1

TITLE PAGE

EFFECTS OF LABORATORY PRACTICAL WORK, DEMONSTRATION METHOD AND LEARNING STYLES ON SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT

AND INTEREST IN CHEMISTRY

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Tables Pages

TITLE PAGE i

APPROVAL PAGE ii

CERTIFICAITON PAGE iii

DEDICATION iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

LIST OF APPENDICES x

LIST OF TABLES xi

ABSTRACT xii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study 1

Statement of the Problem 10

Purpose of the Study 11

Significance of the Study 11

Scope of the Study 12

Research Questions 13

Hypotheses 13

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

Conceptual Framework 15

Chemistry 17

Cooperative Learning 19

Lecture Method 39

Achievement 41

Interest 42

School Location 43

Gender 45

Theoretical Framework 47

Vygotsky Theory of Learning 47

Related Empirical Studies 49

Cooperative Learning and Achievement in Chemistry 49

vii

3

Gender and Achievement in Chemistry 54

School Location and Achievement in Chemistry 58

Interest and Achievement in Chemistry 59

Summary of Literature Review 61

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHOD

Design of the Study 64

Area of the Study 65

Population of the Study 65

Sample and Sampling Technique 65

Instrument for Data Collection 66

Validation of Instrument 66

Reliability of Instrument 67

Experimental Procedures 67

Control of Experimental Variables 69

Method of Data Analysis 70

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS

Research Question One 71

Research Question Two 71

Research Question Three 72

Research Question Four 73

Research Question Five 73

Research Question Six 74

Research Question Seven 75

Research Question Eight 76

Research Hypothesis One 76

Research Hypothesis Two 77

Research Hypothesis Three 77

Research Hypothesis Four 78

Research Hypothesis Five 79

Research Hypothesis Six 79

Research Hypothesis Seven 80

Research Hypothesis Eight 80

viii

4

Summary of the Findings 80

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS

AND SUMMARY

Discussion of Findings 82

Conclusions 86

Educational Implications of the Findings 86

Recommendations 87

Limitations of the Study 88

Suggestions for Further Research 88

Summary of the Study 88

References 91

Appendices 102

ix

5

APPENDICES

A: Chemistry Achievement Test Questions CAT (multiple choice questions) 102

B: Marking Guide for the Chemistry Achievement Test Questions 104

C: Chemistry Interest Inventory Scale (CII) used for the Study. 106

D: Table of Specification for the Chemistry Achievement Test Questions (CAT) 108

E: Computation of Reliability of CAT. 109

F: Computation of Reliability of CII. 114

G: Population of SS2 Chemistry Students in Abakaliki Education Zone

for 2015/2016 Academic Session. 134

H: Sample size of SS2 Chemistry Students in Urban and Rural Schools. 136

I: Request for Validation of Research Instrument. 137

J: Some of the Correction Recommendations Made by the Validates. 138

K: Lesson Notes on Cooperative Learning 142

L: Lesson Notes on Conventional Lecture Method 158

x

6

LIST OF TABLES

1: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students to taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with the lecture method. 71

2: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of male and female students in chemistry. 72

3: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. 72

4: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught usinglecture method. 73

5: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of male and female students in chemistry. 74

6: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. 74

7: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students for the interaction effect of method and gender. 75

8: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students for the interaction effect of method and location. 76

9: Analysis of covariance of the effect of method on students’ achievement in chemistry 77

10: Analysis of covariance for the influence of location on students’ achievement in chemistry 78

11: Analysis of covariance of the effect of method on students’ interest in chemistry 78

12: Analysis of covariance for the influence of location on students’ Interest in chemistry 79

xi

7

ABSTRACT

The study investigated the Effects Of Laboratory Practical Work, Demonstration Method And Learning Styles On Secondary School Students’ Achievement And Interest In Chemistry. Eight research questions and Eight null hypothesis which were tested at 0.05 level of significance guided the study. Quasi-experimental research design was adopted for the study. The population of the study was 1175 SS II students in the said zone. The sample of the study was 160 SS II students. Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) and Chemistry Interest Inventory (CII) were used for data collection. Three experts carried out construct, face and content validity on the instruments. The reliability coefficients of 0.914 and 0.861 were obtained for CAT and CII respectively. Mean and standard deviation were used to answer research questions and ANCOVA was used to test research hypothesis at 0.05 level of significance. The findings of the study showed that cooperative learning strategy significantly enhanced academic achievement and interest of students in chemistry more than the conventional lecture method. Gender had a significant main effect on the achievement and interest of students in chemistry which shows that male students achieved higher in chemistry more than the female students when exposed to cooperative learning strategy. Location of school was not a significant factor on students’ achievement and interest in chemistry when taught using cooperative learning strategy. It was recommended among others that teacher training institutions such as colleges of Education and the universities should adopt cooperative learning strategy as a teaching strategy for teaching their students, since those students will turn out to be chemistry teachers in secondary schools.

xii

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Science is a human endeavour that consists of process and product. It is dynamic and

essentially concerned with search and explanation of both regularities and irregularities in

nature. It embraces every attempt of humans to explore, interpret and manage the natural

world (Garuba, Agweda & Abumere, 2012). Science is the systematic study of anything that

can be examined, tested and verified (Agugu 2012). The word Science is derived from the

Latin word “Scientia” meaning to know (Nwankwo, 1998). Science is a systematic process of

obtaining testable or verifiable knowledge about nature and natural occurrences, utilizing

careful observation and experimentation (Okeke, 2008). Science is a systematic study of the

universe and environment through observation and experimentation leading to production of

an organized body of knowledge (Njoku, 2013). Science as a field of study has enormous

contributions to national development. The study of science allows learners to experience the

richness and excitement of the natural world as they engage in inquiry, critical thinking and

demonstration of skills. Science also transforms the environment towards improving the

general quality of life, thus making the world a better place to live. Science is the bedrock of

technological development. It equally facilitates and enhances industrial and technological

progress among the people and within a nation. For these reasons the federal Government of

Nigeria advocates the study of science at all levels of the nations education for the production

of adequate number of scientists to inspire and support development (FGN, 2008).

Science as fields of study have many branches all working together to achieve a

common goal. These branches are divided into three major groups which are:

Natural sciences which studies natural phenomena including fundamental forces and

biological life.

1

2

Formal sciences such as mathematics and logic which use apriori as opposed to factual

methodology and;

Social sciences which studies human behavior and societies. The natural and social

sciences are empirical science, meaning that the knowledge must be based on

observable phenomena and must be capable of being verified by other researchers

working under the same conditions. (Opara, 2004: 5).

The natural sciences are made up of sub-fields such as physical science, biological

science and applied science. Chemistry is one of the basic units of the physical science which

studies matter and the changes they undergo. It studies various substances, atoms, molecules

and matter. Chemistry as a subject studies the composition and properties of matter, their

reactions and uses of such reactions to form new substance. Chemistry is part of everything in

our lives. Every material in existence is made up of matter – even our own bodies. Chemistry

is involved in everything we do, from growing and cooking food, to cleaning our homes and

bodies, to launching a space shuttle. Chemistry is one of the physical sciences that help us to

describe and explain our world.

From the foregoing, the role of chemistry in the development of the scientific base of

a country cannot be overemphasized and Nigeria is not an exception. Yet with the increasing

importance of chemistry to the unfolding world, the achievement of students in the subject at

the secondary school remains a dismal failure (Saage 2009). However it is disappointing to

note that students’ achievement in chemistry at internal and external examination has

remained considerably poor despite the relative importance of chemistry Saage, (2009).

Several factors have been advanced to account for students’ poor achievement in chemistry.

Kosau, (2006) reported that such factors include the student’s factor, teacher’s factor, societal

factor, the governmental infrastructural problem, language problem, examination body

related variables, curriculum related variables, tested variables, and textbook selected

variables and home related variables. Saage (2009) also identified specific variable such as

3

poor primary school background in science, lack of incentives for test, lack of interest on the

part of the students, students not interested in hard work, incompetent teachers in the primary

school, large class, fear of the subject psychologically etc.

Student’s achievement in chemistry at the secondary school level is deteriorating

every year. This statement is re-iterated by WAEC Chief Examiners’ Report (2014:5) “the

questions are generally within the scope of the students, although the achievements of the

students bellied the quality and simplicity of the questions”. This poor achievement has been

attributed to so many factors, some which have been mentioned, but primarily the method

used by the chemistry teachers which is the conventional method or lecture method has been

adduced to be one of the major problems (Igboanugo, 2013). This method makes students to

be passive listeners in the classroom learning. For lecture method, lectures are delivered to

students from notes or textbooks, with little discussion. So no serious effort is made to

engage the bored minds of the students. This usually leads to a situation whereby students

complete their courses or study but still lacking in a coherent body of knowledge or any

inkling to how one chemistry concepts relates to the others. The students may likely graduate

without knowing how to think logically and carryout simple experiment in chemistry.

(Igbokwe, 2007), notes that the lecture method of teaching is familiar, easy and required no

imagination. Perhaps, this is why it is the dominant method of teaching in secondary schools,

colleges and universities. As of the short-comings of the existing science teaching methods,

the researcher has decided to investigate the effect of a novel teaching method-cooperative

learning strategy and interest on student’s achievement in chemistry.

Cooperative learning refers to the instructional strategies in which pairs of small

group of learners work together to accomplish a shared goal (Ogbu2008). The purpose of

cooperation is for learners to maximize their own and each others’ learning, with members of

the group all striving for joint benefit. Cooperative learning according to Adams (2013),

4

employed many of the following characteristics and strategies in the class room: positive

inter-dependence, face to face interactions, individual accountability, social skills and group

processing.

Group work has served as a pedagogical tool in a variety of learning situations. Ogbu

(2008), explains that group work is the act of working together with a group of people all

trying to solve the same problem. This strategy is different from a situation where the teacher

leads and dominates learning activities thereby having all decision made regarding purposes,

content and participation in his/her hands.

In recent times, more effort has been made towards bringing into reality what goes on

in the society into the classroom setting. It has been discovered that various skills are needed

to function in the society as human beings, since life is not a solitary existence that which

must be lived in the company of others. Cooperative learning as an aspect of learning is both

a fact of life and a realistic aspect of existence have learned skills. For example, skills of

critical thinking, and interdependent ingoing and group participatory behavior are some of the

skills of cooperative learning. In cooperation, students experience a joint workspace. The

essential elements of cooperative learning are; positive interdependence, face to face

promotive interaction, individual and group accountability, interpersonal and small group

skills and group processing. Through a deliberate application of cooperative learning

strategies in the classroom, educators aim at correcting the unconscious societal and

educational bias that requires competition. Huang and Su (2010) are of the view that because

cooperative learning groups have active interdependence, it will cultivate team spirit of

students penetrating into the teaching of the class, as well as lay a good foundation of

development of I Q for students entering the society. This assertion is in line with the

observation of Mezieobi (2009) that: “When students acquire values or cooperation, self

discipline orderliness, group work, attitude and harmonious cohesive behavior, as a result of

5

the level of classroom interactive situation created by the teacher, they are equipped with

good citizens’ skills for cooperative nation building and development(p.79)”.

The above views from different researchers point to the fact that cooperative learning

is very useful to the learners in particular and the society as a whole. It has been argued that

though cooperative learning strategy has been tried in teaching arts and commercial subjects

(Adams, 2013), many chemistry teachers have not been trained or be made aware of the

benefits of this strategy in non-practical situation. Consequently, there is the need to test the

benefits claimed by researchers on cooperative leaning strategy in non-practical chemistry

learning situations. Cooperative learning strategy is different from other types of group work

done by students because it has the underlying philosophy that knowledge is essentially

social in nature. It is a give and take process that depends on interaction with other

individuals during learning situations. In other words, as a matter of fact, students learn from

each other through communication and cooperative efforts. Also in this learning strategy, the

teacher acts as an organizer, a facilitator and to a varying degree as a resource person.

According to Yamarik (2007), cooperative learning strategies have demonstrated the ability

to outperform teacher-centered strategies in the classroom, especially in social studies. From

the foregoing, it can be deduced that a cooperative learning interaction in the science

classroom, especially in chemistry may offers students the opportunity to develop interest in

chemistry, as well as record positive achievement in the subject. Hence learning

cooperatively by interaction between students enables them to not only work together in

solving problems easily, but also making wise decisions using both thoughts and teaching or

logic and intuition.

Closely related to cooperative learning strategy of teaching is interest of students in

chemistry learning. Interest is an important variable in the academic achievement of

chemistry because when one is interested in chemistry, one becomes eager to learn it. Interest

6

is a persisting inclination to be attentive and enjoy some activities in contents. Paul (2013),

observes that Interest can help learners think more clearly, understand more deeply and

remember more accurately. According to the author, interest has power to transform

struggling performance in learners to a new academic achievement. Subramanian (2009),

observes interest as a psychological stage of engagement, experience in the moment and

proposition to engage repeatedly with particular ideas events or objects. According to the

author, interest acts as an urge and it is considered as a cognitive and affective state. Interest

enables learners to employ more effective learning strategies such as critical thinking and

making connections between old and new learning experiences. It is therefore important for

teachers to be acquainted with adequate teaching methods or strategies and materials which

will increase students’ interest in chemistry. Therefore in the teaching and learning of

chemistry in secondary school, it is necessary to arouse the interest of students so as to

enhance students’ achievement in chemistry. The researcher is of the opinion that if

cooperative learning strategy is used in the teaching of chemistry, it will enhance the interest

of students in chemistry thereby promoting better achievement in the subject.

However, although there is a general belief that students’ poor achievement in

chemistry could be traced to inappropriate method of teaching used by teachers and low or

lack of interest on the part of the students, some intervening variables such as gender and

school location of students can also affect the achievement of students’ in chemistry.

Gender is a variable which plays an important role in the learning process. According

to Ezeh (2013:7), “Gender refers to one’s subjective feeling of ‘maleness’ and ‘femaleness’

irrespective of one’s sex. It is generally classified into masculine and feminine and concerned

with attitude that describes males and females in the social and cultural context”. Chukwu

(2012), sees gender as the behavioural, cultural and psychological characteristics associated

with boys and girls which may influence their academic achievement. This involves all

7

characteristics of men and women which a particular society has determined and assigned to

each sex. The issue of gender is an important one in science education especially with

increasing emphasis on ways of boosting manpower for technological development as well as

increasing the population of females in science and technology fields (UNESCO, 2009). In

Nigeria, and perhaps the whole of Africa, gender bias is still very prevalent (Nwosu, 2012).

This is a view to which Onuigbo (2009) has also alluded in pointing out that: “girls are

naturally perceived to be weak and should study courses that are not very difficult like such

as food science, education and English. The boys are seen to be strong and should take

subjects that are scientific and require calculations such as physics, chemistry and

mathematics and other courses such as medicine, engineering, aeronautics or astronomy. This

implies that societal norms influence people actions (p.183)”. It is common place to see

gender stereotypes manifesting in the day-to-day life of an average Nigerian. Certain

vocations and professions have traditionally been regarded as men’s (Medicine, Engineering,

Architecture) and others women (Nursing, catering, typing, arts). Typically, parents call boys

to wash cars, cut grass, fix bulbs or climb ladders to fix or remove things. On the other hand,

chores such as washing dishes, cooking, clearing and so on are reserve for girls. In a nutshell,

what are regarded as complex and difficult tasks are allotted to boys, whereas girls are

expected to handle the relatively easy and less demanding task.

As a result of this way of thinking, the larger society has tended to see females as the

“weaker sex”. Consequently, an average Nigerian child goes to school with these fixed

stereotypes. Gender issues, both on the part of the teachers and students have been

documented to affect learning generally (Erinoso, 2005). Conflicting results in gender-related

research should, however be expected as studies vary in their learning content. These include

the methodology, populations, geography, and research task and classroom interactions.

8

Viann, (2002) carried out a research to investigate gender differences and the effects

of cooperative learning interactions in science classroom using individualized learning

method with three treatment sections using cooperative learning strategy based on learning

together model of Johnson and Johnson (1991), the result shows non-significant gender-

related differences but females achieved slightly higher grades than males. Samuel and John

(2004), examined how the cooperative class experiment (CCE) teaching methods affects

students’ achievement in chemistry. They found that there was no significant difference in

gender achievement between the experimental and control groups, but girls had a slightly

higher mean score than boys did.

Kolawole (2007) found that boys performed better than girls in both competitive and

cooperative learning strategies when the researcher carried out a research on the effects of

competitive and cooperative learning strategies on Nigerian student’s academic performance

in mathematics. Billings (2000); Agnele and Uhumniah (2008), found out in their studies at

various times, that male students achieved significantly better than female students in science

education. These differences in achievement according to the researchers may be attributed to

gender stereotyping which encourages male and female students to show interest in subject

relevant and related to the roles expected of them in the society.

All the above findings are inconclusive in their respective reports as to whether

females and males differ in the way they learn and interact cooperatively in chemistry and

science classroom. Also none of the research showed effect of gender on students’ interest in

chemistry. It is therefore important to find out in clear terms any gender differences in

cooperative learning strategy in chemistry among secondary school students.

Closely related to gender influence on students achievement in chemistry is location

of school. The location of school has a lot to do with how a child learns in school. Location is

a particular position or geographical area. It can also mean a settlement, whether a village,

9

town or city usually occupied by human beings (Marja, 2006). School location simply refers

to the geographical area where the school is located, whether in Urban or Rural area.

Differentiation between urban and rural area are demographically done by the government

offices of regional planning and development. Urban area schools are believed to have social

facilities, while rural area schools are believed to lack social facilities such as electricity,

pipe-borne water supply, tarred roads, well-equipped laboratories and qualified teachers

among others. However, the specific problems of teaching chemistry in urban and rural

schools and whether students achieve significantly better in any of the locations when taught

using cooperative learning strategy have not been adequately investigated. Also, there are

contrary views as regards the effects of school location and students academic achievement in

the few researches carried out. Bodunde (2010), reports that school location is a significant

factor in students’ achievement in oral English. Uzoegwu (2004), also reports that school

location has significant effect on the academic achievement of students in essay writing,

while Yusuf and Adigun (2010), shows that location has no effect on students academic

achievement. Nbina and Obomanu (2011), observed that federal and State governments in

Nigeria have been making concerted efforts to improve the educational system in the rural

areas using certain educational management commissions to ensure that qualified teachers

who have been trained using cooperative learning strategy and facilities that will enhance

student’s academic achievement are sent to rural schools. These efforts by the government

notwithstanding, secondary school in rural areas appear to be disadvantaged in areas of

infrastructure. The researchers also observed that most rural secondary schools are not well-

equipped as most urban secondary schools. Furthermore, well-trained and more

technologically informed teachers prefer posting to urban schools than rural schools. Hence,

it is important to investigate whether school location influences students’ achievement in

10

chemistry and any relationship between students’ interests and achievement in rural and

urban schools, when students are taught using cooperative learning strategy.

Based on the previous studies, the effect of cooperative learning strategy, interest,

school location and gender on students’ achievement seem to be inconsistent and

contradictory. This calls for continuous and further research on the effect of cooperative

learning strategies, interest, school location and gender on students’ academic achievement

from time to time and place to place. Consequently, this study seeks to investigate the effect

of cooperative learning strategy and students’ achievement and interest in chemistry in

Abakaliki education zone of Ebonyi State.

Statement of the Problem

There have been consistent reports of poor achievement in chemistry among

Nigerians students over the years. Also, results on students’ achievement in senior secondary

certificate examination (SSCE) in chemistry over the year have not been commendable.

