the last was 25 degrees. However, we do
not have any such thing as a “message thermometer.” We have to make judgments
about how much a message agrees or disagrees with us because there is not
accurate or objective way to measure message position. Social
Judgment/Involvement theory holds that the process of judging or perceiving the
position of a message is important to understanding how persuasion works.
The key point of the social judgment theory
is that, attitude change (persuasion) is mediated by judgmental processes and
effects. Put differently, persuasion occurs at the end of the process where a
person understands a message then compares the position it advocates to the
person's position on that issue. A person's position on an issue is dependent
on:
- the
person's most preferred position (his anchor point),
- the
person's judgement of the various alternatives (spread across his
latitudes of acceptance, rejection, and no commitment), and
- the
person's level of ego-involvement with the issue(Muzafer, and Carl 1980
).
To change an
attitude, the first step is to judge how close or far away one's position is.
The next step is to shift one's position in response to the argument made. We
adjust an attitude once we have judged a new position to be in our latitude of
acceptance (Muzafer, and Carl 1980). If we judge that message to be in our latitude of
rejection, we will also adjust our attitude, but in the opposite direction from
what we think the speaker is advocating. Sometimes an attitude change may be
incidental. In the boomerang effect, an attitude changes in the opposite
direction from what the message advocates - the listener is driven away from
rather than drawn to an idea. A major implication of social judgement theory is
that persuasion is difficult to accomplish. Successful persuasive messages are
those that are targeted to the receiver’s latitude of acceptance and discrepant
from the anchor position, so that the incoming information cannot be
assimilated or contrasted. The receiver’s ego-involvement must also be taken
into consideration (Muzafer, and Carl, 1965 ). This suggests
that even successful attempts at persuasion will yield only small changes in
attitude. We know that effective teachers produce the desire learning outcome.
For a teacher to be effective, he/she must vary his/her teaching methods. It against this background that this study
investigated the relationship between this parameter and student’s attitudes
towards physics so as to find out how this quality can change student’s
negative attitudes towards physics to positive.
REVIEW OF RELATED
LITERATURE
When parents send
a child to school, they expect the teachers to educate him or her. By
education, it is meant to train the child whole being, helping his or her mind,
body and personality to grow to the full. Therefore, the aim of education is to
help the child to develop as well as possible mentally, physically, morally,
socially and emotionally. To do these, there are usually curricula on the
various school subjects. The teachers are expected to prepare their lesson
notes as guides since they cannot give a good lesson unless it has been well
prepared. Also, the teacher must decide on the best method(s) for the lesson to
be delivered that would enable the students develop positive attitudes towards
the subject.
One of the
objectives of physics education is to develop students’ interest in physics, as
today’s society depends largely on development in physics and its application
called technology. Teachers are expected to devise ways of making their
students to develop positive attitudes towards physics and science-related
disciplines. This can only be achieved when the correct teaching methods are
used. However, the superiority of any one method of teaching for all learning
situations has not been established by research. There is much evidence to show
that a variety of methods and procedures improves the teaching-learning
situation and hence students’ attitude towards the subject-Physics. Thus,
teachers need to draw upon a variety of teaching methods so as to improve on
students’ attitudes towards physics.
The poor
performance of students in physics has assumed a dangerous dimension. In the
light of this, physics educators need to seek suitable ways of tackling the
current mass failure if they are to halt the drifts of students to arts and
social science subjects (CGCE Results, 2020). The relevance and importance of
physics amongst the science subjects is formidable, hence the need for proper
teaching of the subject in the secondary schools so that students’ scores in
internal and external examinations will be high, thereby making the candidates’
entrance into higher schools easier. According to Onwu
(1981) teachers of physics are expected to make physics more relevant,
enjoyable, easy and meaningful to students. Teaching methods need to be
improved as the teaching- learning situation may demand. Teaching methods such
as inquiry, lecture-demonstration, lecture - demonstration and performance,
cooperative or group learning, and project, have been recommended for the
teaching of science in schools (Mcdonald and Nelson,
1954; Webb, 1982; Rogus, 1985; Adedoyin,
1990; Ajewole, 1991, Newcomb et al., 199). There is however the need to understand that for
different topics in science especially physics; the teaching approaches may
differ depending on the complexity and structure of the topics. Teachers should
be concerned with the use of variety of teaching methods. The most enjoyable
aspect of teaching and learning can occur when a variety of teaching methods
are used. This study assessed and
compared the relative effectiveness of four teaching methods for teaching of physics
that can lead to positive improvement in students’ attitudes towards physics.
These methods are; Lecture method, Lecture – Demonstration and Performance, Inquiry – Teaching Method and
Cooperative Teaching Method.
The lecture method
is used primarily to introduce students to a new topic, but it is also a
valuable method for summarizing ideas, showing relationships between theory and
practice, and re-emphasizing main points. The lecture method is the most widely
used form of presentation. Every instructor should know how to develop and
present a lecture. They also should understand the advantages and limitations
of this method. Lectures are used for introduction of new subjects, summarizing
ideas, showing relationships between theory and practice, and reemphasizing
main points. The lecture method is adaptable to many different settings,
including either small or large groups. Lectures also may be used to introduce
a unit of instruction or a complete training program. Finally, lectures may be
combined with other teaching methods to give added meaning and direction.
The lecture method
of teaching needs to be very flexible since it may be used in different ways.
For example, there are several types of lectures such as the illustrated talk where the speaker
relies heavily on visual aids to convey ideas to the listeners. With a briefing, the speaker presents a
concise array of facts to the listeners who normally do not expect elaboration
of supporting material. During a formal lecture, the speaker's purpose is to
inform, to persuade, or to entertain with little or no verbal participation by
the students. When using a lecture method, the teacher plans and delivers an
oral presentation in a manner that allows some participation by the students
and helps direct them toward the desired learning outcomes.
A
lecture-demonstration method is a teaching technique that combines oral
explanation with "doing" to communicate processes, concepts, and
facts. It is particularly effective in teaching a skill that can be observed. A
skilled educator may wish to both tell and show what steps to take in an
educational process. A demonstration is usually accompanied by a thorough
explanation, which is essentially a lecture.
Lecture –
Demonstration – Performance method of teaching is based on the simple, yet
sound principle that we learn by doing. Students learn physical or mental
skills by actually performing those skills under supervision. An individual
learns to write by writing, to weld by welding, and to fly an aircraft by
actually performing flight manoeuvres. Students also learn mental skills, such
as speed reading, by this method. Skills requiring the use of tools, machines,
and equipment are particularly well suited to this instructional method.
The
lecture-demonstration-performance method is widely used. The science teacher
uses it during laboratory periods, the aircraft maintenance instructor uses it
in the shop, and the flight instructor uses it in teaching piloting skills. In
the lab physics teachers use it for example, to demonstrate the basic law of
magnetism which states that like poles repel while unlike poles attract. Explanations
must be clear, pertinent to the objectives of the particular lesson to be presented,
and based on the known experience and knowledge of the students. In teaching a
skill, the teacher must convey to the students the precise actions they are to
perform. In addition to the necessary steps, the teacher should describe the
end result of these efforts. Before leaving this phase, the teacher should
encourage students to ask questions about any step of the procedure that they
do not understand.
The teacher must
show students the actions necessary to perform a skill. As little extraneous activity
as possible should be included in the demonstration if students are to clearly
understand that the teacher is accurately performing the actions previously
explained. If, due to some unanticipated circumstances the demonstration does
not closely conform to the explanation, this deviation should be immediately
acknowledged and explained.
Because these two
phases, which involve separate actions, are performed concurrently, they are
discussed here under a single heading. The first of these phases is the
student's performance of the physical or mental skills that have been explained
and demonstrated. The second activity is the teacher’s supervision. Student
performance requires students to act and do. To learn skills, students must
practice. The teacher must, therefore, allot enough time for meaningful student
activity. Through doing, students learn to follow correct procedures and to
reach established standards. It is important that students be given an
opportunity to perform the skill as soon as possible after a demonstration. In
flight training, the teacher may allow the student to follow along on the
controls during the demonstration of a manoeuvre. Immediately thereafter, the
teacher should have the student attempt to perform the manoeuvre, coaching as
necessary. In another example, students have been performing a task, such as a
weight and balance computation, as a group. Prior to terminating the
performance phase, they should be allowed to independently complete the task at
least once, with supervision and coaching as necessary.
In this phase, the
teacher judges student performance. The student displays whatever competence
has been attained, and the teacher discovers just how well the skill has been
learned. To test each student's ability to perform, the teacher requires
students to work independently throughout this phase and makes some comment as
to how each performed the skill relative to the way it was taught. From this
measurement of student achievement, the teacher determines the effectiveness of
the instruction.