Failure in this subject area has been attributed to the methods and strategies of teaching

adopted by the teachers. The lecture method employed by teachers in the teaching of

chemistry at the senior secondary school have been found to have some limitations, one of

which is that it is teacher-centered instead of learner-centered. Also, the poor achievement of

students in chemistry at the secondary school level may also be as a result of interest of

students in the subjects. It has been observed that student’s lack of interest in chemistry could

also be traced to inappropriate method of teaching used by the teachers.

There is the need to address this problem in order to enhance students’ interest and

achievement in chemistry in both internal and external examinations. It is assumed that the

method used in teaching chemistry has a great role to play in the alleviation of this problem,

and that the use of cooperative learning strategy could help in this regard. Therefore, the

11

problem of this study put in question form is: what is the effect of cooperative learning

strategy on senior secondary school student achievement and interest in chemistry?

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to ascertain the Effects Of Laboratory Practical Work,

Demonstration Method And Learning Styles On Secondary School Students’ Achievement

And Interest In Chemistry

Specifically, the study seeks to:

1. find out the mean achievement scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative

learning strategy and those taught using lecture method.

2. ascertain the influence of gender on the mean achievement scores of students in

chemistry.

3. ascertain the influence of school location on the mean achievement scores of student in

chemistry.

4. ascertain the effect of cooperative learning strategy on the interest of chemistry students.

5. ascertain the influence of gender on the interest of chemistry students.

6. ascertain the influence of school location on the interest of chemistry students.

7. ascertain the interaction effect between method and gender on students’ mean

achievement scores in chemistry.

8. ascertain the interaction effect between method and school location on students’ mean

achievement scores in chemistry.

Significance of the Study

The findings of the study when implemented will have both practical and theoretical

significance. The theoretical significance of this study its result will throw more light on

Vygotsky theory of learning (1978) which explains that the process of intellectual

development takes place with social and cultural contents. The findings of this present study

12

will either support or disagree with Vygotsky’s theory which also views learning as a process

that requires environmental input and social interaction. This theory shows how, within a set

environment, individuals serve as each others’ monitors, supporters and guides. Also this

study is theoretically significant because it will provide insight into the currently existing

theories on cooperative learning strategy, which is thought to reduce students’ passivity and

competition in classroom learning situation, thereby facilitating the effective acquisition of

collaborative skills in chemistry.

The findings of this study will benefit the students, teachers, education authorities,

and curriculum developers. The students will benefit from the findings of this study because

the use of cooperative learning strategy will improve their achievement in chemistry.

Applications of the findings of this study pedagogically, will reduce the teacher’s

stress in the classroom as most of the learning activities will be carried out by the students

while the teacher will just be a facilitator of learning. The findings of this study will enable

education authorities to organize seminars and workshops where they will enlighten the

chemistry teachers on how to use cooperative learning strategy and on the teachers the

necessity to use the strategy in their various schools as it will help improve their students’

achievement in chemistry.

Curriculum developers will also benefit from the findings of this study. They will

include the strategy as an innovation in science teaching strategy in secondary school

curriculum. The strategy will also be included in the curriculum used for training teachers.

Scope of the Study

This study will be carried out in Abakaliki education zone of Ebonyi State. Senior

Secondary School Two (SS II) students will be used for this study. The choice of SSII is

made because of students’ achievement in chemistry at this level is very poor in Abakaliki

education zone. (Source: Secondary Education Board, Ugwuachara Abakaliki). The

13

researcher intends to investigate the effect of cooperative learning strategy on students’

achievement and interest in chemistry in this education zone.

The study will cover some selected topics in Senior Secondary School two (SSII)

chemistry curriculums. The topics includes: periodic table of elements, rate of chemical

reaction, oxidation-reduction reaction and energy changes in chemical reaction. The

researcher chose these topics because they are appropriate for the students’ level and are

enshrined in the SS2 curriculum. Also these topics were selected because they fall within the

period they will be taught to students as contained in the SS2 scheme of work for the term.

Research Questions

The following research questions guided this study:

1. What are the mean achievement scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative

learning strategy and those taught using the lecture method?

2. What are the mean achievement scores of male and female students in chemistry?

3. What are the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry?

4. What is the effect of cooperative learning strategy on the interest of chemistry students?

5. What is the effect of gender on the interest of chemistry students?

6. What is the effect of school location on the interest of chemistry students?

7. What is the interaction effect of method and gender on students’ mean achievement

scores in chemistry?

8. What is the interaction effect of method and school location on students’ mean

achievement scores in chemistry?

Hypotheses

The following null Hypotheses guided this study and was be tested at 0.05 level of

significance.

14

H01: There is no significance difference between the mean achievement scores of students

taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the

lecture method.

H02: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of male and

female students in chemistry.

H03: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of urban and

rural student in chemistry.

H04: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of students taught

chemistry using the cooperative learning strategy and those taught using lecture

method.

H05: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of male and

female students in chemistry when taught using cooperative learning strategy.

H06: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of urban and rural

student in chemistry.

H07: There is no significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ means

achievement scores in chemistry.

H08: There is no significant interaction effect of method and school location on students’

mean achievement scores in chemistry.

15

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This chapter present review of related literature under the following heading;

conceptual framework, theoretical framework, the review of empirical studies and summary

of literature review.

Conceptual Framework

• Chemistry

• Cooperative learning

• Lecture method

• Achievement

• Interest

• Gender

• School location

Theoretical Framework

• Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of cooperative learning

Review of Related Empirical Studies

• Cooperative learning and achievement in chemistry

• Gender and achievement in chemistry

• School location and achievement in chemistry

•Interest and achievement in chemistry

Summary of Literature Review

15

16

Fig. 1: Schematic diagram for the study of the effect of cooperative learning strategy on

students’ achievement and interest in chemistry.

The figure above begins with a focus on chemistry which is the subject area. This

research work is considering. Chemistry is a physical science subject which studies the

composition, structure and uses of matter. It also studies the changes matter undergo during

chemical reaction. Chemistry is an important science subject that students at the senior

secondary school level who intends to chose a career in science is expected to study. This is

InterestThis is what influences students learning behaviour and intention to participate in teaching and a learning process

Achievement This is doing something successfully typically by effort, courage and skills

ChemistryIs a branch of physical science, which studies the composition, properties and behaviour of matter.

Cooperative Learning StrategyA method of teaching involving the pairing or grouping of students in learning situation.

Lecture MethodA method of teaching involving the teacher dictating notes or content of a topic verbally or orally to students in learning situation.

Students

Gender Is a psychological term describing behaviour and attributes expected of individuals on the basis of being born as a male or female.

School LocationRefers to where the school is located, whether in urban or rural area.

Teaching MethodThis is a recognized and systematic way of performing a task of teaching.

17

because chemistry is one of the basic units of science and anyone who intends to excel in

science related career is expected to have background knowledge of chemistry.

Chemistry as a subject cannot be effectively impacted on learners without the teacher

using a method of teaching. Method of teaching is a major determinant in every learning

situation. That is, a recognized and systematic way of performing a task of teaching. The

teaching method based on the present study includes the cooperative learning strategy and the

lecture method of teaching. For this diagram, the method of teaching used by the teacher

determines the extent which the students are able to learn the content of topic they are

exposed to. Also, gender of students and the location of the school play a vital role on

students’ interest in learning and consequently their achievement in a learning situation. Each

aspect of the diagramed model is well represented in the conceptual, theoretical and empirical

framework of this present study. Therefore, this study will investigate the effect of

cooperative learning strategy on student’s achievement and interest in chemistry.

Chemistry

Chemistry is a physical science which studies the composition, properties and

behavior of matter. As a fundamental component of matter, the atom is the basic unit of

chemistry (Opara, 2004:10). Chemistry is concerned with atoms and their interactions with

other atoms, with particular focus on the properties of the chemical bond formed between

species. Chemistry is also concerned with various forms of energy (e.g photochemical

reactions, oxidation-reduction reactions, changes in phases of matter, separation of mixture,

properties of polymers etc). Chemistry is sometimes called “the central science” because it

bridges other natural science like physics, biology and geology with each other.

Chemistry studies how matter combines or separates to form other substances and

how other substances interact with energy (Ababio, 2013). According to the author, people

think of chemists as scientists wearing white coats and mixing strange liquids in a laboratory,

18

but the truth is that we are all chemist. Doctor, nurses and veterinaries must study chemistry,

but understanding basic chemistry concepts is important for almost every field of study.

Chemistry as a physical science subject has five main branches, each of which has

many areas of study. These branches include: Analytical chemistry, physical chemistry,

organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry and biochemistry. Within these broad categories are

countless fields of study, many of which have important effects on our daily life. Chemists

improve many products from the food we eat and the clothing we wear to the materials with

which we build our homes (Opara, 2004:11). According to the author, food chemists improve

the quality, safety, storage and taste of our food. They work to develop new products or

improve processing; they test products to supply information, used for the nutrition labels or

to determine how packaging and storage affects the safety and quality of food. Chemistry

helps to protect our environment and searches for new sources of energy. Environmental

chemists study how chemicals interact with the natural environment. Environmental

chemistry is an interdisciplinary study that involves both analytical chemistry and

understanding of environmental science. Environmental chemist must first understand the

chemicals and chemical reactions present in natural processes in the soil, water and air.

Through sampling and analysis, they are able to determine if human activities have

contaminated the environment or cause harmful reactions to it.

The issue of substances and chemical reactions that affects the environment is the

major concern of agricultural chemistry. In order words, agricultural chemistry is concerned

with the substances and chemical reactions that are involved with the production, protection

and use of crops. It is a highly interdisciplinary field that relies on many other sciences.

Agricultural chemists develop fertilizers, insecticides and herbicides necessary for large scale

crop production. They also monitor how these products are used and their impacts on the

environment. Agricultural biotechnology is an aspect of agricultural chemistry which has

19

helped in genetically manipulates crops to be resistant to the herbicides used to control weeds

in the field of agriculture.

Chemical engineering is an aspect of chemistry which combines a background in

chemistry with engineering and economics concepts to solve technological problems.

Industries require chemical engineers to devise new ways to make the manufacturing of their

products easier and more cost effective. Chemical engineers are involved in designing and

operating processing plants, develop safety procedures for handling dangerous materials and

supervise the manufacture of nearly every product we use. Chemical engineers work to

develop new products and processes in every field. Apart from chemical engineering another

aspect of chemistry worth of mention because of its importance is Geochemistry.

Geochemistry is an aspect of chemistry that combines chemistry and geology to study

the make up and interaction between substances found in the earth. Geochemists determine

how mining operations and waste can affect water quality and the environment. Petroleum

geochemists are employed by oil and gas companies to help find new energy reserves.

Cooperative Learning

Cooperative learning as “the instructional use of small groups so that students work

together to maximize their own and each others learning” (Johnson, Johnson and Smith,

1991: 33). The authors also define three broad categories for cooperative learning groups:

Formal cooperative learning groups used to teach content and problem solving skills;

informal cooperative base group that ensure active processing during a lecture, and

cooperative base group that provides long-term academic support. To be genuinely

cooperative, each type of group requires the presence of five basic elements. These are

“positive interdependence (a sense of sink or swim together); individual accountability (each

team member has to contribute and learn; interpersonal skills, communication, trust,

leadership, decision making, and conflict resolution); Face-to-face promotive interaction, and

20

processing (tem reflection on how well the team is functioning and how to function even

better” (Johnson & Johnson, 2002a).

In their meta-analysis of effect of small group learning on undergraduate n

mathematics, engineering and technology, spring, Stanne and Donovan (1997), defines

cooperative learning as a teaching technique that brings students together to learn in small,

heterogeneous groups. In these groups, students work interdependently without constant and

direct supervision from the teacher. Assignments are structured so that everyone contributes

challenges as well as rewards are shared brainstorming, lively discussion, and collaboration

are the hallmarks of the cooperative-learning classroom. Cooperative learning is not the same

as ability grouping where a teacher divides up the class in order to instruct students with

similar skills. Cooperative learning is not having students sit side by side at the same table to

talk while they complete individual assignments. Cooperative learning is not assigning a task

to a group in which one student does the work and the others get equal credit.

According to the authors, cooperative learning shows real scientific experience in

which scientist work together, not isolation, to solve difficult problems, with cooperative

learning; the classroom becomes a fertile environment for ideas and novel solutions.

Cooperative learning empowers and involves students in that it raises students’ self-esteem

because they are learning something on their own through cooperation, rather than being

handed prepackaged knowledge. It helps students become self-sufficient, self-directed,

lifelong learners. In a cooperative learning environment, students are less dependent on the

teacher for knowledge and this enhance intellectual development and better academic

performance. Cooperative learning serves the heterogeneous classroom, in the sense that with

group work, everyone has the chance to participate, and everyone has a role to play. As

students join forces to achieve a common goal they come to recognize commonalities that cut

across differences related to ethnicity, socio-economic background, and gender. Likewise,

21

cooperative learning provides an excellent vehicle for students of differing ability level to

work together in a positive way. Challenged students can interact successfully with average

and advanced students and in so doing can learn that they have something to offer.

Cooperative learning strengthens interpersonal skill this is because group task are

structured so that students must cooperate to succeed. Students quickly understand that they

will sink or swim together by how constructively they interact. Consequently, students

develop important interpersonal and social skills, that help them function in a group setting

and that twill ultimately benefit them socially at work, and in other situation. Cooperative

learning helps students develop appropriate social skill, in that when doing cooperative group

work students channel their energies into constructive task while satisfying their fundamental

need for social interaction. Cooperative learning is an effective management tool because;

establishing cooperative learning in the classroom requires the teacher to relinquish some

control, so the students themselves can become responsible for building their own

knowledge. Working in groups to probe and investigate ideas, answers, questions, and draw

conclusions about observations allows students to discover and discuss concepts in their own

language. When students learn through cooperation, the knowledge derived becomes their

own, not just a loan of the teachers ideas or those from the textbooks (Godwin, 1999:20).

Cooperative learning interactions help students to develop their emotional

intelligence, since working together involves the interactions of the emotions of the group

member which eventually promote higher academic achievements for the students in all

subject areas. Cooperative learning is an effective tool for meeting the individual needs of

students. Cooperative learning builds relationships among students where relationships might

not have developed before. Students are required to interact with each other as individuals

with common goals. In so doing, students learn more about each others personal

22

characteristics, manage their emotions and that of others and as a result, many stereotypes are

destroyed.

Cooperative learning enhances social interaction, which is essential to meet the needs

of at risk students (Slavin, Karwelt, and Madden, 1989; Johnson, 1998). Within the

framework of cooperative learning groups, students learn how to interact with their peers and

increase involvement with the school community. Positive interaction does not always occur

naturally and social skills instruction must precede and concur with the cooperative learning

strategies. Social skills encompass communicating, building and maintaining trust, providing

leadership, and managing conflicts (Godwin 1999). In two studies (Nelson & Johnson, 1996;

Peter, Bruhl, & Serna, 1998) found that students with behaviour disorder who do not receive

social skills instruction perform better with direct instruction method and that student who

did receive social skills instruction perform better with cooperative groups methods.

Cooperative learning has been found to be a successful teaching strategy at all levels,

from pre-school to post secondary. The developmental characteristics of middle school

students makes cooperative learning a good fit of teaching strategy for the needs of students.

Young adolescent need to socialize, be a part of group, share feelings, receive emotional

support, and then to see things from other perspectives. Cooperative learning groups do not

separate students on the basic of class, race, or gender and the goals of middle schools are

consistent with the goals of cooperative learning theories. It is a peer-centered pedagogy that

promotes academic achievement and builds positive social relationships (Sapon-Shevin,

1994). From the various definitions of authors given above, cooperative learning strategy is a

method of teaching involves the pairing or grouping of students in learning situation. It is a

kind of students centered type of teaching were the student discusses a concept among

themselves and find solution to the problem and the teacher only act as a facilitator and not as

the instructor. Cooperative learning strategy helps to eliminate the teacher centered methods

23

of teaching and enables the students be an active participant in the teaching-learning process.

This leads to a sense of belonging and motivation on the part of the students. Also, it

enhances team spirit among students which in-turn prepares them individually for life in the

longer society. From the literature review, it was observed that cooperative learning strategy

has been an effective teaching method in impacting knowledge especially in practical

learning situation. However, this method has not been used effectively in a non-practical

situation. Hence the researcher identifies this gap and intends to fill it. Therefore, the present

study will investigate the effect of cooperative learning strategy on student achievement and

interest in chemistry.

Models of Cooperative Learning

Slavin (1995) Model of Cooperative Learning

While there is a fair consensus among researchers about the positive effect of

cooperative learning on students’ achievement, there remains a controversy about why and

how cooperative learning methods affects achievement and, most importantly, under what

conditions cooperative learning has these effects. In earlier work, Slavin (1995) identified

motivation, social cohesion, cognitive-developmental and cognitive elaborations as the major

theoretical perspectives on the achievement effects of cooperative learning.

The Motivationlist perspective presumes that task motivation is the single most

impactful part of the learning process, asserting that the other process such as planning and

helping are driven by individuals’ motivated interest. Motivationlist- oriented scholars focus

more on the reward or goal structure under which students operate, even going as far as to

suggest that under some circumstance, interaction may not be necessary for the benefits of

cooperative goal structure to manifest (Slavin, 1995). By contrast, the social cohesion

perspective (also called interdependent theory) suggests that the effect of cooperative

learning is largely dependent on the cohesiveness of the group. This perspective holds that

24

students help each other to learn because they care about the group and it’s member and come

to derive self-identity benefits from group membership (Johnson and Johnson, 1998). The

two cognitive perspective focus on the interactions among groups of students, holding that in

themselves, these interactions leads to better learning and thus better achievement. Within the

general cognitive heading, developmentalist, attributes these effect to processes outlined by

scholars such as Piaget and Vygotsky. Work from the cognitive elaboration perspective

asserts that learners must engage in some manner of cognitive restructuring (elaboration) of

new materials in order to learn them. Cooperative learning is said to facilitate that process

one reason for the continued lack of consensus among cooperative learning scholars is that

adherents of each perspective tend to approach the topic without reference to the body of

similar work from other perspectives.

The following are some theoretical perspectives on cooperative learning strategies:

Motivational Perspectives: Motivational perspectives on cooperative learning posit that task

motivation is the most important part of the process believing that the other processes are

drawn primarily by motivation. From a Motivationlist perspectives (e.g. Johnson and

Johnson, 1998; Slavin, 1983, 2009), cooperative incentives structures create a situation in

which the only way group members can attain their own personal goals is if the group is

successful. Therefore, to meet their personal goals, group member must help their group mate

to do whatever enables them to succeed, and, perhaps even more importantly, to encourage

their group mates to excerpt more efforts. In other words, rewarding groups based on group

performance (or the sum of individual performances) creates an interpersonal reward

structure in which group members will give or withhold social reinforces, (e.g. praise,

encouragement) in response to group mates’ task related efforts.

25

The motivationalist critique of traditional classroom organization holds that the

competitive grading and informal reward system of the traditional classroom experts creates

peer norms opposing academic efforts (Coleman, 1961). Since one student’s success decrease

the chances that other will succeed, students are likely to express norms that high

achievement is for “nerds” or “teacher’ pets. However, by having students work together

towards a common goal, they may be motivated to express norms favoring academic

achievements, to reinforce one another for academic efforts.

Not surprisingly, motivational theorists build group rewards into their cooperative

learning methods. In methods developed by Johns Hopkins University (Slavin, 1994, 1995),

students can earn certificates or other recognition if their average team scores on quizzes or

other individual assignment exceeds a pre-established criterion. Methods developed by David

and Roger Johnson (1998) and their colleagues at the University of Minisota of ten given

students’ grade based on group performance which is defined in several ways. The theoretical

rationale for these group rewards is that if students value the success of a group, they will

encourage and help one another to achieve.

Considerable evidence from practical applications of cooperative learning in

elementary and secondary schools supports the motivationalist position that group rewards

are essential to the effectiveness of cooperative learning, with one critical qualification. Use

of group goals or rewards enhances achievement outcomes of cooperative learning if and

only if the group rewards are based on the individual learning of all group members (Slavin,

1995). Most often this means that team scores are computed based on the average scores on

quizzes which all team mates, take individually, without teammate help. For example, in

students Team-Achievement Division or STAD (Slavin, 1994), Students works in mixed-

ability teams to master the material initially presented by the teacher. Following this, students

take individual quizzes on the material and the terms may earn certificates based on the

26

degree to which team members have improved over their own past records. The only way the

team can succeed is to ensure that all team members have learned, so the team members

activities focus on explaining concept to one another, helping one another practice, and

encouraging one another to achieve. For contrast, if group rewards are given based on a

single group product (for example, the team completes a worksheet or solves a problem),

there is little incentive for group members to explain concept to one another, and one or two

members may do all the work (Slavin, 1995).

In assessing the empirical evidence supporting cooperative learning strategies, the

greatest weight must be given to studies of longer duration. Well executed, these are bounds

to be realistically generalizable to the day to day functioning of classroom practices. A

review of 99 studies of cooperative learning in elementary and secondary schools that

involved durations of at least four weeks compared achievement gains in cooperative learning

and control groups of sixty-four studies of cooperative learning methods that provided

rewards based on the sum of group members’ individual learning, fifty (78%) found

significantly positive effects (Slavin, 1995). The median effect size for the studies from

which sizes could be computed was +.32 (thirty-two percent of a standard deviation separated

cooperative learning and control treatments). In contrast, studies of methods that used group

goals based on a single group product or provided no group rewards found few positive

effects, with the median effect size of only +17. comparison of alternative treatments within

the same studies Found similar performances patterns; group goals based on the sum of

individual learning performances were necessary to the in structural effectiveness of the

cooperative learning models (e.g. Fantuzzo, polite and Grayson, 1990; Fantuzzu, polite and

Grayson, 1990; Fantuzzu, Riggio, Connelly, and Dimeff, 1980).

27

In contrast, when group’s task is to ensure that every group member learns something,

it is in the interest of every group member to spend time explaining concept to his or her

groups mates. Studies of students of behaviour within cooperative groups have consistently

found that the students who give most from cooperative work are those who give and receive

elaborated explanations (Webb, 1985, 2008). In contrast, giving and receiving answers

without explanation were negatively related to achievement gain. Group goals and

individuals accountability motivates students to give elaborated explanations and to take one

another’s learning seriously, instead of simply giving answers.

Social Cohesion Perspectives: A theoretical perspective some what related to the

motivational viewpoint holds that the effect of cooperative learning on achievement is

strongly mediated by the cohesiveness of the group. The quality of the group’s interactions is

thought to be largely determined by group cohesion. In helping one another learn because

they identify with the group and want one another to succeed. This perspective is similar to

the motivational perspective in that emphasizes primarily motivation rather than cognitive

explanations for the instructional effectiveness of cooperative learning. However,

motivational theorist holds that students help their group mate primarily because it is in their

own interest to do so. Social cohesion theorist in contrast, emphasizes the ideal that students

help their group mates learn because they care about the group. A hallmark of the social

cohesion perspective is emphasize on team building activities in preparation for cooperative

learning, and processing or group self-evaluation during and after group activities. Social

cohesion theorist has historically tended to downplay or reject the group incentive and

individual accountability held by motivational researchers to be essential. They emphasized,

instead, that the effect of cooperative learning on the students and on the students’

achievement depends substantially on the quality of the group interaction. For example,

(Cohen, 1986:20), stated that “if the task is challenging and interesting, and if students are

28

sufficiently prepared for skills in group process, student will experience the process of group

work itself as highly rewarding… never grade or evaluate students on their individual

contributions to the group product” Cohen’s (1994) and Elliot Aronson (Aronson, Blaney,

Stephan, Sikes and Snapp, 1978) and his colleagues, may be described as social cohesiveness

theories. Cohen, Aronson, and the Sharons all prescribe forms of cooperative learning in

which student take on individual roles within group, which Slavin (1983) calls “task

specialization” methods in Aronson’s Jigsaw method, student study materials on one of the

form of five topics distributed among the group members. They meet “expert group” to share

information on their topics with members of other teams, who had same topic, and then take

turns presenting their topics to the team. In the Sharon’s group investigation method, group

take on topics within a unit studies by the class as a whole and then further subdivided the

topics into task within a group. The student investigates the topic together and ultimately

presents their finding to the class as a whole.

One main purpose of the task specialization used in Jigsaw, group investigation, and

finding out is to create interdependence among group members. In the Johnson’s methods, a

somewhat similar form of interdependence is created by having students take on roles as

“checker”, “recorder”, “observer”, and so on. The ideal is that students value their group

mates (as a result of team building and other cohesiveness-building activities) and are

dependent on one another; they are likely to encourage and help one another succeed.

Cognitive Perspective: The major alternative to the motivationalist and social cohesiveness

perspective on cooperative learning, both of which focus primarily on group norms and

interpersonal influence, is the cognitive perspective. The cognitive perspective holds that

interactions among students will in themselves increase student achievement for reason

which has to do with mental processes of information rather than with motivations.

Cooperative methods developed by cognitive theories involve neither the group goals that are

29

the cornerstone of the motivationalist methods nor the emphasis on building group

cohesiveness characteristics of social cohesion methods. However, there are several quite

cognitive perspective, as well as some which are similar in theoretical perspective, but have

developed on largely parallel tracks. The two most notable of these are described below.

Developmental perspectives: One widely researched set of cognitive theories is the

developmental perspective (e.g. Damon, 1984). The fundamental assumption of the

developmental perspective on cooperative learning is that interaction among children around

appropriate task increases their mastery of critical concepts Vygotsky (1978:32), defines the

zone of proximal developmental as “….The distance between the actual developmental level

as determined by independent problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with

more capable peers”. In this view collaborative activity among children promotes growth

because children of similar ages are likely to be operating within one another proximal zones

of development, modeling in the collaborative group behaviours more advanced than they

could perform as individuals.

Similarly, Piaget (1926) held that social-arbitrary knowledge languages, values,

morality, and symbol system… can only be learned in interactions with others. Peer

interactions are also important in logical-mathematics thought in disequilibrating the child’s

egocentric conceptualization and providing feedback to the child about validity of logical

construction (Slavin, 1995). Despite considerable support from theoretical and laboratory

research, there is little evidence from classroom experiments conducted over meaningful time

periods that “pure” cooperative methods, which depend solely on interaction, produce higher

achievement. However, it is likely that the cognitive processes described by the

developmental theorist are important mediating variables which can help explain the positive

outcomes of effective cooperative learning method (Slavin, 1995).

30

A simple path model of cooperative learning process, adapted from Slavin (1995) is

diagrammed below. It depicts the main functional relationship among the major theoretical

approaches cooperative learning.

Interactions of theoretical perspective on cooperative learning strategy on learning.

Fig. 2: Adapted from Slavin (1995) theory of cooperative learning

The figure above begins with a focus on group goals or incentive based on individual

learning of all group members. That is, the model assumes that motivation to learn and to do

encourage and help others to learn and help to do encourage and help others learn activities

cooperative behaviours that will result in learning. This would include both task motivation

and motivation to interact in the group. In this model, motivation to succeed leads to learning

directly, and also drives the behaviours and attitudes that lead to group cohesion, which in

turn facilitates the types interactions that yield enhanced learning and academic achievement.

The relationships are conceived to be reciprocal, such that as task motivation leads to the

development group of cohesion, that development may reinforce and enhance task

Enhanced learning

Group goals based on learning of all members

Social Cohesion

Motivation to learn

Motivation to encourage group mates to learn

Motivation to help group mates learn

Elaborated explanation (peer tutoring) peer modeling

Cognitive elaboration peer practice

Peer Assessment and correction

31

motivation. By the same token, the cognitive processes may become cohesion intrinsically

rewarding and lead to increased task motivation and group cohesion. Each aspect of the

diagrammed model is well represented in the theoretical and empirical cooperative learning

literature. Based on the above theory, cooperative learning interactions is fostered through

group motivation, social cohesion and cognitive or mental processing. Therefore this study

will further prove whether this element of cooperative learning according to slaving (1995)

will influence students academic achievement in chemistry.

Johnson, D.W; and Johnson, R.T. (1984) model of cooperative learning

In the Johnson and Johnson model of cooperative learning, there are five essential

elements: positive interdependence, promotive interaction, individual accountability, group

processing, and social skills. In this review the first three of these essential elements will be

discussed in details; this review is intended to help students and teachers better understand

what positive interdependence, individual accountability and promotive learning interactions

are why the three elements are important in cooperative learning interactions, and how this

elements might be incorporated in wide range of learning activities.

Cooperative learning is the instructional use of small groups so that students work

together to maximize their own and each other’s learning manage their emotions and

emphatize with the emotions of others during the process of group learning (Johnson and

Johnson, 1984). This preceding brief definition of cooperative learning may provide an

intriguing starting point; teachers might require more depth to think about how they might

introduce cooperative learning into classes. Two descriptions may help the teacher and

readers form more complete and pictures of cooperative learning in their classrooms. The

first description shown in the figure below is a structural model drawn from Johnson and

Johnson, with five pillars of cooperative learning.

32

Fig. 3: Adapted from Johnson and Johnson (1984) model of cooperative learning.

Positive interdependence is the belief by each individual that there is value in working with

each other students and that both individual learning and work product will be better as a

result of collaboration. The following quotes Illustrates different perspective on positive

interdependence.

“Positive interdependence is linking students together so that one cannot succeed

unless all group members succeed. Group members have to know that they sink or swim

together”.

When students clearly understand positive interdependence, they understand that each

member’s effort are required and indispensable for group success and each group member

has a unique contribution to make to the joint effort because of his or her resource and/or

role and task responsibilities. Positive goal interdependence ensures that the group is united

around a common goal, a concrete reason for being, such as ‘learn the assigned material.

Positive interdependence is successfully structured when group member perceive that they

are linked with each other in a way that one cannot succeed unless every one succeeds. Group

goals and task therefore, must be design and communicated to students in way that make

Cooperative Learning

Positive interdependence “we need contribution from each of my teams members if the we’ re going to succeed

Promotive, face to face interaction “How I think, talk and act toward my team members will influence how well we perform”

Individual accountability “Although my team members can help with the assigned task my individual performance will shape my grade

Social skills

“working effectively together as a team means that I need to improve my interpersonal skills”

Group

processing

33

them believe they sink or swim together. When positive interdependence is solidly structured,

it highlights that each group members are required and indispensable for group and success

and each group members has a unique contribution to make to the joint effort because of his

or her resources and /or role and task responsibilities. Doing so creates a commitment to the

success of group members as well as one’s own and is the heart of cooperative learning. If

there is no positive interdependence there is no cooperation product goal interdependence:

use a product that requires contribution from each member. An example is asking a group of

students to reach a consensus answer, turn in one problem solving assignment at the class, or

produce a single graph.

Reward interdependence: can be designed into a task using some form of shared grades. For

examples, besides their individual scores on exam, students may receive a certain number of

points if all group members score at or above a certain grade.

Resource interdependence: exist when individuals each possess specific resources needed for

the group as whole to succeed. Teachers may promote resources interdependence by giving

specific resources to different individuals in the group.

Role interdependence: exist when specific roles are assigned to team members (for example

recorder or timekeeper). These roles need to be performed in order for the team to function;

however, assigning the roles highlights their importance and assigns accountability to

individual. Roles can be rotated regularly to give all team members experience

Task or sequence interdependence: Occurs when one group member must first complete

his/her task before the next task can be completed. For example, collecting water samples

might be assigned to two group members, while research on how to collect sample is done by

two other group members.

Promotive Interaction: Although it is an important element of cooperative learning, positive

interdependence alone does not generate the degree and intensity of interaction required in

34

cooperative learning activities first, team members used to think that success of the team

depends on the contribution by each member. Next, they think that ongoing interactions,

particularly face-to-face interactions are required for success. Some tasks are positively

interdependent such as report preparation or programming assignments, because they result in

a single team product, but they many not require ongoing interactions. Group writing

assignments-term papers, and programming projects – have positive interdependence because

the final products depend on contributions from all group members. However, they lack

another element that is required for cooperative learning activities, promotive interactions,

promotive interactions is a set of characteristics in the task or learning activity that requires

ongoing conversation dialogue, exchange and support. Students need to do real work together

in which they promote each other successes by sharing resources and helping, supporting,

encouraging and applauding each others effort to achieve. There are important cognitive

activities and interpersonal dynamics that can only occur when students promote each others

learning. This includes orally explaining how to solve problems, teaching one’s knowledge to

others. Checking for understanding, discussing concepts being learned and connecting

present with past learning. Each of these activities can be structured into group task directions

and procedures. Doing so helps ensure that cooperative learning groups are both and

academic support system (every students has someone who is committed to helping him or

her learn) and a personal support system (every student has someone who is committed to

helping him or her learn). It is through promoting each other’s learning face-to-face that

members become personally committed to each other as well as to their mutual goals. Below

are some examples of how learning activities or part of learning activities might be structured

to encourage face-to-face promotive interaction in order to provide greater understanding of

this important pillar of cooperative learning.

35

Ask students to work on a problem or part of a problem (to limit amount of time spent

on the exercise), in class. The problem should be challenging enough to require contributions

from multiple team members but not so challenging that team members are not able to

succeed.

Ask students to form individual responses to a multiple-choiced question focused on a

particular concept and then reach consensus on an answer as a team.

Ask teams to generate possible applications of a concept introduced in class.

With a complex concept or task, divide it into part and post different parts on the tops of flip

charts. Have groups move from chart to chart and spend a couple of minutes generating lists,

including what they know about the part, what they need to know about it and applications

related to it. Allow all groups to move around the room until they return to their starting

points, have them analyze and summarize the information and report it to the class

Follow up successful team activities by asking students to reflect on how the team helped

individual learning.

Form heterogeneous groups so that different individuals have more to learn from each other

than in homogenous groups.

Individual Accountability: Individual accountability is the belief by each individual that

he/she will be accountable for his/her performance in learning. Phrased negatively, an

individual believes that he/she cannot receive a satisfactory rating by riding in the coat tails

of other members of the group on cooperative learning; Johnson and Johnson (2004) describe

the need for both group and individual accountability. Two levels accountability must be

accountable for achieving its goals and each member must be accountable for contributing his

or her share of the work. Individual accountability exists when the performance of each

individual is assessed and the results are given back to the group and the individual in order

to ascertain who needs more assistance, support and encouragement in learning. The purpose

36

of cooperative learning groups is to make each members a stronger individuals in his or her

right. Students learn together so that they subsequently can gain greater individual

competency. After participating in a cooperative lesson, group members should accomplish

the same kind of tasks by themselves. They learn to do something together so that they can do

it more easily when they are alone. Individual accountability is the structural element

required to discourage and lower the likelihood of free riders or social loafing. Individual

accountability is promoted by providing opportunities for the performance of individuals to

be observed and evaluated by others.

Social Skills: It is very important for students to have sufficient social skills, involving an

explicit teaching of appropriate leadership, communication, trust and conflict resolution skills

so that they could cooperative effectively, social skills should explicitly taught to the students

so that they can work among themselves not only in terms of cooperation but also without

hostility and with the teachers authority. With this, each students get motivated internally by

need for freedom love and fun and also students must be taught these skills and motivated to

use them. If the group members lack the interpersonal and small group skills to cooperate

effectively, cooperative learning would not be productive.

Group Processing: The teaching of cooperative skills is essential, placing socially unskilled

students in a group and telling them to cooperate did not guarantee that ability to do so

effectively. Students must learn the task and maintenance skills for group to run smoothly.

Students might not instinctively know these skills; therefore they must be taught explicitly

how to cooperate with others. The interpersonal and small group could be taught through a

number of means; first of all, setting a social skills goal along with the academic goal. Let

students know it’s importance to the teacher. Secondly, it could establish through role

playing, modeling, and discussing the component of particular social skills. The teacher’s

role in this teaching method was not of someone who measures the capacities of the students

37

in terms of a final product but in terms of the process. That is someone acting as friends, as a

coordinator, as a director who guided his/her actors how to perform, and as an advisor in the

academic task and in the psychosocial and cognitive development of the students.

From the Johnson and Johnson (1984) theory of cooperative learning, the five

essential elements of the literature reveals that adequate and effective learning interactions

among students in the classroom is facilitated through positive interdependence, promotive

interactions, individual accountability, social skills and group processing. Based on these

findings, this study will seek to further ascertain the importance of these elements of

cooperative learning on student’s achievement in chemistry.

Kagan (2009) Model of Cooperative Learning

Kagan (2009), modified the key elements of cooperative learning documented by

Johnson and Johnson (1993) to devise the PIES principles. Positive interdependence,

individual accountability, equal participation and simultaneous interaction. Kagan (2009),

summaries the PIES principles into a set of five questions:

Positive Correlation: Are pupils on the same side?

Defined by Kagan (2009) as a direct link between the benefit received by one group

member and the next and between one group and next. If a pupil knows that another pupils

success will benefit them, they will support and encourage that pupil to succeed. Similarly if

the classroom has a competitive atmosphere a pupil may assume that one’s loss is another

gain. In other words, the question seeks to understand the nature of the classroom

environment, are the pupils cooperating or competing.

Interdependence: Does the task require working?

To gain a truly cooperative atmosphere in the classroom, task need to be structured to

ensure that pupil is capable of completing the task on their own, but all pupils are able to

complete it by working cooperatively (Johnson and Johnson, 1989).

38

•Is individual, public performance required?

Individual accountability was introduced by Kagan (2009) to eradicate the inherent

group grades’ problem that he claims put in any teacher off using cooperative-learning

approaches. He argues that if individual, public performance is required by task, then pupils

can be graded individually. An individual performance indicates that the task can be done

individually without help.

•Is Participations approximately equal?

The task has to ensure that all pupils working in groups are participating equally

throughout the lesson. There are several approaches to this, for example using pre-defined

structure, assigning roles to the group numbers or providing timed allocations.

That percentage of pupils is overly interacting at once?

The notion of simultaneous interaction is concerned with ratio of pupil interaction

during the lesson. For example, during a sequential question and answer session where the

teacher asks a question, awaits pupils to raise their hands, select a pupil to answer and then

responds to that answer. In this example, for every interaction the pupils makes, the teacher

makes twice as many. This can lead to lessons being teacher led and some pupils not

interacting at all during the lesson on the other hand, when the pupils are working in groups

there are several lines of interaction available to them. During well-constructed pair of work

for example, pupil interaction can as high as 50% of time.

According to Kagan (2009) in a “traditional” classroom, reinforcement tends to be

delayed. For example, the teacher gives out worksheet, the pupils completed the lesson. The

pupils do not receive their reward until the following lesson, which could be the next day or

even the following week.

39

Kagan (2009); claims however, that in a ‘cooperative’ classroom there is immediate

reinforcement upon the completion of each problem, pupils receive praise from their peers

and hence the reward occurs immediately. Furthermore, the reward system itself is fairly

infrequent in a ‘traditional’ classroom in contrast with cooperative classroom. Using the

example above the pupils only receive one reward per lesson or worksheet on the other hand.

Pupils are receiving a reward after each problem in a cooperative classroom. Finally, we

address the desirability of the rewards. The pupils in today’s world are vastly motivated by

grades or the teacher feedback. The pupils of the 21st century live a peer-based culture praise

or feedback from their peers seen for more desirable than teacher praise (Kagan, 2004).