Obviously, the
aviation teacher is the key to effective teaching. An experienced teacher’s
knowledge and skill regarding methods of instruction may be compared to a
maintenance technician's toolbox. The teacher’s tools are teaching methods.
Just as the technician uses some tools more than others, the teacher will use
some methods more often than others. As is the case with the technician, there
will be times when a less used tool will be the exact tool needed for a
particular situation. The teacher’s success is determined to a large degree by
the ability to organize material and to select and utilize a teaching method
appropriate to a particular lesson.
Inquiry Teaching (sometimes known as the inquiry method) is a
student-centered method of education focused
on asking questions. Students are encouraged to ask questions which are
meaningful to them, and which do not necessarily have easy answers; teachers
are encouraged to avoid giving answers when this is possible, and in any case
to avoid giving direct answers in favour of asking more questions. The method
was advocated by Neil Postman and Charles Weingartner in their book teaching as a
Subversive Activity (1990, p. 34–37).
Teacher adhering to the inquiry
method in pedagogy must behave very differently from a
traditional teacher. Postman and Weingartner suggest
that inquiry teachers have the following characteristics (1990):
·
They avoid telling students what they "ought to
know".
·
They talk to students mostly by questioning, and
especially by asking divergent questions.
·
They do not accept short, simple answers to questions.
·
They encourage students to interact directly with one
another, and avoid judging what is said in student interactions.
·
They do not summarize students' discussion.
·
They do not plan the exact direction of their lessons in
advance, and allow it to develop in response to students' interests.
·
Their lessons pose problems to students.
·
They gauge their success by change in students' inquiry behaviors.
Inquiry is a style or method of teaching where the learner
with minimum guidance from the teacher seeks to discover and create answers to
a recognized problem through procedure of making a diligent search (Callahan
& Clark, 1977; Adedoyin, 1990). Inquiry is a term used in science teaching
that refers to a way of questioning, seeking knowledge or information, or
finding out about phenomena. It involves investigation, searching, defining a
problem, formulating hypothesis, gathering and interpreting data and arriving
at a conclusion. In inquiry situation, students learn not only concepts and principles
but self-direction, responsibility and social communication. It also permits
students to assimilate and accommodate information. Inquiry is the way people
learn when they're left alone. The lecture method is used primarily to
introduce students to a new subject, but it is also a valuable method for
summarizing ideas, showing relationships between theory and practice, and
re-emphasizing main points.
To summarize, inquiry-based teaching is helpful for
students to construct their own meaning and understanding and to gain some
important skills that they can use throughout their lives. Therefore, physics
teachers should encourage inquiry-based learning among students and create
opportunities for them to conduct inquiry about a particular problem or issue.
The main setback is the lack of ICT tools in most of the schools in the Southwest
Region Cameroon.
Cooperative or group learning is an instructional strategy
which organizes students into small groups so that they can work together to
maximize their own and each other's learning. Numerous research studies in
diverse school settings, and across a wide range of subject areas, indicate
promising possibilities for academic achievement with this strategy. For
example, advocates have noted that students completing cooperative learning
group tasks tend to have higher test scores, higher self-esteem, improved
social skills, and greater comprehension of the subjects they are studying.
Numerous other benefits for students have been attributed to these programs. Perhaps
the most significant characteristic of group learning is that it continually
requires active participation of the student in the learning process.
Encouraging students to work or co-operate with each other
in constructing their own understanding has been a highly valued principle of
effective teaching in science (Slavin, 1990; Kagan, 1992& Munro, 1999). The popularity of
co-operative learning rose rapidly during the early 1980s as the use of
individualistic ‘mastery learning’ declined (Jones & Carter, 1998).
Educators realized that the motivational and mediating impact of peer-peer
interactions was the missing part of the individualized mastery instruction.
Therefore, educators viewed co-operative learning to be a more efficient way of
meeting the range of needs of students in a science classroom.
Theoretical foundations of co-operative learning have been
strongly affected by Vygotsky’s ideas about learning. Vygotsky (1928) indicates
that learners do not construct knowledge in isolation but through social
interaction with their peers and thus, the interactions among learners affect
each other’s learning. This implies that working with other students is a
critical component of the process of knowledge construction. Therefore, social
constructivist views imply a social context where ideas and conceptions are
communicated, shared, tested, negotiated, and reported by students and the
teacher (Vygotsky, 1928; Tobin et al, 1990; Driver, Asoko,
et.al 1994). Consequently, the prevailing view of learning in science has been
a social constructivist perspective (Solomon, 1993; Yager,
1995; Jones & Carter, 1998; Tytler, 2002a).