From the Kagan (2009) modified version of the elements cooperative learning,

positive correlation (i.e. pupils seeing themselves succeeding if the entire group succeeds)

and the question of what percentage of pupils interacting in a lesson is strongly related to

what cooperative learning interactions is expected to achieve. Based on this findings; the

present study will further seek to ascertain whether positive correlation, and participation

patterns and percentage of interactions in cooperative learning influences academic

achievements of students in chemistry.

Lecture Method

Method or strategy, for the purpose of this work, refers to a recognized and systematic

way of performing the task of teaching. A strategy is a planned series of actions for achieving

something (Azikiwe, 1998). A strategy is a process, style and method of doing something. It

involves a sequence of steps with prescribed strategies and practices used in implementing a

teaching approach. There are various teaching methods for impacting knowledge in science.

The methods include: lecture method, demonstration method, guided-discovery method,

inquiry-based method, experimentation method etc. Amongst the listed teaching methods,

lecture method is one of the oldest teaching methods and appears to be very popular in the

40

teaching chemistry and science in general. The lecture or conventional method of teaching

emanates from the school of behaviorists with the proponents like B.F. Skinner, E.L.

Thordike and so, believe that learning is simply forming bonds between stimulus and

response and popularized the notion that behavior can be objectively studied.

According to Eya (1999), lecture is a discourse delivered allowed for instruction or

entertainment. Sometimes, lecture method cannot be avoided especially when the class is

large, course content is large, there is limited time and space, inadequate facilities, inadequate

personnel and unqualified teachers. The conventional instructional model (lecture model) is

preferred by many teachers in secondary schools to other methods for a number of reasons

(Salu, 2000). The author argues that it enables the teacher to reach large number of students

at the same time.

According to Prado and Plourde (2005), in this teaching method, the teacher usually

spends sometime in teaching, guides and students through a complex problem broken down

into simple steps; then the students are given one by one simple steps to carryout on their

own, and finally the students are given one or more simple problems to accomplish by

themselves. According to the authors, to use this teaching method well, there is the need to

choose a concept or topic for which lecture method is appropriate. The students must know

what to expect in it’s order and the apportioned time for each. The teacher should speak

clearly with a varied tone and speed. The teacher should enhance the speed with visuals and

vary the lesson by not speaking always. For any lesson longer than 30 minutes, the teacher

should be varied and also allow the students to ask questions. Such questions are usually low

memory questions. The teacher asks a question and chooses a student to answer it. To answer

the teacher’s question, the student plays “guess what is in the teacher’s head” until the student

guesses right.

41

According to Ibe (2006), the lecture method of teaching enables the teacher have total

control of the timing of the lesson, it help the instructor or teacher to monitor the activities of

the students easily in the learning process. The lecture method of teaching, though may be an

old method of teaching, but may not be discarded but requires support strategies. Therefore

the present study intends to investigate whether cooperative learning strategy will enhance

student’s achievement and interest in Chemistry.

Achievement

Achievement means doing something successful typically by effort, courage and

skills, the art of achieving, attainment or accomplishment. According to Nwachukwu (2004),

achievement is accomplishing whatever goals you have set for yourself, which is doing what

you want to do within the bounds of the law, overcoming obstacles and attaining a high

standard. It is the pursuit of dreams without fear and unbelief. Achievement requires drive

and single mindedness and it is about completing goals one has set for oneself.

As noted by Onyilo and Onyilo (2010), achievement is a term for noteworthy act.

Achievement connotes final accomplishment of something note worthy after much effort and

often in spite of obstacles and discouragements. Achievement connotes boldness, bravery,

and usually ingenuity. Achievement sometimes demands skills and strength. According to

Barnes (2013), achievement is something accomplishing, especially by superior abilities,

special effort, great courage, etc. Achievement is a result gained by effort. It is a great or

heroic deed. Achievement is the act of accomplishing or finishing.

Habibian (2012), refers to academic achievement as all knowledge, sills and an idea

gained in the course of academic programme. Ojebisi, Olosunde and Isola (2011), looked at

academic achievement as a child’s performance in an academic area such as in reading,

mathematics, science and history. Williams (2011), also defines academic achievement as

excellences in all academic disciplines in class as well as extra-curricular activities.

42

Academic achievement from various definitions from other authors can be summarized as the

ability of a learner to complete an academic activity successfully. Academic achievement is

important because it is strongly linked to positive outcomes for human beings. It helps to

secure a bright future and brings higher opportunity of success in life. In others words, it is

used to indicate whether the learners have been successful or unsuccessful in mastering an

academic content or skill. For instance, a student who takes a standardized text in chemistry

and scores 99 percent is regarded as an achiever while a learner who scores 10 percent in the

same text is seen as a non-achiever. In view of the above, academic achievement manifest

itself in what one can do after a given academic programme. Thus, effective teaching method

like cooperative learning method could enhance learner’s achievement. Therefore this study

will seek to find out if cooperative learning strategy can lead to students’ academic

achievement in chemistry.

Interest

Interest in academic context could be referred to as what influences student learning

behavior and intention to participate in learning. Paul (2013), observes that interest can help

learners think more clearly, understand more deeply and remember more accurately.

Subramanian (2009), observes that when learners are interested in what is being learnt, they

pay attention and process information more efficiently. According to the author, interest

enables learners to employ more effective learning strategies such as critical thinking and

making connections between old and new knowledge. Dunst quoted in Stonehouse (2012),

defines interest as a child’s individual likes, preferences and favourites. According to the

researcher, interest should be used as a starting point for effective learning to take place. It is

a known fact that children learn best and are more engaged when they are interested. Okoro

(2011), state that one of the strongest factors affecting students’ learning a particular subject

adopted by the teacher which highly correlates with the perception of the subject relevant to

43

their future is the interest of the learner. According to the researcher, the interest of the

students is one of the critical element in curriculum implementation, therefore, in selecting

learning experiences, it is natural for students no to be engaged in what they are not interested

in. Hence, a teacher asked to consider the interest of the student to enable him or her base the

activities selected for the attainment of the specific objectives of the lesson. This is because

no student will want to engage in what they are not interested in. Therefore, interest should be

used in providing a meaningful learning experience. To be interesting, a learning material

must be novel, complex and comprehensible. From the above definitions, interest in

academic context could be referred to as what influences student learning behavior and

intention to participate in learning process, therefore, the researcher is of the view that the use

of good instructional teaching method like the cooperative learning strategy can arouse

learner’s interest and facilitate meaningful learning. Hence, this study will investigate the

influence of cooperative learning strategy on student’s achievements and interest in

chemistry.

School Location

School location simply refers to where the school is located, whether in urban or rural

areas. Differentiation between urban and rural areas is demographically done by the

government offices of regional planning and development. Urban areas are those with social

facilities while rural areas lack social facilities like electricity, pipe water supply tarred roads

etc. Owoeye (2011) stated that rural community is characterized by low population,

subsistent mode of life, monotonous and burdensome, while in the city hotels, recreational

center, markets, banks, and good road networks are present in the urban area. The author

further states that highly qualified teachers prefer to serve in urban areas than rural areas.

Nbina and Obomanu (2011) also stressed that teachers are known to prefer to serve in urban

schools rather than rural schools. Accordingly, Kuliman, Weather, and Baterworth (2007)

44

observed that teachers do not accept postings to rural areas because their conditions are not

up to the expected standard as their social life in the area is virtually restricted as a result of

inadequate amenities; facilities are deficient, playground are without equipment, libraries are

without books, while laboratories are glorified ones.

Making a critical analysis of locational factors, Hallak (2007) also guessed that the

provision of education in rural areas is normally fraught with the following difficulties and

problems; qualified teachers refusing appointments in isolated villages, villagers refusing to

send their children to school because they are dependent on them for help, parents hesitate to

entrust their daughters to male teachers, some villages have few children for an ordinary

primary school, lack of roads or satisfactory means of communication also makes it difficult

to get books and teaching materials to the school which place difficulties in the way of

organizing school transport amongst others.

According to Nbina and Obomanu (2011), federal and state governments in Nigeria

have been making effort to improve the educational system in the rural areas using certain

education management commissions to ensure that qualified specialist teachers and facilities

are sent to rural schools. The authors noted that notwithstanding, all the efforts made by the

government, secondary school in rural areas is comparatively new, and not as well equipped

as urban secondary schools. Ezeudu and Obi (2013), indicated that schools in the urban areas

have electricity, water supply, more teachers, learning facilities and infrastructure. Onah

(2011), indicated that students in schools in the urban areas achieve more than students in the

rural areas in science subjects. Specifically, Owoeye and Yara (2011), showed in their studies

that schools in urban locations had better academic performance than their rural counterparts

in chemistry. On contrary, Ezeudu (2003) and Bosede (2010) showed that school location had

no effect on students’ academic achievement in chemistry. Gana cited in Owoeye (2011), on

the effect of using designed visual teaching models on the learning of mathematics at junior

45

secondary school level of Niger state, found that there was no significant difference in

mathematics achievement scores of students in urban and rural locations. Alokan (2010),

found out that students problems are strongly associated with poor performance and that sex

and location do not affect the negative relationship between students problems and academic

performance. Shield and Dockrell (2008), while looking at the effect of classroom and

environmental noise on children’s academic performance found out that both chronic and

acute exposure to environmental and classroom noise have a detrimental effect upon

children’s learning and performance.

From all the above literature and the influence of school location and academic

achievement, some of the researchers believe that location have effect on students’ academic

achievement while some hold a contrary view to the effect of school location on students’

academic achievement. Nevertheless, different opinions by different scholars have shown

existing differences in academic achievement between schools in urban areas and rural areas.

The present study is therefore a contribution to further studies on whether school location

affects students’ academic achievement in chemistry.

Gender

Gender is defined as a cultural constraint which distinguished the roles, behaviour,

mental, and emotional characteristic between males and females developed by a society

(Uwah, 2005, Azikiwe, 2005). A society in this regard is a group of individual who share a

common interest and norms and live together in a particular geographical location. In the

same vein, Umo (2004), defined gender as a psychological terms used in describing

behaviour and attributes expected of individuals on the basis of being born either male or

female. On the influence of gender on academic achievement, Azikiwe (2005), observes that

although assumption of gender difference in English language in favour of females seemed to

be accepted to a large extent through research evidence in English language speaking

46

countries. Ekeh (2003) discovered that male secondary school students performed better than

females in science and mathematics subjects. These differences in achievement may be

attributed to gender stereotyping which encourages male and female students to school to

show interest subject relevant and related to the roles expected of them in the society.

National Assessment educational Progress (1994) showed that males had higher average

score than females between ages of 9, 13, and 17 in science, Mathematics and reading

assessment. Okon (2003), maintains that gender has no significant influence on student

performance in science. Some authors believed that males perform better than females in any

course that deal with calculation as observed by Awoniyi (2000) who stated that male

candidates performed better, related to female in subject in requiring quantitative ability. The

researcher said that male show superiority in science, statistics and accounting. Raimi and

Adeoye (2002), in their research on gender differences among college student as

determinants of performance in integrated science revealed a significant difference between

male and female in terms of their attitude towards integrated science in favour of males.

Other suggestion to show that gender has effect on science teaching and learning

abound. Umback (2004) believed that females are more likely than males’ counterpart to

value and use effective educational practices. This therefore helps in placing emphasis on

academic challenge and enriching their educational experience. Furthermore, Ozioko (2003),

investigate the effect of word attack skill strategy on students’ achievement in reading

comprehension. The author found out that no difference exists between the performance of

males and females. Uzoegwu (2004) carried out a study on the effect of cooperative method

on students’ achievement in English essay writing, gender was a variable considered in the

study. The author found out that male students achieved higher than female students in easy

writing. Conversely, achievement of students in English according to Balarebe (1999) and

Bodunde (1999), has no significant difference. The duo found out that no sex difference in

47

motivation, learning and performance. Azikiwe (2005), studied gender influence on language

learning. The researcher found out that sex had no influence on language learning. From the

foregoing, it shows that enough research evidence have not been established in Nigeria to

support the claim that females achieve better than males in science and chemistry to be

specific. Also the findings above reveal controversy on gender difference in science students’

achievement in chemistry at the senior secondary school level. As a result of this conflicting

issue, it is imperative to find out if there are any gender differences on students’ achievement

in chemistry among secondary students hence this study will investigate the effect of gender

on students’ achievement in chemistry.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Vygotsky’s (1978) Theory of Learning

This theory was propounded by Vygotsky a Russian teacher and psychologist in 1978.

Vygotsky’s main concern is that social interaction and social context, a world full of other

people, who interact with the child from birth onwards, are essential in the cognitive

development. He states that “every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice

first, on the social level and later on the individual level, first between people (inter-

psychological) and then inside the child (intra-psychological). This applied equally to

voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to the formation of concepts. All the higher

functions originate as actual relationship between individuals (Vygotsky, 1978: 57).

Next, he pointed out at the ideal that the potential for cognitive development is limited

to a certain time span, which he names the “zone of proximal development” (ZPD). For

addition, full development ZPD depends upon full social interaction. The ranges of skill that

can be developed with adult guidance or peer collaboration exceed what can be attained

alone. It is of very fact that other people playing important roles in helping children to learn;

providing objects and ideals to their attention, talking while playing and sharing, reading

48

stories, asking question. In a wide range of ways, adult mediate the world for children and

make it possible for them to get access to it. The ability to learn through instruction and

mediation is characteristic of human intelligence. By the help of adult, children can do and

understand more than they can on their own.

Actually, Vygotsky proposed the notion of the zone of proximal development (ZPD)

to give a new meaning to intelligence instead of measuring intelligence by what a child can

do alone. Vygotsky suggested that intelligence could better be measured by what a child can

do with skilled help. Vygotsky attempted to shed light on consciousness which develops as a

result of socialization. While learning, the first utterances have a communicational purpose,

but once internalized they become “Inner Speech.” According to Vygotsky, young children

can often be observed talking to themselves and act as if they carry out task or play, in what

is called private speech. As children get older, they gradually speak less and less loud, and

differential between social speech for others and inner speech, which continues to play an

important role in regulating and controlling behaviour. In the internalizing process, the

interpersonal, joint talk and joint activity, later becomes interpersonal, mental action by one

individual.

In Vygotskian terms, development in learners can be seen as internalizing from social

interaction process which grow as the learners’ takes control of the learning process with

other children and the adult acting as a facilitator. According to the author social learning

process provides learners with a new tool, opens up opportunities for doing things and for

organizing information on their own.

From the above, it is crystal clear that Vygotsky’s theory of learning encourages

cooperative learning. He emphasizes interaction among learners of science and that the full

development of a student can only be attained via cooperative learning. Hence, this theory is

49

related to this study. This study emphasizes cooperative learning strategy where students

experience a joint workspace in the company of other students.

Related Emperical Studies

Cooperative learning and achievement in chemistry

Aluko and Olorundare (2002), investigated the relative effectiveness of cooperative

and individualistic abilities in secondary school chemistry in Ilesha Local Government area

of Osun State, Nigeria. The study made use of a quasi-experimental, non-randomized

factorial design. Two hundred and fifty (250) senior secondary two (SSII) chemistry students

were purposely sampled from three public secondary schools in the area of study. Two

research instruments; Researchers instructional packages for solving chemistry problem

(RIP) and chemistry performance test (CPT) were developed, validated and used for the

study. Five hypotheses were raised and tested using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Two

experimental groups cooperative instructional group, individualistic instructional group and a

control group were used. The results of the analysis showed that there was a significant

difference in the performance of chemistry students exposed to cooperative instructional

strategy, individualistic instructional strategy and conventional lecture method. Both the

cooperative instructional strategy and individualistic instructional strategy improved the

performance of the learners. The cooperative instructional strategy was found to be most

effective in enhancing better performance of the learners. The above study is related to the

present study because both of them are in chemistry. Both examined cooperative learning

strategy. They are also experimental studies. However, the study is different from the present

study in some areas. The study is different in terms of location. Though both studies are

interested in determining the efficacy of cooperative learning strategy on students’

achievement in chemistry, but the present study include interest as a variable in order to see if

50

chemistry students really show interest in the method which the review study did not

consider. The researcher identifies this gap in the reviewed study and will seek to fill it.

Oludipe and Awokoyo (2009), investigated the influence of cooperative learning

methods of teaching on senior secondary school students’ anxiety for learning chemistry. One

hundred and twenty (120) students (52 females and 68 males) randomly selected from the

senior secondary schools in south- west Nigeria participated in the study. The study

employed a quasi-experimental design. The design included two treatment groups-

cooperative learning method (Jig Saw II) and the conventional lecture method. Two lesson

notes; one for cooperative learning method and the other for conventional chalk-and-talk

method, and chemistry anxiety scale (CAS) were the instruments used to collect the relevant

data. The data collected was analyzed using on-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The

findings of the study revealed that students in both the cooperative and conventional lecture

group exhibited high level of chemistry anxiety at the pretest level. However, after the

treatment (post test level), the chemistry anxiety level of the students in cooperative learning

group reduced drastically while the chemistry anxiety level of the students in conventional

lecture group increased. It was concluded that since cooperative learning methods of teaching

reduced students chemistry anxiety, chemistry teachers should be encouraged to incorporate

cooperative learning in their methods of teaching. Oludipe and Awokoyo’s work is related to

the present study because both of them share the same teaching technique; both studies are

experimental and are in the same subject area. Also, both studies have two lesson notes based

on cooperative learning and lecture method. However, both studies are different in terms of

method of data analysis, population and method of data collection. In the same vein, the two

studies are different in terms of variable, while the previous study was carried out on effect of

cooperative learning strategy on chemistry students anxiety, the present study is considering

students interests in chemistry. Although both studies are interested in determining the effect

51

of cooperative learning strategy, but the present study is concerned about the interest of

students in chemistry as a variable which the previous study did not consider. The present

study identifies a gap in this area and intends to fill it.

Adekunle (2010), investigated the effects of three strategies (i.e guided discovery,

think-pair-share, and lecture) on senior secondary school students achievement in chemistry.

A quasi-experimental design was adopted for the study. Treatment was at three levels (guided

discovery, think-pair-share, and lecture strategies). Two hundred and forty two (242) senior

secondary schools in Ijebu Ode and Odogbolu local government areas of Ogun State were

randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups. Three instruments were developed

and used to collect data from students during 8-week of treatment program. The collected

data were subjected to analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and multiple classification

analysis. Scheffe test was further used as post hoc measures. It was found that students taught

with guided-discovery and think-pair-share strategies obtained significantly higher post test

mean scores than those in the lecture strategy.

Adekunle’s work is related to the present study because both of them are in

Chemistry, both studies are experimental; both studies use the same method of data analysis.

However, the study is different from the present study in some areas. The study is different in

terms of teaching techniques and number of teaching techniques considered and compared.

They are different in the area of population and location. However, though the two studies are

interested in determining the efficacy of both cooperative and lecture method on students

achievement, but while the previous study is considering an aspect of cooperative learning

strategy, i.e. think-pair-share, the present study while investigate all aspect of cooperative

learning which the reviewed study did not consider.

52

Ibraheem (2010), investigated the efficacy of two modes of student team-achievement

divisions (STAD) a kind of cooperative learning method on senior secondary school two

chemistry students learning outcomes in chemical kinetics. A pre-test, post test control group

quasi experimental design was adopted for the study. A total of three hundred (110 males and

190 females) subjects drawn from six secondary schools in Epe division of Lagos state,

Nigeria took part in the study. Intact classes where used in all the selected schools.

Cooperative learning guide, achievement test on chemical kinetics and students’ attitude to

chemical kinetics questionnaire and lesson notes on chemical kinetics were used as

instruments for data collection. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to analyse data

collected. The result revealed that there was a significant main effect of treatment on

students’ achievements and attitude in chemical kinetics.

Ibraheem’s work is similar to the present study because both of them are in chemistry.

Both studies use the same teaching technique. They are also experimental studies. However,

the study is different from the present study in some areas, the study is different in terms of

location, population of the study and the number of instruments used for data collection.

Also, from the reviewed literature, both studies are interested in determining whether

cooperative learning strategy will enhance students achievement in chemistry, but the present

study also considering interest as a variable in order to see if chemistry students really show

interest in the method which the reviewed study did not consider. The researcher identifies a

gap in this area and intends to fill it.

Dhananjay & Rima, (2013), investigated the effect of cooperative learning on

achievement in social science of secondary schools. The study was an experimental research

design. It was conducted on a sample size of 60 students from Gaya district of Bihar in

Taiwan. Two self-developed tools were used in the form of instructional tool unit wise lesson

planning along with teaching aids and measures tools in the form of a teacher made test and a

53

3-point-scale to study the impact of the method used. Experimental group was taught through

cooperative learning method and controlled was taught through traditional method. Findings

of the study reflected that mean achievement of the students exposed to cooperative method

differs significantly from the mean achievement of the students taught through traditional

method. The above study is related to the present study because both of them use the same

teaching technique. They are both experimental studies. However, the study is different in

from the present study in some areas. The study is different in terms of location. The above

study was carried out in Gaya district of Bihar in Taiwan while the present study will be

carried out in Abakaliki education zone of Ebonyi state Nigeria. Also from the reviewed

study, both studies are interested in determining the impact of cooperative learning strategy

on student’s achievement, but the previous study did not consider interest as a variable which

is one of the major variables in the present study. The researcher indentifies this gap and

intends to fill it.

Gambari & Olumorin (2013), investigated the effect of cooperative, competitive and

individual instructional strategies on the performance of high, medium and low academic

achievers using video instructional package. A total of 120 senior secondary school

mathematics students were randomly assigned into cooperative, competitive, and

individualized conventional teaching methods. Students from each group were stratified into

high, medium and low achievers. Video instructional package (VIP) on mathematics and

Geometry Achievement Test (GAT) were used as test instruments, respectively. Analysis of

Variance (ANOVA) and Scheffe test were used for data analysis. The findings indicated that

there was significant difference in the performance of the groups in favour of cooperative

learning strategy. Also, students’ achievement levels had significant influence on their

performance in cooperative and individualized instructional settings. It was recommended

that mathematics teachers should employ cooperative learning strategies, to improve

54

students’ performance as to bridge the gap among high, medium and low achievers. The

above study is related to the present study because both of them share the same technique of

teaching; both of them are experimental studies, both used two instruments for data

collection. However, the studies are different in some areas; the above study is different from

the present study in the area of population, subject area, and method of data analysis. Though

both studies are interested in determining the efficacy of cooperative learning strategy, but

the present study includes interest as a variable to see if chemistry students really show

interest in the method which the reviewed study did not consider. The researcher identifies

this gap in the previous study and will intend to fill it in this present study. All the empirical

studies reviewed so far on effect of cooperative learning strategy on achievement of students

are related to the present study, though some are from other discipline. Also they are related

to the present study because most of them are experimental studies and the targeted subjects

are senior secondary schools. Therefore, it is interesting to find out whether the success

recorded in chemistry and other areas of science using cooperative learning strategy would be

recorded in present study. Also, interest which is a variable in the present study that was not

considered in the previous literature will be investigated in the present study in Abakaliki

Education Zone of Ebonyi State.

Gender and Achievement in Chemistry

Abubakar and Oguguo (2011), investigated age and gender as predictors of academic

achievement of college Mathematics Science students. The purpose of this study was to

determine if there were significant relationship and contributory effect of gender and age on

the academic achievement of Mathematics students. Also, the effect of gender on academic

achievement Mathematics was ascertained. Three research questions and one hypothesis

guided the study. The design for the study was ex-post factor research design. A sample of

three hundred and thirty-two (332) students: two hundred twenty-three (223) females and one

55

hundred nine (109) males were used. Scatter-plot, mean and standard deviation were used for

the descriptive statistics while univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multiple

regressions were used for the inferential statistics. Z-test was used to test the null hypothesis

formulated at 0.05 level of significant. Result revealed a linear relationship between age and

gender. Low positive correlation coefficients were obtained for age. The null hypothesis

tested was accepted implying no significant gender difference in academic achievement of

the students. It was suggested that some more variables be included so as to determine

significant effect of academic achievement of Mathematics students. Result revealed no

significant gender difference in academic achievement of the students. The above study is

related to the present study because both of them considered gender as an important variable

in academic achievement of students. However, the above study is different from the present

study in some areas. The above study is different in terms of population of the study, location

of the study, method of data analysis, research design and subject area. Although both studies

examined the effect of gender on students achievement, but the present study considers the

effect of method and interest on gender which the reviewed study did not consider as

important variable in predicting male and female academic achievement. The researchers

identify this gap and intend to fill it in the present study.

Alao and Abubakar (2010), carried out study on gender and academic performance of

college physics students: a case study of department physics/computer science education,

Federal College of Education (Technical) Omoku, Nigeria. The purpose of the study was to

assess the gender difference in academic performance of Physics students. Four hypotheses

were formulated tested using t-test. A sample of thirty-six (36) students comprising of

eighteen (18) female eighteen (18) male students was used for the study. The results revealed

that there was no statistical significant difference in academic performance between female

and male students. Based on this, it was recommended that teachers in the department of

56

physics/computer should still improve on their pedagogy skills so as to be able to impact on

the students, stressing the importance of Physics in Technology, giving them the necessary

motivation to learn especially in their introductory courses. The above study is related to the

present study because both examined the influence of gender on academic achievement of

students. Nevertheless the above study is different from the present study in some areas. The

above study is different from this study in terms of population of students used, number of

research hypothesis, subject area and level of students. Furthermore, the reviewed literature

did not examine the effect of cooperative learning strategy as a variable in accessing male

and female students’ academic performance which the present study is investigating. The

researches identify a gap in method as a predictor of students’ academic performance in the

reviewed literature and intend to fill it. Hence the present study will determine the effect of

method (i.e. cooperative learning strategy) on students’ achievement in chemistry in

Abakaliki Education Zone of Ebonyi State.

Ayodele (2009), examined gender differences in mathematics and integrated science

achievement among Junior Secondary School Students. The purpose of the study was to

examine gender differences in Mathematics and Integrated Science achievement among the

Junior Secondary school students with particular interest on the interaction effect of gender

and school type on students’ achievement. Three hypotheses were formulated and tested

using Analysis of co- variance (ANCOVA). A sample of 840 students of both sexes drawn

from 2006 and 2007 Junior Secondary School Certificate Examinations (JSSCE) in Ekiti

State, Nigeria was used for the study. The study adopted ex-post factor research design. The

findings from the study revealed that female students outperformed male students in science.

And that the achievement of male students did not differ from female students in

mathematics. The above reviewed study is related to the present study in some areas. Both

studies use the same teaching technique (i.e. interaction effect). Both studies use the same

57

method for data analysis. However, both studies are different in some areas. They are

different in terms of subject areas, population of the study, area of the study and research

design adopted. Also they differ in the level of students used. While the former was carried

out on Junior Secondary School Students, the present study will be carried out on Senior

Secondary School Students. Though both studies are interested in determining the important

of interactions of students on male and female students academic achievement, but the

present study includes interest as a variable in order to see if male and female students really

show interest in the method which the reviewed study did not consider. Hence, the present

study will determine the effects of interest on male and female students’ achievement in

chemistry in Abakaliki Education Zone of Ebonyi State.

Oludipe (2012), investigated gender difference in Nigerian Junior Secondary students’

academic achievement in Basic Science. The main purpose of this study was to investigate

the influence of gender on Junior Secondary students’ academic achievement in Basic science

using cooperative learning teaching strategy. Three hypotheses were formulated for the study.

Sample of one hundred and twenty students (120) students obtained from the intact classes of

the three selected Junior Secondary Schools in the three selected Local Government Areas of

Ogun State, South- west Nigeria was used for the study. The study employed a quasi-

experimental design. The instrument used for data collection was achievement Test for Basic

Science (ATBS). The data collected was analyzed using mean, standard deviation and t-test.

Finding of the study revealed that there was no significant difference in academic

achievement of male female students at the pretest, posttest, and delayed posttest levels

respectively. The above study is similar to the present study in some areas. Both studies use

the same teaching technique, they are both experimental studies. However, they are different

in some areas. They are different in terms of population of the study, number of research

hypothesis, subject area and level of students. Though both studies are interested in

58

ascertaining the influence of cooperative learning strategy and gender on students’ academic

achievement, but the present study includes interest as a variable and a predictor of academic

achievement which the reviewed study did not consider. The researcher identifies a gap in

this area which the present study intends to fill.

School Location and Achievement in Chemistry

Nbina and Obomanu (2011), assessed the effects of problem solving instructional

strategies on students’ achievement and retention in chemistry with respect to location in

Rivers State. A pretest, post-test, non-equivalent control group design was adopted for the

study and two research question and two hypotheses were answered and tested. Purposive

and stratified random sampling were used to select the subjects and the results revealed no

significant difference observed on scores of both pretest post-test of urban and rural students

in the achievement and retention tests administered in the course of the study. The findings

revealed no significant difference observed on the scores of urban and rural subjects in the

problem solving. The above is similar to the present study because both of them are

experimental studies. They are both conducted in chemistry. However, the present study is

investigating cooperative learning strategy while the reviewed study assessed the effect of

problem solving instructional strategies on students’ achievement. Also the present study

includes interest as a variable as to ascertain if chemistry students show interest in the method

which the reviewed study did not consider. The researcher identifies a gap in this area which

the present study intends to fill.

Ezeudu and Obi (2013), investigated the effect of gender and location on students’

achievement in chemistry in secondary schools in Nsukka Local Government Area of Enugu

State, Nigeria. The study was guided by three research questions and three hypotheses. The

sample of the study was 827 students comprising 473 males and 354 females. Ex-post factor

design was adopted for the study. The school past records was the instrument used to collect

59

data for the study. Mean and standard deviations were used answer the research questions t-

test statistics were used to analyzed the hypotheses. The findings showed that male students

achieved significantly better than the female students in both urban and rural schools. Also

there was no significant difference in the academic achievement of students in urban and

rural schools. It was recommended among others that adequate incentives from Federal

Government, parents and stakeholders of education should be provided to female students.

The above study is related to the present study because both of them are in chemistry; they

are both experimental studies and used the same scale for data analyses. Though both studies

investigated the effect of gender and school location on students’ achievement, but the

present includes cooperative learning strategy and interest as key variables to really show

their effects on students achievement which the reviewed study did not consider. The

researcher identifies a gap in this area and the present study will seek to fill it.

Interest and Academic Achievement in Chemistry

Chukwu (2002), studied the use of local games in promoting students’ interest in

Mathematics learning. The study employed quasi-experimental, involving the non-equivalent

pre-test, post-test control group design. The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to

analyze the data. The researcher discovered that the game enhanced the students’ interest.

The interest the students developed in the learning helped them achieved higher in the

subject. The results interpreted to be as a result of pupils’ active participation in the

Instructional gaming process. The above study is related to the present study in some areas.

They are both experimental studies. Both studies shared the same method of data analysis,

and interest is another variable similar in both studies. However, they are different in some

areas. They are different in subject area.

60

Omeje (2002), studied the effect of instructional building model on students’

performance and interest in Technical Drawing. Interest was one of the variables studied.

The study was a quasi-experimental non-equivalent control group design analysis.

Hypothesis one was analyzed using analysis of covariance while hypothesis two and three

were analyzed using t-test. The researcher found out that the group taught with the

instructional building model had a higher mean interest score compared with the group taught

with conventional method. The reviewed study is related to the present study in some areas.

They are both experimental studies. Both studies share the same method of data analysis, and

interest is another variable similar in both studies. However, though they are interested in

determining the effect of method and interest on students’ achievement, but the present study

includes gender and location as variables which the reviewed study did not consider. The

researcher identifies a gap in this area and this present study intends to fill it.

Allen (2013) conducted a study to assess the effectiveness of career oriented

performance tasks (COPT) approach against the traditional teaching approach (TTA) in

enhancing student interest in chemistry in higher school in the Philippines. Specifically, it

sought to find out if student exposed to career oriented performance tasks have higher interest

in chemistry than those students exposed to the traditional teaching approach. Career oriented

performance tasks approach aims to integrate career oriented example and enquiry based

activity in general inorganic chemistry. The study used the quasi experimental pretest,

posttest control group design. The sample of the study consisted of two intact sections of first

year college students in a private higher education institution in Manila who are enrolled in

general inorganic chemistry during the second semester of school year 2011 to 2012. Thirty

nine (39) students are in the COPT class, while thirty eight (38) students are in the TTA class.

The instruments use in the study is the chemistry attitude and experiences questionnaire

(CAEQ) to assess student’s interest in chemistry. The study found out that the main posttest

61

score in the chemistry attitude and experience questionnaire was not significantly higher for

students exposed to COPT than for students exposed to TTA. The result of the study also

showed that the integration of career oriented examples in chemistry was not effective in

enhancing students’ interest in the subject given the limited time of intervention and that

longer exposure to intervention is necessary to enhance college students’ interest in

chemistry. The above study is related to the present study because both of them are carried

out in chemistry; they are both experimental studies and consider method and interest as a

key variable in students’ academic achievements in chemistry. However, the two studies

differs in the area of location, population of the study, instruments for data collection,

students level and teaching technique considered. Also, the reviewed study did not consider

the effect of gender and school location as variables which the present study considers as

predictor variables in students achievement in chemistry. The researcher identifies a gap in

the area and the present study will seek to fill it.

From the foregoing, it is seen that interest is a major tool in teaching and learning.

Interest often improves learner’s enthusiasm to learning. It is a major tool that improves

learners’ ego in learning. As a result of this, interest in learning should be considered and

teachers are expected to use a method or strategy that will ginger learner’s interest in

learning.

Summary of Literature Review

The reviews of literature were presented in three broad stages as follows: Conceptual

framework, Theoretical Framework and Emperical Studies. The conceptual framework

discusses the following; concept of chemistry, cooperative learning, methods and strategies,

interest, school location, gender in science and achievement in chemistry.

62

Major theory related to this study was also reviewed. The theory on which this

research work is anchored on is the Vygotsky (1978) constructivist theory of learning of

science and which states that the full development of a student can only be achieved through

learning cooperatively with other students.

The review of emperical studies discussed the effect of cooperative learning strategy

on students’ achievement in chemistry, gender, school location, achievement in chemistry

and interest in learning.

From the above, effective learning of chemistry and students academic achievement

requires a student-centred method in its teaching. Its proper teaching hinges on the teaching

of the learners process of learning. It was discovered that there is no conclusion among the

researchers that any particular method is ranked the best than others in teaching. However,

many attest that cooperative learning strategy is preferable to teaching chemistry and science

than the conventional lecture method.

A lot of emperical studies were carried out to know whether gender determines

students’ achievement in learning. Although different views and opinions were raised in

disciples and subject, some suggested that females are better in learning, while some

conclude d that males are good and achieve better in learning strategies. In the review of

emperical studies on gender and achievement in chemistry, some of the findings shows no

significant gender difference in chemistry, some shows that females outperformed males in

chemistry while some concluded that males achieved better in chemistry than their females

counterpart. All the reviewed work on gender and achievement are inconclusive as to which

sex achieved better in the subject.

Location is another area of argument of the scholars on whether location of school

influences the achievement in chemistry or not. The review shows no significant difference in

the achievement of students in urban and rural schools in chemistry while the research carried

63

out in other disciplines were inconclusive as to whether school location is prediction of

academic achievement in teaching – learning situation. Therefore, this present study will

thoroughly investigate the influence of school location on students’ achievement in

chemistry.

From the literature reviewed, it is clear that many studies have been carried out on

chemistry and on the place of gender and location on students’ achievement in chemistry, but

the researcher observed that most of the reviewed literature on gender and school location did

not consider interest as a major variable. The researcher identifies this gap and this present

study will fill it. Also, many studies have been carried out on the effect of cooperative

learning strategy on students’ achievement in chemistry and most of the findings shows that

cooperative learning strategy improves students’ achievement in chemistry, but the observed

that some of the reviewed literature on achievement in chemistry did not consider interest and

achievement as a variable while some of the reviewed literature only considered one kind of

cooperative learning on students’ achievement. The researcher identifies this gap and the

present study will fill it. Furthermore, the reviewed of literature on gender and achievements

in chemistry, most of the reviewed literature shows that there is no significant gender

difference and achievement while some revealed that males performed better than females in

chemistry. The researcher observed this slight contradictions from the result of the reviewed

literature and intends to ascertain the effect of gender on students’ achievement in chemistry.

Also, the literatures on school location and achievement in chemistry shows some

contradictions, while one revealed no significant difference in achievement of urban and rural

students in chemistry, the other one revealed that male students performed better than their

female counterparts in urban and rural schools. Hence the researcher identifies this

inconsistency and intends to correct it in the present study.

64

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHOD

This chapter discusses the methodology of the study under the following headings:

design of the study, area of study, population of the study, sample and sampling technique,

instrument for data collection, validation of the instrument, reliability of the instrument,

experimental procedure and control of extraneous variables and method of data analysis.

Design of the Study

The study is a quasi-experimental design. Specifically, pretest, post test non-

randomized group design was used. The design is considered appropriate because intact

classes was used by the researcher in order to avoid disruption of the normal academic

programme of the schools. The design is symbolically presented in the following figure

Grouping Pre-test Treatment Post-test

E O1 X O2

- - - - - - - - - -

C O1 -X O2

Symbolic representation of the design of the study

Where;

E = Experimental group (cooperative learning strategy)

C = Control group (lecture method)

O1 = Pre-test

O2 = Post-test

X = Treatment of experimental group

-X = Control group

- - - = the two groups are not equivalent

Source: Nworgu B.G. (2006: 42)

6364

65

Area of the Study

This study was carried out in Abakaliki education zone of Ebonyi State. The zone

consists of four local government areas namely: Ebonyi, Ohaukwu, Abakaliki and Izzi local

governments. The choice of this area was based on the fact that the researcher is familiar with

all the locations of the schools for the study and has taught chemistry in both the urban and

rural areas of the education zone. Also, the researcher thought it wise to use the education

zone for the study because of the students’ poor academic achievement in chemistry at the

senior secondary school certificate examination in the zone over the years. In addition, the

education zone is good enough to provide the data for the study because there are rural and

urban areas in the zone and being the largest education zone among the three education zones

in Ebonyi State.

Population of the Study

The population of the study consisted of all the 1175 chemistry students (651 males

and 524 females) in the forty nine (49) governments owned secondary schools in Abakaliki

Education Zone of Ebonyi State in the 2014 – 2015 academic session. (Source: Abakaliki

Education Zonal Office, Ugwuachara, Abakaliki) the choice of SS2 students is made because

students in this level have spent more than four years in secondary school. Also, they are in

the penultimate years of their secondary school. They, therefore, are presumed to have been

exposed to adequate science teaching and learning and have chosen chemistry as one of the

subject to be offered in the senior secondary certificate examination. Also, since they are not

having any internal examination that may trigger off much revision of work done in

chemistry, they are best suited for this research.