Social constructivist views put a great emphasis on language and communication.
This suggests that students need to talk with their peers
and teacher in order to articulate their prior ideas about a concept and their
explorations made in an investigation, to clarify their thinking and to correct
their misconceptions (Driver et al, 1994; Watts, 1994; Osborne, 1997).
Classroom-based research suggests that students can meet these aims in
co-operative learning groups (Jones & Carter, 1998). Co-operative learning
groups promote community aspects of the classroom and the role of discussion
with peers in helping students to learn science. This offers many benefits for
students for their learning and growth. For example, peer-peer discussions in
co-operative learning groups can promote meaningful learning by helping
learners to help each other to incorporate new experiences and information into
their existing cognitive structures in a non-arbitrary and non-verbatim way (Ausubel, 1968; Novak & Gowin,
1984; Mintzes & Wandersee,
1998). Therefore, it is believed that co-operative learning can foster the
development of deep understanding (Spitulnik, et.al,
1998; Joyce et al, 2000a).
In co-operative learning groups, peers can moderate each
other’s learning in ways that are distinctively different from the teacher’s
methods (Jones and Carter, 1998). As students are at similar developmental
levels (Piaget, 1960 & Vygotsky, 1928), they can sometimes be more
effective than adults in helping individuals to construct meaning. In other
words, since they generally use similar words and terms while speaking, peers
can understand each other’s talk and explanations more easily. For example, a
peer may help a confused student by rewording the teacher’s explanation.
Co-operative learning groups are useful contexts for promoting productive
discussions among students (Kagan, 1992; Osborne, 1997; Johnson et al, 1998),
providing an environment free of some of the social pressures of teaching
science with the teacher (Abrams, 1998). Students may have the opportunity to
reveal their existing ideas and clarify them, ask questions and challenge each
other’s ideas and provide rich interactions for creating connections among
concepts (Spitulnik et al, 1998). Such
discussions may create a pool of students’ ideas and productive arguments over
disagreements. As a result, the exchange of ideas in small groups may promote
the development of complex conceptions (Millar &Driver, 1987).
Furthermore, effective co-operative learning groups can
provide an opportunity for students to give and receive feedback from other
students regarding their understanding (Brown, 1994 & Joyce et al,
2000a, 2000b). Consequently, students can learn from each other and develop a
shared understanding of the topics they are learning. Sharing diverse
experiences enriches a group’s problem solving and creativity skills (Jones
&Carter, 1998). Moreover, seeing that others’ views can enrich and help
their thinking can encourage students to tolerate and accept alternative points
of view as well (Abrams, 1998). In addition, group members benefit from each
other’s existing competencies and skills (Jones & Carter, 1998). For
example, a student who already knows how to handle a thermometer, a balance or
other science laboratory tools can help other members’ in knowledge
construction and skills development. Overall, because of these benefits,
numerous studies in very diverse school settings and across a wide range of
content areas have reported that co-operative learning can positively increase
students’ achievement and develop their skills and attitudes towards the
subject being studied (Sharan & Shacher, 1988; Slavin, 1990; Kagan, 1992; Stahl, 1994; Osborne, 1997 & Johnson et
al, 1998). For example, Sharan & Shacher (1988) reported that students with poor achievement
taught by using a group investigation method throughout a year-long course in
social studies achieved average gains nearly two and a half times those of the
lower achievement students taught by the whole-class method. In fact, they
scored more highly than the higher achieving students taught with whole-class
method. These can be explained by the fact that the shared responsibility and
interaction produce more positive feelings toward tasks and others, generate
better inter-group relationships and result in better self-images for students
(Joyce et al, 2000b). This usually lead to
positive attitudes towards the subject.
However, co-operative learning requires teachers to
carefully plan tasks and to closely monitor students’ access to power and
authority within the group, which can vary according to a myriad of factors
including gender, race, personality and socio-economic status. Without careful
planning and monitoring, despite its wide advantages, co-operative learning can
be of little help to the learner (Jones & Carter, 1998), as it can isolate
and restrict a group member’s access to the materials, ideas and peer assistance.