Sample and Sampling Technique

The sample of 160 chemistry students consisting 75 males and 85 females was used

for the study. Multi-stage sampling technique was used for the study. First eight co-education

66

schools were drawn from Abakaliki Local Government Area of the zone. The 4 – co-

educational schools (two from rural and two from urban areas) was drawn from the eight co-

educational schools by random sampling technique. Intact classes were used for the study so

that all the students can benefit from the lessons. Simple random sampling technique was

used to name the schools in relation to experimental and control groups.

Instrument for Data Collection

Two instruments were used for this study. The data was collected through the

Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT). The CAT consisted of 25-item. The test items were

developed using SSCE past question papers. The items covered the following contents that

were taught in the lesson. The contents are: Periodic table of elements, rates of chemical

reactions, oxidation – reduction reactions, energy and chemical reaction. The CAT was

developed from the above unit topics first by constructing a test blue print for the different

content specified above. The objectives of the topics in SS 2 chemistry curriculum served as a

guide for developing the questions. Also, Chemistry Interest Inventory scale developed by the

researcher was used. It is a thirty (30) item with four point rating scale. The respondents are

expected to indicate their degree of agreement or disagreement on a number of statements,

positive and negative about chemistry.

Validation of Instruments

The types of validity established for the instrument were face, construct and content

validity. Three experts from the University of Nigeria Nsukka (One in Psychology, and two

in Science Education) validated the instruments. Content validity of the chemistry

achievement test was carried out by preparing a test blue print which rates the questions on

the achievement test based on knowledge, comprehension and application of the selected

chemistry topics which was validated by three the experts. This is to ensure that the questions

that forms the test items are in the senior chemistry curriculum and that they are appropriate

67

to the level of the students. Chemistry Interest Inventory (CII) underwent construct validity.

This was to ensure proper working, understanding and also determine the extent to which the

inventory measures student’s interest. The comments and suggestions of the experts were

used by the researcher in making the final draft of the instruments.

Reliability of the Instrument

The reliability of the instruments was established through trial testing on a group of

20 SS2 chemistry students in Afikpo High School in Afikpo North Local government Area of

Ebonyi state. The Chemistry Interest Inventory (CII) was administered first to the students by

the regular teacher. The response was collated by the researcher and the regular teacher. The

Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) was immediately administered to the students of the

same school by the regular teacher. The Chemistry Achievement Test was marked by the

researcher and the regular teacher of the school. The Chemistry Interest Inventory and the

Chemistry Achievement Test was given to a measurement and evaluation expert in the

University of Nigeria Nsukka, for analysis of estimates of internal consistency. The analysis

of the inventory was done using the Cronbach Alpha and value obtained was 0.914,

indicating the high reliability of the instrument. The reliability of the CAT was done by the

same expert using the Kuder-Richardson (K-R20) method and the estimate gave 0.861, which

shows that the instrument is relatively reliable.

Experimental Procedures

Training of Teachers or Research Assistants: The researcher trained the chemistry

teachers that was used to carryout the study. The training included the purpose of the study, a

rehearsal on how to conduct the study by the regular teachers of the schools handling both the

control and experimental groups, and the procedure to administer the instrument. Before the

commencement of the experiment, the researcher had four days training session with the

68

chemistry teachers. The training lasted for 2 hours daily. The training involved the chemistry

teachers from the four schools for the study. The purpose of this is to:

Enable the teacher acquire the necessary competence for implementing experimental

conditions.

Enable the teachers to enhance minimum standard in the implementation of the

experimental conditions.

Educate the teachers on how to regulate the students activities during the instruction.

Enable the teachers to evaluate the students during and after the instruction

Educate the teachers on the procedure needed to administer the instrument before and

after treatment.

Educate the teachers or research assistants on the use of the lesson notes especially the

lesson note on group learning since most of the teachers are familiar with the lecture

based method of teaching and learning.

Intact Classes: Since the schools have intact classes, the teachers made use of the school time

table. Intact classes are assigned to experimental and control groups. Pretest was administered

before the experiment commences. The same regular teachers in each school taught the

control and experimental groups. This is to reduce teacher’s variable. In each of the selected

schools, the control group was taught using the conventional lecture method while the

experimental group was taught using the cooperative learning strategy. The experiment lasted

for four weeks.

Data Collection: The instruments were administered to all the students by the research

assistants or teachers. The pretest of the Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) was

administered to the students by the research assistants and the scores were collated. The

research assistants will then carry out the treatment on both control and experimental group

69

using the lesson note prepared by the researcher. At the end of the teaching, the post test for

the Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) was carried out and the scores were collated.

The chemistry interest Inventory was then administered before and after the achievement test.

This is to enable the students to tick a response on their feelings about the interest statements.

Control of Extraneous Variables

Experimental Bias: The actual teaching of the control and the experimental groups

were not done by the researcher. The regular chemistry teachers carried out the teaching. This

is to avoid possible bias by the researcher. Also, the regular chemistry teachers that handled

the control and the experimental groups were given lesson plans that were developed by the

researcher.

Test Effect: The experiment lasted for four weeks and it is expected that the period was long

enough to disallow pretest from affecting post test scores and to eliminate the possibility of

becoming test wise. Also, the questions were re-arranged before administering the post test.

Control of Hawthorns Effect: Hawthorns effect occurs when the students’ performance is

affected by virtue of being aware that they are subjects of an experiment. To control this, the

regular teachers were used for the control and the experimental groups.

Lesson Plans: To ensure the uniformity of the lesson contents, the researcher developed

lesson plans for teachers that handled both the control and experimental groups.

Control of Mortality: The chemistry teachers carrying out the teaching and testing informed

the students that the score of the test will form 10marks of the class continuous assessment

scores for the term. This is to ensure that there is no mortality as a result of absenteeism or

drop out.

Novelty Effect: To avoid novelty effect, which might give rise to increased interest,

motivation or participation on the part of the students, just because they were doing

70

something different or new, pretest and post test were administered to all intact classes used

for the study.

Method of Data Analysis

The research questions were answered using mean and standard deviation. The null

hypotheses were tested using Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), at an alpha level of 0.05

level of significance.

71

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

This chapter presents the analysis of the data collected in accordance with the

research questions and hypotheses that guided the study.

Research Question One: What are the mean achievement scores of students taught

chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with the lecture method?

Table 1: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with the lecture method

Group Pre-test Post-test

n Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain

Cooperative Learning 80 35.32 6.17 46.15 12.78 10.83

Lecture Method 80 34.52 8.15 37.60 7.80 3.08

Table 1 shows that the students who were taught chemistry using cooperative learning

strategy had mean achievement score of 46.15 with a standard deviation of 12.78 at the post-

test while those who were taught using lecture method had mean achievement score of 37.60

with a standard deviation of 7.80. Mean gain scores of 10.83 and 3.08 for the two groups

respectively imply that the students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy

achieved higher than their counterpart who were taught using lecture method.

Research Question Two: What are the mean achievement scores of male and female

students in chemistry?

71

72

Table 2: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of male and female students in chemistry

Gender Pre-test Post-test

N Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain

Male 75 28.61 7.06 45.00 14.34 16.39

Female 85 31.08 9.58 39.11 6.94 8.03

Table 2 reveals the achievement mean scores of male and female students in chemistry. It

shows that male students had post-test mean achievement score of 45.00 with a standard

deviation of 14.34 while their female counterpart had post-test mean achievement score of

39.11 with a standard deviation of 6.94. Mean gain scores of 16.39 and 8.03 for the male and

female students respectively may have indicated that male students achieved higher than their

female counterpart.

Research Question Three: What are the mean achievement scores of urban and rural

students in chemistry?

Table 3: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry

Location Pre-test Post-test

N Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain

Urban 78 30.39 8.40 42.83 12.23 12.44

Rural 82 29.47 8.73 40.96 10.53 11.49

Table 3 reveals the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. It

shows that urban students had post-test mean achievement score of 42.83 with a standard

73

deviation of 12.23 while their rural counterpart had post-test mean achievement score of

40.96 with a standard deviation of 10.53. Mean gain scores of 12.44 and 11.49 for the urban

and rural students respectively may have indicated that urban students achieved higher than

their rural counterpart.

Research Question Four: What is the effect of cooperative learning strategy on the interest

of chemistry students?

Table 4: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using lecture method

Group Pre-test Post-test

n Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain

Experimental 80 41.35 5.78 61.72 7.55 20.37

Control 80 41.85 6.82 51.85 8.45 10.00

Analysis of data in Table 4 shows that the students who were taught chemistry using

cooperative learning strategy had post mean interest score of 61.72 with a standard deviation

of 7.55 while those that were taught using lecture method had post mean interest score of

51.85 with a standard deviation of 8.45. Mean interest gain scores of 20.37 and 10.00 for the

two groups respectively imply that the students who were exposed to cooperative learning

strategy had higher post interest score than their counterpart exposed to lecture method.

Research Question Five: What is the effect of gender on the interest of chemistry students?

74

Table 5: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of male and female students in chemistry

Gender Pre-interest Post-interest

n Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain

Male 75 41.96 6.16 60.16 8.91 18.20

Female 85 41.28 6.45 53.81 8.82 12.53

Table 5 reveals the interest mean scores of male and female students in chemistry. The

analysis shows that male students had post interest mean score of 60.16 with a standard

deviation of 8.91 while their female counterpart had post interest mean score of 53.81 with a

standard deviation of 8.82. Mean interest gain scores of 18.20 and 12.53 for the male and

female students respectively may have indicated that male students had higher interest score

than their female counterpart.

Research Question Six: What is the effect of school location on the interest of chemistry

students?

Table 6: Mean and standard deviation of interest scores of urban and rural students in chemistry

Location Pre-test Post-test

N Mean SD Mean SD Mean Gain

Urban 78 41.00 6.33 56.64 8.32 15.64

Rural 82 42.17 6.31 56.52 10.35 14.35

Table 6 reveals the interest mean scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. The Table

shows that urban students had post interest mean score of 56.64 with a standard deviation of

8.32 while their rural counterpart had post interest mean score of 56.92 with a standard

deviation of 10.35. Mean interest gain scores of 15.64 and 14.35 for the urban and rural

75

students respectively may have indicated that urban students had slightly higher interest score

than their rural counterpart.

Research Question Seven: What is the interaction effect of method and gender on students’

mean achievement scores in chemistry?

Table 7: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students for the interaction effect of method and gender

Pre-test Post-test

Group Gender n Mean SD Mean SD

Cooperative Male 40 36.37 5.44 52.75 14.21

Female 40 34.27 6.12 39.55 6.31

Lecture Male35 31.17 7.87 36.14 8.03

Female45 37.13 7.45 38.73 7.51

Table 7 shows the interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in

chemistry. It shows that male students who were exposed to cooperative learning had a post-

test achievement mean score of 52.75 with a standard deviation of 14.21 while the male

students who were exposed to lecture method had a post-test achievement mean score of

36.14 with a standard deviation of 8.03. The female students who were exposed to

cooperative learning had a post-test achievement mean score of 39.55 with a standard

deviation of 6.31 while the students who were exposed to lecture method had a post-test

achievement mean score of 38.73 with a standard deviation of 7.51. This by implication

shows that both male and female students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy

had higher post-test achievement mean scores than the male and female students who were

exposed to lecture method.

Research Question Eight: What is the interaction effect of method and school location on

students’ mean achievement scores in chemistry?

76

Table 8: Mean and standard deviation of achievement scores of students for the interaction effect of method and location

Pre-test Post-test

Group Location N Mean SD Mean Std. Deviation

Cooperative Urban 42 35.54 5.83 47.45 13.44

Rural 38 35.07 6.60 44.71 12.03

LectureUrban 36 36.05 7.38 37.44 7.87

Rural 44 33.27 8.61 37.72 7.83

Table 8 shows the interaction effect of method and location on students’ achievement in

chemistry. It shows that students in urban schools who were exposed to cooperative learning

had a post-test achievement mean score of 47.45 with a standard deviation of 13.44 while the

students in urban schools who were exposed to lecture method had a post-test achievement

mean score of 37.44 with a standard deviation of 7.87. The students in rural schools who

were exposed to cooperative learning had a post-test achievement mean score of 44.71 with a

standard deviation of 12.03 while those in rural schools who were exposed to lecture method

had a post-test achievement mean score of 37.72 with a standard deviation of 7.83. This by

implication shows that both urban and rural students who were exposed to cooperative

learning had higher post-test achievement mean scores than the urban and rural students

exposed to lecture method.

HO1: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of students

taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the lecture

method.

77

Table 9: Analysis of covariance of the effect of method on students’ achievement in chemistry

Source Type III Sum of

Squares

df Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected Model 6541.015a 4 1635.254 17.953 .000

Intercept 14018.913 1 14018.913 153.907 .000

Pre-test .001 1 .001 .000 .998

Group 2132.366 1 2132.366 23.410 .000

Gender 1095.353 1 1095.353 12.025 .001

Group * Gender 2276.658 1 2276.658 24.994 .000

Error 14118.485 155 91.087

Total 301222.000 160

Corrected Total 20659.500 159

a. R Squared = .317 (Adjusted R Squared = .299)

The analysis of data in Table 9 shows that the probability associated with the calculated value

of F (23.410) for the effect of teaching method on students’ achievement in chemistry is

0.000. Since the probability value of .000 is less than the .05 level of significance (p < .05),

the null hypothesis was rejected meaning that there is a significant difference in the mean

achievement scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and

those taught using the lecture method in favour of those exposed to cooperative learning

strategy.

HO2: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of male and

female students in chemistry.

Table 9 shows that the probability associated with the calculated value of F (12.025) for the

influence of gender on students’ achievement in chemistry is 0.001. Since the probability

value of 0.001 is less than 0.05 level of significance (p < .05), the null hypothesis was

rejected. Thus, there is a significant difference in the mean achievement scores of male and

female students in chemistry in favour of the male students.

HO3: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of urban and

rural students in chemistry.

78

Table 10: Analysis of covariance for the influence of location on students’ achievement in chemistry

Source Type III Sum of

Squares

df Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected Model 3164.931a 4 791.233 7.010 .000

Intercept 12772.432 1 12772.432 113.162 .000

Pre-test 89.268 1 89.268 .791 .375

Group 2498.840 1 2498.840 22.139 .000

Location 44.004 1 44.004 .390 .533

Group * Location 105.403 1 105.403 .934 .335

Error 17494.569 155 112.868

Total 301222.000 160

Corrected Total 20659.500 159

a. R Squared = .153 (Adjusted R Squared = .131)

Table 10 reveals that the calculated value of F (0.390) for the influence of school location on

students’ achievement in chemistry had an associated probability value of 0.533. For the fact

that the probability value is greater than the 0.05 level of significance (p > .05), the null

hypothesis was accepted. This implies that there is no significant difference in the mean

achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry.

HO4: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of students taught

chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the lecture method.

Table 11: Analysis of covariance of the effect of method on students’ interest in chemistry

Source Type III Sum of

Squares

Df Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected Model 5379.729a 4 1344.932 24.108 .000

Intercept 5580.251 1 5580.251 100.027 .000

Pre-interest 143.789 1 143.789 2.577 .110

Group 3690.988 1 3690.988 66.162 .000

Gender 1256.525 1 1256.525 22.523 .000

Group * Gender 32.597 1 32.597 .584 .446

Error 8647.046 155 55.787

Total 529998.000 160

Corrected Total 14026.775 159

a. R Squared = .384 (Adjusted R Squared = .368)

79

Table 11 shows that the calculated value of F (66.162) for the effect of teaching method on

students’ interest in chemistry is 0.000. Thus, there is a significant difference between the

mean interest scores of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and

those taught with lecture method in favour of those taught using cooperative learning

strategy. This is for the fact the probability value of 0.000 is less than the 0.05 level of

significance (p <.05).

HO5: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of male and female

students in chemistry when taught using cooperative learning strategy.

Data analysis in Table 11 reveals that the probability associated the calculated value of F

(22.523) for the influence of gender on students’ interest is 0.000. Thus, there is a significant

difference in the mean interest scores of male and female students in chemistry since the

probability value of 0.000 is greater than the 0.05 level of significance (p < .05).

HO6: There is no significant difference between the mean interest scores of urban and rural

students in chemistry.

Table 12: Analysis of covariance for the influence of location on students’ interest in chemistry

Source Type III Sum of

Squares

df Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected Model 4166.482a 4 1041.620 16.374 .000

Intercept 5463.768 1 5463.768 85.888 .000

Pre-interest 156.233 1 156.233 2.456 .119

Group 3961.200 1 3961.200 62.269 .000

Location 28.352 1 28.352 .446 .505

Group * Location 52.981 1 52.981 .833 .363

Error 9860.293 155 63.615

Total 529998.000 160

Corrected Total 14026.775 159

a. R Squared = .297 (Adjusted R Squared = .279)

80

Analysis of data in Table 12 reveals that the calculated value of F (0.446) for the influence of

school location on students’ interest in chemistry had an associated probability value of

0.505. For the fact that the 0.505 probability value is more than the 0.05 level of significance,

the null hypothesis was accepted. Thus, there is no significant difference in the mean interest

scores of urban and rural students in chemistry.

HO7: There is no significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ mean

achievement scores in chemistry.

Table 9 reveals that the calculated value of F (24.994) for the interaction effect of method and

gender on students’ achievement in chemistry had a probability value of 0.000. Hence, there

is a significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in chemistry

since the probability value of 0.000 is less than the 0.05 level of significance (p < 0.05).

HO8: There is no significant interaction effect of method and school location on students’

mean achievement scores in chemistry.

Table 10 reveals that the associated probability for the calculated value of F (0.934) for the

interaction effect of method and school location on students’ achievement in chemistry is

0.335. Since the probability value of 0.335 is greater than the 0.05 level of significance (p >

0.05), the null hypothesis was accepted. Hence, there is no significant interaction effect of

method and school location on students’ achievement in chemistry.

Summary of the Findings

The following are the findings of the study;

1. Students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy achieved higher than

their counterpart who were taught using lecture method. Further analysis showed that

there is a significant difference in the mean achievement scores of students taught

chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the lecture

method in favour of those exposed to cooperative learning strategy.

81

2. Male students achieved higher than their female counterpart. Besides, there is a

significant difference in the mean achievement scores of male and female students in

chemistry in favour of the male students.

3. Urban students achieved higher than their rural counterpart. However, there is no

significant difference in the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in

chemistry.

4. Students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy had higher post interest

score than their counterpart exposed to lecture method. It was further found that there

is a significant difference between the mean interest scores of students taught

chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with lecture method in

favour of those taught using cooperative learning strategy.

5. Male students had higher interest score than their female counterpart. Thus, there is a

significant difference in the mean interest scores of male and female students in

chemistry.

6. Urban students had higher interest score than their rural counterpart. However, there

is no significant difference in the mean interest scores of urban and rural students in

chemistry.

7. Male and female students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement

mean scores than the male and female students of the control group. Besides, there is

a significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in

chemistry.

8. Urban and rural students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement

mean scores than the urban and rural students of the control group. It was further

found that there is no significant interaction effect of method and school location on

students’ achievement in chemistry.

82

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUMMARY

The chapter presents the discussion of findings; conclusions reached from the findings

of the study; educational implications of the study; recommendations; limitations of the study

and suggestions for further research and the summary of the study.

Discussion of Findings

The discussion of the findings was done under the following subheadings;

Effect of cooperative learning method on the achievement and interest scores of students in chemistry

Effect of cooperative learning method on the interest scores of students in chemistry

Effect of gender on achievement and interest scores of students in chemistry

Effect of gender on interest scores of students in chemistry

Effect of location on achievement and interest scores of students in chemistry

Effect of location on interest scores of students in chemistry

Interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement scores of students in chemistry

Interaction effect of method and location on students’ achievement scores of students in chemistry

Effect of cooperative learning method on the achievement and interest scores of students in chemistry

The findings of the study showed that students who were exposed to cooperative learning

strategy achieved higher than their counterpart who were taught using lecture method.

Further analysis showed that there is a significant difference in the mean achievement scores

of students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using

lecture method in favour of those exposed to cooperative learning strategy. This finding is in

line with the findings of Uwameiye and Ogunbameru (2005) who discovered in their study

82

83

that students exposed to cooperative learning strategy significantly performed better than the

students exposed to lecture method of teaching. This result also agrees with the result of

Okwor (2007) whose study also revealed a significant difference in the mean achievement

scores of students taught with guided discovery method. Ozioko (2015) obtained similar

result in her study. Nbina (2013) also found that cooperative learning strategy was

significantly superior to the demonstration method in enhancing the cognitive achievement of

students. These confirmed the fact that cooperative learning strategy is more effective than

the lecture method in enhancing students’ achievement in chemistry. Buttressing this finding,

Gambari and Olumorin (2013) & Dhananjay and Rima (2013) found that there is a significant

difference in the performance of students taught mathematics using two instructional

approaches in favour of those taught using cooperative strategy. Besides, it has been shown in

literature review that cooperative learning strategy plays important roles in enhancing a

balanced development of the child, that is in both cognitive, effective and psychomotor skills.

Effect of cooperative learning method on the interest scores of students in chemistry

The findings of the study revealed that students who were exposed to cooperative learning

strategy had higher post interest score than their counterpart exposed to lecture method. It

was further found that there is a significant difference between the mean interest scores of

students taught chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with lecture

method in favour of those taught using cooperative learning strategy. This finding agrees with

the findings of Chukwu (2002) and Omeje (2002). Chukwu (2002) found in a similar study

that the use of innovative strategy enhances the interest of students more than the

conventional method of teaching. Omeje also found that students taught using instructional

building model had higher interest score than those taught using conventional method.

84

Influence of gender on achievement scores of students in chemistry

The findings of the study revealed that male students achieved higher than their female

counterpart. Further statistical analysis showed that there is a significant difference in the

mean achievement scores of male and female students in chemistry in favour of the male

students. In line with the findings of this study is the finding of Titilayo (2015). Titilayo

(2015) found that the academic performances of both male and female students in accounting

differ significantly when exposed to cooperative learning strategy. On the other hand, the finding

of this study disagrees with the findings of Okeke (2013) and Okonkwo (2014). Okeke

(2013) found that project-based method favours both male and female students alike in

Government curriculum instruction. Okonkwo (2014) found that there is no significant

influence of gender on students’ achievement in Government in secondary schools when

taught using guided discovery method.

Influence of gender on interest scores of students in chemistry

The findings of the study showed that male students had higher interest score than their

female counterpart. Thus, there is a significant difference in the mean interest scores of male

and female students in chemistry. This finding agrees with the findings of Titilayo (2015)

who found that the interest scores of both male and female students in accounting differ

significantly after being exposed to cooperative learning strategy. However, the finding

disagrees with the findings of Oludipe (2012) who found that there is no significant

difference in the interest scores of male and female students in Basic science.

Influence of location on achievement scores of students in chemistry

Urban students achieved higher than their rural counterpart. However, there is no significant

difference in the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. This

finding disagrees with findings of Okoro (2011), Ezeudu and Obi (2013) and Ozioko (2015).

Okoro (2011) concluded that school location had a moderating influence upon the

85

achievement of students in cognitive and non-cognitive instruments in favour of the urban

students. Ezeudu and Obi (2013) found that male students achieved significantly better than

the female students in both urban and rural schools. Ozioko (2015) found that school location

is found to have a significant effect on the students’ achievement in Foods and Nutrition

when taught using cooperative learning strategy. The explanation for the observed differential

achievement in favour of urban schools may be that the surrounding of rural schools is

generally unstimulating or insufficiently stimulating unlike urban areas which have lots of

fascinating and stimulating materials for teaching. That was not the case for the present study

as location was found not to be a significant factor on the achievement of students in

chemistry.

Influence of location on interest scores of students in chemistry

The findings of the study revealed that students in urban schools had higher interest score

than their rural counterpart. However, there is no significant difference in the mean interest

scores of urban and rural students in chemistry. Buttressing this finding, Nbina and Obomanu

(2011) found no significant difference in the interest scores of students in urban and rural

schools.

Interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement scores of students in chemistry

Male and female students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement mean

scores than the male and female students of the control group. Besides, there is a significant

interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in chemistry. Contrary to

the findings of this study are the findings of Okeke (2013) and Okonkwo (2014). Okeke (2013)

found that project-based method favours both male and female students alike in Government

curriculum instruction. Similarly Okonkwo (2014) found that there is no significant influence of

gender on students’ achievement in Government in secondary schools when taught using guided

discovery method.

86

Interaction effect of method and location on students’ achievement of students in chemistry

Urban and rural students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement mean

scores than the urban and rural students of the control group. It was further found that there is

no significant interaction effect of method and school location on students’ achievement in

chemistry. This finding disagrees with the finding of Ozioko (2015). Ozioko (2015) found

that school location was found to have a significant effect on the students’ achievement in

Foods and Nutrition when taught using cooperative learning strategy.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of this study the following conclusions were drawn. Cooperative

learning strategy significantly enhanced academic achievement and interest of students in

chemistry more than the conventional lecture method. Gender had a significant influence on

the achievement and interest of students in chemistry. This means that male students achieved

higher in chemistry more than the female students when exposed to cooperative learning

strategy. Location of school was not a significant factor on students’ achievement and interest

in chemistry when taught using cooperative learning strategy.

Educational Implications of the Findings

The findings of this study have some obvious educational implications for Teachers, students,

curriculum planners and school administrators.

The findings of the study showed that cooperative learning strategy had significant effect on

students’ achievement and interest in chemistry than the conventional lecture method. This

implies that the continuous use of conventional lecture method may not improve the

achievement and interest of students in chemistry.

This finding has implication for the teachers in the sense that the application of the strategy

will reduce the teachers’ stress in the classroom as most of the learning activities will be

87

carried out by the students while the teachers serve as facilitators. The implication of the

findings to students is that cooperative learning strategy is activity oriented and student-

centered strategy which demands seriousness, practice and hardwork on the part of the

students.

For the curriculum planners, the findings imply that they can develop appropriate Curriculum

that will make provision for the teacher to adopt cooperative learning strategy that will

encourage active participation of the students in teaching and learning. The findings of the

study equally imply that school administrators need to organize workshops and seminars to

disseminate the information on the efficacy of cooperative learning strategy on students’

achievement and interest in chemistry.

The findings equally showed that cooperative learning strategy is gender biased in favour of

the male students. This implies that frantic efforts should be made by the school authorities to

enable the female students improve their chemistry abilities when taught using cooperative

learning strategy. The findings of the study showed that cooperative learning strategy is

location friendly implying that equal attention should be given to both urban and rural school

students when adopting the strategy. This means that cooperative learning is not location

biased.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations were proffered:

1. Teachers of chemistry should adopt the use of cooperative learning strategy in the

teaching of the subject since its efficacy has been confirmed.

88

2. Teacher training institutions such as colleges of education and the universities should

adopt cooperative learning strategy as a teaching strategy for teaching their students,

since those students will turn out to be chemistry teachers in secondary schools.

3. Cooperative learning strategy should be integrated into the curriculum of chemistry at

secondary school level as one of the effective teaching approaches for use.

4. Government authorities both State and Federal should organize short time training,

workshops or seminars on how to make use of cooperative learning strategy for

teaching chemistry effectively.

5. Frantic efforts should be made by the school authorities to enable the female students

improve their chemistry abilities when taught using cooperative learning strategy.

Limitations of the study

The findings of this study may have been affected by the following factors;

1. Only few schools in the study area were used for the study. The sample of the study

may have not been good enough to represent the whole schools in the study area.

2. The content covered were only few units of the SS II chemistry curriculum

Suggestions for Further Research

The following suggestions were made for further research

1. The study can be replicated by future researchers in which large sample size will be

used for the sake of generalizability of the findings.

2. The study can also be replicated using various contents of chemistry curriculum.

Summary of the Study

The study investigated the effect of cooperative learning strategy on students’ Achievement

and interest in chemistry in Abakaliki Education Zone of Ebonyi State. Eight research

questions and eight null hypotheses which were tested at the 0.05 level of significance guided

89

the study. Quasi experimental research design was adopted for the study. The study was

carried out in Abakaliki Education Zone of Ebonyi State. The population of the study was

1175 SS II students in the said zone. The sample of the study was of 160 SS I1 students.

Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) and Chemistry Interest Inventory (CII) were used for

data collection. Three experts validated the instrument. The reliability coefficients of 0.914

and 0.861 were obtained for CAT and CII respectively. Mean and standard deviation were

used to answer research questions and ANCOVA was used to test research hypotheses at 0.05

level of significance. The findings of the study showed that;

1. Students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy achieved higher than

their counterpart who were taught using lecture method. Further analysis showed that

there is a significant difference in the mean achievement scores of students taught

chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught using the lecture

method in favour of those exposed to cooperative learning strategy.

2. Male students achieved higher than their female counterpart. Besides, there is a

significant difference in the mean achievement scores of male and female students in

chemistry in favour of the male students.

3. Urban students achieved higher than their rural counterpart. However, there is no

significant difference in the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students in

chemistry.

4. Students who were exposed to cooperative learning strategy had higher post interest

score than their counterpart exposed to lecture method. It was further found that there

is a significant difference between the mean interest scores of students taught

chemistry using cooperative learning strategy and those taught with lecture method in

favour of those taught using cooperative learning strategy.

90

5. Male students had higher interest score than their female counterpart. Thus, there is a

significant difference in the mean interest scores of male and female students in

chemistry.

6. Urban students had higher interest score than their rural counterpart. However, there

is no significant difference in the mean interest scores of urban and rural students in

chemistry.

7. Male and female students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement

mean scores than the male and female students of the control group. Besides, there is

a significant interaction effect of method and gender on students’ achievement in

chemistry.

8. Urban and rural students of the experimental group had higher post-test achievement

mean scores than the urban and rural students of the control group. It was further

found that there is no significant interaction effect of method and school location on

students’ achievement in chemistry.

Based on the findings of the study and the educational implications, recommendations were

highlighted. Some limitations that could have undermined the external validity of the study

were also highlighted from where suggestions for further studies were proffered.

91

REFERENCES

Ababio, O.Y. (2013). New school chemistry for senior secondary school: Africa Feb publishers (6th edition).

Abubarkar, R.B. & Oguguo, O.D. (2011).Age and gender as predictors of academic achievement of college mathematics and science students. Proceedings of 2011 International Conference on Teaching, Learning and Change. International Association for Teaching and Learning, 736 – 748.

Adams, A.R. (2013). Cooperative learning effects on the classroom. Unpublished M.Ed. Thesis, Faculty of Arts Education, Northern Michigan University.

Adekunle O.B. (2010). Effect of guided discovery and think – pair – share strategies on secondary school students’ achievement in chemistry. (Unpublished) Ph.D. Thesis, Olabisi Onabanjo University Ago-Iwoye.

Adeyemi B.A. (2008). Effects of cooperative learning and problem solving strategies on junior secondary school students’ achievement in social studies. Journal of Research in Education Psychology.16(3), 2008, 691 – 708.

Aguele, L.I. & Uhumniah (2008). Female Participation in Science, Technology and Mathematics (STM) Education in Nigeria and National Development. Journal of Social Science, 15(2), 121 – 126.

Agugu, C.U. (2012). Ethical issues in scientific and technological practices, UNN, department of science education. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nigeria Nsukka.

Allen A. (2013). Career – oriented performance tasks: Effects on students’ interest in chemistry. Asia – Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching. 14 (2), 12.

Allen, A.E. (2013). Career – oriented performance task in chemistry: Effects on students’ critical thinking skills. Education Research International, 2(2), 81 – 90.

Alokan, F.B. (2010). Influence of sex and location on student academic performance. The Social Sciences (TSS), 5(4), 340 – 345.

Aluko, K.O. & Olorundare, A.S. (2002). Effects of cooperative and individualistic instructional strategies on students problem solving abilities in chemistry. African Research Review. 1(1), 44.

Aronson, E; and Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes. I., & Snapp, M. (1978).The Jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Awoniyi, S.A. (2000). Sex differences in academic performance. Nigerian Journal of Gender and Development, 1(1 & 2), 35.

91

92

Ayodele, M.O. (2009). Gender differences in mathematics and integrated science achievement among junior secondary school students, Malaysia Journal of Learning and Instruction, 6, 41 – 53.

Azikiwe U. (1998).Language teaching and learning. Onitsha: Africa Fep. Publishers Ltd. Azikiwe, U. (2005). Language influence on achievement in Language. Paper presented at the

conference of the association of English language teachers in the colleges of Education and polytechnics held at the federal college of Education, Omoku, Rivers State.

Balarabe, M. (1999). Motivation, learning and performances among Nigerian students. A seminar paper presented in Faculty of Education, Zaria Ahamadu Bello University.

Barnes, S.L. (2012). Achievement, motivation for teacher education analysis of attitude about future. Success for residence in poor urban neighbourhood. Sociological Focus, 35(2), 201 – 208.

Bilesanmi-Awoderu, J.B. (2006). Effect of computer-assisted instruction, simulation/games on the academic achievement of secondary school students in Biology, Sokoto Educational Review, 8(1), 49 – 60.

Billings, D. (2000). Women’s way of knowing and the Digital Divide. Presented in an interactive paper presentation.

Bodunde, H.A. (1991). Factors influencing adolescent attitude to school rules and regulations in Zaria secondary school. Unpublished Masters Degree Thesis, Zaria Faculty of Education, Ahmedu Bello University.

Bosede, A. F. (2010). Influence of sex and location on relationship between students problems and academic performance. The Social Science, 5(4) 340 – 345.

Chukwu, C.R. (2012). Effects imagery and gender on secondary school students’ achievement and interest in essay writing in Anambra State, Nigeria. Unpublished M.ed. Thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Nigeria Nsukka.

Chukwu, J.O. (2002). Promoting interest in mathematics learning through local games, International Journal of Arts and Technology Education 2(1) 124 – 136.

Cohen, E. (1986). Designing group work. Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.

Cohen, E. (1987). Statistical power analyses for the behaviour (2nded) Hillsdale: New Jersey Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cohen, E. G. &Aronson, E. (1994). Designing group–work. Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom (2nd Edition). New York, Teachers College Press.

Cohen, J., Kennedy-Justice, M., Pai S., Torres, C., Toomey, R., & DePierro, E. (2000), encouraging meaningful quantitative problem solving. Journal of Chemical Education, 77, 1166 – 1173.

93

Coleman, J. (1961). The adolescent society. New York: Free Press.

Damon, W. & Phelps E. (1989). Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education. International Journal of Educational Research. 58(2), 9 – 19.

Damon, W. (1984). Peer education: The untapped Potential. Journal of Applied Development Psychology 5, 331 – 343.

Dhananjay. D. & Rima. K. (2013). Effect of cooperative learning on achievement in environmental science of school students’. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications 7, (2), 2250 – 2258.

Dienye & Gbamanja (1990). Science education, theory and practice.

Dooly, M. (ed) (2008). Constructing knowledge together. Telecollaborative language learning. A Guide Book to Moderating Intercultural Collaboration Online. Bern: Peter Lang.

Ekeh, P.U. (2003). Gender bias and achievement in science and mathematics among school pupils. Implication for human resource development, Journal of Curriculum Organization of Nigeria, 10(1), 30 – 33.

Erinoso, Y.E. (2005). Women and Science. 36thInangural Lecture, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago – Iwoye, 1 – 37.

Ezeh, D.N. (2013). Science without women: a paradox. And inaugural lecture of the University of Nigeria, delivered on May 30th.

Ezeudu, F.O. & Obi T.N. (2013). Effect of gender and location on students’ achievement in chemistry in secondary schools in Nsukka Local Government Area of Enugu State, Nigeria. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences. 3(15), 50 – 55.

Ezeudu, S.A. (2003). Classroom environment as correlate of students’ cognitive achievement in senior secondary school geography. The Journal of World Council for Curriculum and Instruction Nigeria chapter, 4(2), 65 – 73.

Fantuzzo, J.W., K. Polite and N. Grayson (1990). “An evaluation of reciprocal peer tutoring across elementary school settings”, Journal of School Psychology. 28 (4), 309 – 323.

Federal Government of Nigeria (2008). Millennium development goals’ report.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004). National Policy on Education. Lagos: NERDC.

Gambari & Olumorin, (2013). The effectiveness of Video-Based Cooperative Learning Strategy on high, medium and low Academic Achievers in Mathematics. An online Journal of the African Educational Research work. 13,(2).

Garuba. M.A. Agweda, F.E. & Abumere I. (2012). The contributions of science and technology education to national development. The Nigerian Experience. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(7), 250-257

94

Goodwin, M. W. (1999). Cooperative learning and social skills: What skills to teach and how to teach them. Interventions in School & Clinic, (35) 29 – 34.

Habibian, F. (2012). Usage pattern, perceived use fullness and ease of use of computer games among Malaysian elementary school students. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 4 (23), 5285 – 5297.

Hallak, J. (1977). Planting the location of schools: An instrument of educational policy. Paris: UNSECO-LLEP.

Huang, F, & Su, J. (2010). Study of teaching model based on cooperative learning. Studies in Literature and Language. 1 (6), 3-5

Ibe, F. N. (2006). Multilingualism and translation as necessary factors for Nigerian language policy. International Journal of research in Arts and social sciences, 4, 842 – 451.

Igboanugo, B.I.K. (2013). Effects of peer-teaching on students’ achievement and interest in senior secondary school difficult chemistry concepts. International Journal of Educational Research, 12 (2), 61-71.

Igbokwe, U.L. (2007).Effects of the cognitive academic language learning approach (CALLA) on students’ achievement in essay writing. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Nigeria Nsukka.

Ibraheem, T.L. (2011). Effects of two modes of student steam achievement division (STAD) strategies on senior secondary School Students’ learning outcomes in chemical kinetics. Asia – Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 12 (2), 7.

John, D. Johnson R. and Holubee, E. (1994a). Cooperative learning in the classroom. Virginia Association for supervisions and curriculum development. 9 (7), 31 – 35.

Johnson, D.W., R. Johnson, and K. Smith. (1991). Cooperative learning: increasing college faculty instructional productivity. ASHE – ERIC higher education report, 20, (4), The George Washington University, Graduate School of Education and Human Development.

Johnson, D.W. and R.T. Johnson (1999). Learning together and alone (5thed), Englenood Cliffs, N. J.: Pretice – Hall.

Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1986). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R. and Smith, K. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Holubec, E.J. (1993). Cooperation in the classroom (6 thed). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

95

Johnson, D., Johnson, R, Holubec, E., (1984). Circles of Learning: Cooperation in the classroom .Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum development.

Johnson, D.W. and Johnson, R.T. (1993). Implementing cooperative learning education digest.

Johnson, G.M. (1998). Principles of instruction for at-risk learners preventing school failure. (42), 167 – 181.

Kagan, S. (1985). Cooperative learning resources for teachers. River Side: University of California at Riverside.

Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative learning. San Clemente: Resources for Teachers.

Kagan, S. (2009).Theory of cooperative learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing, 2009.

Kardia, D.S. (2004). Instructor identity: The impact of Gender and Race on facility experiences with teaching. Machigan. University of Machigan Press.