Physics teachers should encourage cooperative learning in their classrooms
because this will lead to significant improvement in the academic achievement
and positive attitudes of their students toward physics.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This study used quasi experimental design. In
the quasi experimental, three experimental groups were used with one control
group. These groups were; Lecture-demonstration-performance teaching method, n
= 10; Cooperative teaching method, n = 10; Inquiry teaching method, n= 10 and
control group using lecturer method, n =11. The instruments utilized for
the study were a students’ attitudes questionnaire and a
standardized test adapted from demonstration in teaching physics designed by Svedružic (2006).
The two instruments were adapted from some
standardized ones. The questionnaire for form three
students’ evaluation of teacher’s effectiveness was adapted from perceptions of ‘good’ college teaching and student
evaluation of teachers designed by Nasser (2011). The second was adapted from Physics students Attitude
Questionnaire, designed by Hasan and Uğur, (2011). The items in
these instruments were rearranged and reframed so as to make them fit well with
the specific objectives of this study. The questionnaire consisted of five
option Likert Scale type of statements in which the students had to indicate
their degree of agreement by choosing either strongly agreed (SA), agree(A),
Undecided (UD), disagree(D) or strongly disagree (SD) for each of the
statements by ticking his/her chosen option corresponding to each statement
This study assessed and compared the relative effectiveness of four
teaching methods by teaching the students the concepts of temperature, internal
energy, heat-conduction, convection, and radiation. A pre-test post-test
experimental design with a control group was used. A total of forty-one
students were involved in the study. The research instruments developed for the
study were thirteen item Students Attitudes towards Physics Questionnaire
(SAPQ) and a standardized test on the physics concepts taught. The students
were divided into three experimental groups and one control group. Students in
the three experimental groups were subjected to treatment using lecture -
inquiry, lecture-demonstration/performance and cooperative teaching methods
respectively while the students in the control group were taught using the
traditional lecture method. The pre-test was administered to students in all
the four groups before teaching started and after the teaching, a post-test was
administered using the same attitude questionnaire.
In most classrooms around the country today, teachers lecture and give
notes to students. The students are then tested on what they have learned.
However, experiential or “hand-on” teaching is fast replacing or supplementing
the traditional lecture method in the world today. This is because, through
experiments, demonstrations and other participatory activities, Students
discover concepts on their own. Experiential learning increases retention,
motivate students to learn and encourage peer or group cooperation.
According to Hendrickson, attitudes
are the best predictor for estimation of students’ success (Hendrickson, 1997).
Activities must be planned, organized and implemented so that students may
develop more positive attitudes (Pintrich, 1996). As
a science, Physics plays an important role in explaining the events that occur
in the universe. In all events that are around us can be
found physical laws and principles. Although physics is in every area in
our life and facilitate our lives, national and international studies show that
success in physics education is lower than other disciplines (Gok and Silay 2008; Dieck 1997; Rivard and Straw
2000, Mattern and Schau,
2002). In physics education, various methods and techniques can be used
according to the content. Laboratory method, which are
the mostly used method that provides permanent learning, is an educational
method encouraging mental activities and allowing students to work individually
or in groups (Stack, 1995). Laboratory method ensures that students learn ways
to use the knowledge with this method rather than memorizing it. Students
improve their skills to better understand concepts, and adapt them to daily
life as well as their personal skills, and it provides a positive attitude
towards physics lessons (Algan, 1999 and Stack, 1995)
Hypotheses of the Study
The following four hypotheses guided this study;
·
The first
null hypothesis states that, there is no significant relationship between lecture –
demonstration – performance on students’ attitudes towards physics while the alternative hypothesis states that there is a significant
relationship between lecture – demonstration – performance on students’
attitudes towards physics
·
The second
null hypothesis states there is no significant relationship between inquiry – teaching
method and students’ attitudes towards physics while the alternative
hypothesis states that there is a significant
relationship between inquiry – teaching method and students’
attitudes towards physics
·
The third
null hypothesis states that there is no significant relationship between cooperative teaching
method and students’
attitudes towards physics while the alternative hypothesis
states that there is a significant relationship between cooperative teaching
method on students’
attitudes towards physics
·
The fourth
null hypothesis states that there is no significant relationship between lecture method and students’ attitudes towards physics while the alternative
hypothesis states that there is a significant relationship
between lecture method and students’
attitudes towards physics