Kennedy, H.L. (2000). Society cannot continue to exclude women from the field of Science and Mathematics. Marks Education, 120 (3), 529.

Kossau, S. (2006) Gender difference in motivation to learn French. Canadian Modern Language Review. 62(3), 65 – 96.

Kolawole, E.B. (2007). Effects of competitive and cooperative learning strategies on Academic Performance of Nigerian Students in Mathematics. Educational Research Review, 3(1), 33 – 37.

Kuliman, A., Fair Weather, H. and Batterworth, G. (1977). Sex Difference in Verbal Performance Discrepancies, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 47 (1), 85 – 90.

Marja, R.R. (2008). Effect of cooperative learning method on students’ Achievement in Reading comprehension. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

Meizeobi, D.I. (2009). Managing instruction in the classroom. In Igbokwe, U.L &Eze U.N. (eds). Classroom management for curriculum implementation: Applying psychological principles. Enugu: Timex.

National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, (1994). Trends in academic progress. Retrieved from nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?

Nbina, J.B., &Obomanu, B.J. (2011).Assessment of effects of problem solving instructional strategies on students’ achievement and retention in chemistry with respect to location in Rivers state. World Journal of Education, 1(2), 74.Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/wje.vln2p74.

96

Nelson, J. R. & Johnson A. (1996). Effects of direct instruction, cooperative learning and independent learning practices on the classroom behaviour of students with behavioural disorders: A comparative analysis. Journal of Emotional & Behavioural Disorders (4), 53 – 63.

Njoku, Z.C. (2003). Development and preliminary validation of scale for the assessment of students’ interest in o’ level chemistry activities. Journal of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 38 (152), 64 – 70.

Njoku, Z.C. (2013) Lesson note on science & society. Department of Science Education. University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Nigeria.

Nnamani, B.I. & Audu, U.D. (2005). Breaking gender barriers in science technology and mathematics education (STME): Problem and prospect. Unpublished Seminar Paper Presented to the Department of Science Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

Nwachukwu, T.A. (2004). Psychology of learning. De Sandax Limited, Enugu.

Nwankwo, I.O. (2004). Science and scientific knowledge stand on its class as the best discovery of mankind but its abuse is fatal. Science for man. An Annual Publication by Science Education Students’ Association, UNN. 6(1), 52 – 56.

Nworgu, B.G. (2006): Educational research: Basic issues and methodology. University Trust Publishers Nsukka.

Nwosu, I.E. (2012).Gender role perceptions and changing the role of women in Nigeria. International journal of Agriculture and rural development. 15 (3), 1240-1246.

Ogbu, C. (2008). Effects of cooperative and product learning strategies on senior secondary school students’ achievement in essay writing in Afikpo education zone. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki.

Ogundokun, M.O. (2007). Personological factors, school location and types as pridictors of Academic Performance among Senior Secondary School Students in South Western Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ibadan.

Ogundokun, M.O. & Adeyemo, D.A. (2010). Emotional intelligence and academic achievement: The moderating influence of age, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The African Symposium, 10 (2), 127 – 141.

Ojebisi, A.O; Olosunde, G.R., & Isola, O.M. (2011). Instructional material and academic achievement in physics: Some policy implication. European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2(1), 2220 – 2425.

Ojoawo, A.O. (1990). An empirical study of factors responsible for poor academic performance in secondary schools in Oyo State. African Journal of Education Management, 4 (1 & 2), 140 – 148.

Okeke, E.C. (2008). Clarification and analysis of gender concept. Focus on research, reproduction health education, and gender sensitive classrooms. Science teachers association of Nigeria. Gender and STM Education series, 2, 5-8.

97

Okoro, N.Z. (2006). Effects of school location on problem solving among secondary school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 10(4), 307 – 312.

Oludipe, D. & Awokoyo, J. O. (2009). Effects of cooperative learning teaching strategy on the reduction of students’ anxiety for learning chemistry. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(1), 31.

Oludipe, D.I. (2012). Gender difference in Nigeria junior secondary students’ academic achievement in basic science. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 2 (1), 93 – 99.

Omeje, H.O. (2002). Effect of instructional building model on students’ performance and interest in technical drawing. International Journal of Arts and Technology Education, 2(1), 85 – 86.

Onah, E.F. (2011). Influence of sex and school location on students’ achievement in agricultural science. African Journal of Science, Technology and Mathematics Education. (AJSTME), 1(1), 96 – 102.

Onuigbo, L.N. (2009). Managing diversity in the classroom. In Igbokwe, U.L. & Eze U.N.N. (eds). Classroom management for curriculum implementation: Applying Psychological Principles. Enugu. Timex.

Onyilo, B.D. & Onyilo, O.G. (2010). Academic achievement and self-concept of secondary school students. Journal of Research in National Development, 8(2), 67 – 68.

Opara, J.A. (2004); Refocusing research in science, technology and mathematics (STM)

education in Nigeria issues challenges and the way forward. Preceding of the 45th

Annual Conference of STAN, 43 – 49.

Osokoya, M.M. (1998). Some determinant of Secondary School Students’ Academic achievement in Chemistry in Oyo State. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.

Owoeye, J.S. (2011). The effect of integration of location, facilities and class-size on academic achievement of secondary school students in Ekiti State, Nigeria, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan.

Owoeye, J.S. and Yara, P.O. (2011).School location and academic achievement of secondary school in Ekiti State, Nigeria. Asian Social Science (ASS). 7 (5), 170 – 173.

Ozioko, E.A. (2003). Effect of word attack skills on the achievement of senior school students in reading comprehension in Nnewi Education Zone of Anambra State, Unpublished M.Ed. thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

Pandian, S. S. (2004).Cooperative learning in biology. The effect of computers. Department of Education, Arunachi University, India.

Panitz, T. (2000).The motivational benefits of cooperative learning. In M. the all (Eds.) motivation from within: Approaches for Encouraging faculty and students to Excel, 8, 20 – 45, San Francisco, C. AiJossey Bass publishers.

98

Paul, A.M. (2013). How the power of interest drives learning. Retrieved from: blogs.Kqued.Org/mindshift/2013/how-the-power-of-interest-drives-Learning.

Piaget, J. (1926). The language and thought of the child. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. New York: Harcourt Brall.

Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. New York: Viking. Piaget, J. (1972). The Psychology of Intelligence, New York: Harcourt Brall.

Prado, L. & Plourde, L.A. (2005). Increasing reading comprehension through explicit teaching of reading strategies: Is there a difference among the genders? Reading improvement, 32 – 43.

Prater, M.A; Bruhl, S. & Serna, L. A. (1998) Acquiring social skills through cooperative learning and teacher – directed instruction. Remedial and Special Education (19) 160 – 172.

Pressley, M. (2006).Verbal protocols of reading. The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, Ndi Lawrence Erlbaum.

Raimi S. M. & Adeoye, F. A. (2006).Gender differences among College Students’ as determinants of performance in Integrated Science. African Journal of Educational Research, 8(1&2), 41 – 49.

Saage.O. (2009).Causes of mass failure in chemistry examination among students. A commissioned paper presented at Government Secondary Schools Science day, Karu, Abuja. 1st March, 2009.

Salami, S. O (2004). Affective characteristics as determinant of academic performance of school going adolescents: Implications for counseling practice. Sokoto Educational Journal. 3 (2), 20-25.

Salami, S. O. (1998). The influence of causal attribution, level of academic performance and gender on achievement related behaviour of science students. Journal of Research in Education, 2 (2), 67 – 76.

Salu; Y. (2000).Video card games as a learning design for teacher education. International Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences. HelSink, Finland: 45(3), 370 – 380.

Samuel, W. W. & John, G. M. (2004).Effects of cooperative class experiment teaching method on secondary school students’ chemistry achievement in Kenya’s Nakuru District. International Education Journal, 5(1), 26 – 35.

Sapan – Shevin, M. (2004). Introduction, in E. G. Cohen, C. M; Brody & M. Sapon – Shevin (Eds) Teaching Cooperative Learning: the Challenges for Teacher Education. Albany, NY, State. University of New York Press. 1 – 10.

99

Shield, B. & Dockrell, J. (2008). The effects of classrooms and environmental noise on children’s academic performance, 9th International congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem (ICBEN), Foxwoods.

Slavin, R.E. (1983). When does Cooperative Learning increase student achievement? Psychological Bulletin, 94 (3), 429 – 445.

Slavin, R.E. (1994). Cooperative learning. In T. Husen& T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds), The International Encyclopedia of Education (2): 1094 – 1099. Kidlington, Oxford: Elsevier Science.

Slavin, R.E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research and practice. Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster Company.

Slavin, R.E. (1995). Co-operative learning: theory, research, and practice. (2nd edition). Cooperative learning. In G. McCulloch & D. International Encyclopedia of Education. Abington, UK: Routledge.

Slavin, R.E., & N.L. Karweit, (1985). Effects of whole-class, ability – grouped, and individualized instruction on mathematics achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 22: 351 – 367.

Slavin, R.E., Karwelt, N.L. & Madden, N.A. (1989) Effective programs for students At – Risk. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Slavin, R.E. (1991). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning Educational Leadership, 48(5), 71 – 82.

Slavin, R.E. (1994). School and classroom organization in beginning reading Classroom: Aids and instructional grouping. In R.E. Slavin, N.L. Kareint and B.A. Wasik, (eds). Preventing early school failure: Research on effective strategies. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Slavin, R.E. (1995b). Research on cooperative learning and achievement what we know, what we need to know http:www.Scovcsos.WhatEd/sfa/coop/ear.Html.

Slavin, R.E. and Oickle, E. (1981). Effect of learning teams on students achievement and race relations. Treatment by race interaction. Sociology of Education, 54, 173 – 180.

Slavin, R.E., and N. A. Madden (eds) (2009). Two million children: Success for all, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Springer, L. M. Stanne, and S. Donovan. Meta-analysis of Small group learning in science, Math, engineering and technology disciplines, Madison, WI: National Institute for Science Education, 1997.

Stonehouse, A. (2012). Interest based learning. Retrieved from: http://Sorden.com/multimedia2012Pdf.

100

Subramamian P. R. (2009). Motivational effect of interest on students’ engagement, and learning in physical education. Retrieved from: www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens.

The West African Examination Council (2012). Senior School Certificate Examination May/June 2012, Chief Examiners Reports. Nigeria.

Umanah, M.K. (2005). Comparative study of urban and rural chemistry students in secondary schools, Journal of Research in Science Teachings, 1(1), 162 – 170.

Umback, P.D. (2004). Aligning faculty and students’ Behariourism: Realizing the Promise of Greater Expectation. 90 (4), 24 – 31.

Umo, U.C. (2007).Effect of games on the achievement and interest of junior secondary school students in Igbo grammar. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

Umoh, C.G. (2003). A theoretical Analysis of the effects of gender and family education on human resource development, Journal of Curriculum Organization of Nigeria.10(1), 1 – 4.

UNESCO, (2009). First international conference on girls and women in science and technology in Africa, Bamako Mali, 13-15 July, 2009.

Uwah, C. (2005). De-emphasizing gender difference in human resource development. The need for family education. Nigerian Journal of Curriculum Studies.2(1), 60 – 63.

Uzoegwu, P. N. (2004). The effect of the cooperative learning method on students’ achievement in English essay writing. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

Viann, E. (2004). Gender difference and the effects of cooperative learning in college level mathematics. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Curtin University of Technology.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Webb N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research. 13(1), 21 – 40.

Webb, N. (1985), “Student interaction and learning in small groups: A research summary” In R. Slavin, et al. (eds). Learning to Cooperate, Cooperating to Learn, New York: Plenum.

Webb, N. (2008) Co-operative learning, in T. L. Good (ed), 21st Century Education: A Reference Handbook. Thousand Oaks, C. A: Sage.

West African Examination Council (2014). Executive summary of entire results and chief examiners’ report on the West African Senior Secondary School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) Conducted in Nigeria in 2014.

101

Yamarik, S. (2007). Does cooperative learning improve students learning outcomes? Journal of Economic Education, 38 (3), 275

Yusuf, M. A. & Adigun J. T. (2010). The influence of school sex, location and type on students academic performance. International Journal of Science Education. 2 (2), 81 – 85.

102

LESSON NOTE BASED ON COOPERATIVE LEARNING

Week: 1st Week

Subject: Chemistry

Topic: The Periodic Table

Sub-topics: Brief history of the periodic table, definition of the period table,

periodic law, electronic configuration as basis of the periodic table,

groups and periods et the periodic table.

Class: SS2

Duration: 80 minutes

Date:

Instructional Materials: Chart of modern periodic table of elements, worksheet/cardboard

sheets.

Instructional Objectives: At the end of the lesson, the students should be able to:

1. State the periodic law

2. Define electronic configuration

3. List the characteristics of elements in the same group and period of the periodic table.

4 Using the cardboard sheet arrange the first twenty elements into groups and periods.

Entry behaviour: Students are familiar with some of the elements on the periodic table.

Entry Behavior Test: The teacher asks the students to list the first ten elements in the

periodic table.

Instructional Procedure:

Content Development Teacher’s Activity Students’ Activity Strategy Introduction The teacher divides the

students into groups of four.

He/she introduces the lesson by directing the students on the activities for the day.

He/she moves round each group to supervise the group activities after the introduction.

The students in their various groups choose one of the members as the group leader. The students listen to the teacher as he/she introduces the topic for discussion and they all copied down the topic in their notes. The students went further to discuss the new topic in their various groups with each member giving his/her opinion to the group on the topic.

Set-induction and Familiarization.

Listening.

Discussion and Supervision.

103

The Periodic Law The teacher use the chalkboard, ask the students to state the periodic law.

He/she moves from group to group to supervise the learning activities. He/she encourages the group to write down the opinion of the sub-topic.

The group leaders of the various groups lead the discussion by asking each members of their opinion of what the period law is all about.Each members of the group state the periodic law to the hearing of other members.The group leader summarized the group discussion by combining the opinions of the group on the sub-topic under discussion.

Discussion, Stimulus variation and Summary.

Electronic Configuration

The teacher asks the students to define electronic configuration by sketching a chart of periodic table on the chalkboard.

He/she moves round each group to supervise the learning activity.

The students in their various groups brainstorm on the sketch and give definitions of the concept of electronic configuration. The group leader collates each member’s response and summarizes the definition giving by the group. The group a leader goes on to give the group definition of electronic configuration to all members of the class.

Listening,Discussion and Supervision.

Characteristic of Elements in Groups and Periods of the Periodic Table

The teacher writes on the chalk board asking the students to list the characteristics of elements in the same group and period of the periodic table.

He /she move round to supervise and encourage group participation and interaction. The teacher listened to each group leaders and correct was necessary.

The group leaders in their various in their various groups ask each member to give one characteristics each of group and periodic elements. Each members of the group write down one characteristic of elements in the same group and period. The group leader collated the member’s responses and all members discussed them one after the other. The group leader goes further to list the characteristics of elements

Discussion, Questioning, Explanation.

Note taking.

104

in the group and periods for their various groups. All members of the class write down the characteristics of elements as present by each group leaders for further discussions after the lesson.

Arrangement of the first Twenty Elements into Groups and Periods

With the empty table on the chalkboard. Each groups are ask to fill in the first twenty elements into boxes in order of atomic number. The teacher goes further to make necessary corrections on the arrangement of elements presented by each groups.

The group leader asks each group member to copy the sketch and fill in the elements according to their atomic number. Each member used the worksheet giving to them to sketch the periodic table and fill in the elements. All members of the group submitted their worksheet to the group leader and they discuss together on their arrangement. The group leaders presented the arrangement of elements of their group to all members of the class. All members of the group copied the table and arrangement of elements into their notebooks for further discussion during group meeting.

Drawing, Discussion and Summary.

Evaluation The teacher evaluates the group learning outcome by asking the following questions.

1. State the periodic law.

2. Define and briefly explain electronic configuration.

3. List three characteristics each of elements in the same

Each group members of each group discusses the questions and reached an agreement on the answer. The group leaders of each group collated the responses of each group collated the responses of each group members and present the answers to the question on behalf of the group

Face to Face interaction, Discussion, Questioning and Closure.

105

group and period of the periodic table.

4. Using the worksheet, draw periodic table and arrange the first twenty elements.

He/she moves round each

group to ensure that each

member is participating in

providing answer to the

question asked.

He/she encouraged the

students to further discuss

on all the sub-topic treated

in the class.

members.

All members of the class copy the evaluation questions in their notebooks for further discussion during group meeting. The group leader of each group agreed with the members on when to meet for further discussion on the learnt topic.

Assignment: Using the S, P, D, F, notation, arrange the electrons of the first five elements on

the periodic table.

106

Week: 2nd Week

Subject: Chemistry

Topic: Rates of Chemical Reactions

Sub-topics: Rate of reaction and mathematical expression, ways of measuring

reaction rates. Rate curve, collision theory, factors affecting rates of

reaction.

Class: SS 2

Duration: 80 minutes

Date:

Instructional Materials: Marble chips, conc. HCL, beakers, measuring balance, charts of

reaction rates

Instructional Objectives: By the end of the lesson, students should be able to:

1. Define rate of chemical reaction

2. List simple ways of measuring the rate of chemical reaction

3. List the factors affecting the rate of chemical reaction

4. Carryout simple experiment on reaction rates of some compounds

Entry Behaviour: Students are familiar with time measurement of athletes in track and field

events.

Entry Behaviour Test: The teacher asks the students to comment on the time it takes to run

100 metre and 200 metre race in track and field events

Instructional Procedure

Content Development Teacher’s Activity Students’ Activity Strategy Introduction The teacher coordinates

the students by ensuring they are in their various groups. He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to attempt a definition of rate of chemical reaction.

He/she moves round each group to supervise

The students still maintaining their group of four, sits together in preparation for the day’s activities. The group leaders of the various groups ask each member of their group to give one definition of rate of reactions. The group leaders write down each member’s response and all members discussed on the various definitions giving by individuals. All members of the group reached a consensus of the

Set induction.

Group interaction, Individual response, Discussion.

Discussion, Supervision and

107

the various group learning activities. He/she listen to various group leaders and make necessary corrections on their definitions.

definition of rate of reaction. The group leaders read out the definition of the rate of reaction on behalf of other group members/the entire students. The group leader asks one of the group members to write down the teachers corrections for further discussion during group meeting.

Note-taking.

Measuring Reaction Rates

The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to mentions ways of measuring the rate of chemical reaction.He/she moves round each group to supervise the group discussion and also encourage active participation of individual group members in the learning activity.He/she ask groups to list the various ways of measuring reaction rate as agreed by the members. He/she went further to make necessary corrections on group responses.

The group leader ask each member of their groups to mention one way of measuring reaction rates while another member of the group write down their responses.All members of the group brainstorm about each members responses and arrived at a consensus on ways of measuring rates of chemical reactions.

The group leaders of each group read out the ways of measuring rates of chemical reaction as agreed by the entire group. Another member of the group writes the corrections made by the teacher for further discussion during group meeting.

Individual response,

Discussion, Explanation and Questioning,

Group presentation, Listen Note-taking, and Corrections.

Factors Affecting the Rate of Chemical Reaction

The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to list the factors that can affect the rate of chemical reaction.

He/she moves round the class to supervise the group learning activities.

The group leader asks each group members to give one factor that can affect the rate of chemical reaction. Each members of the group give one factor that may affect reaction rates while another member of the group writes down their points. The group leader collates each member’s response and lead the group in discussing on the points

Directing, Individual response and Group interactions,

108

He/she ask each group leader to read out the factors affecting the rate of reaction as discussed in the groups.

He/she makes necessary corrections on group presentation.

listed.Members of the group reached a consensus on the factors affecting the rate of chemical reaction and the group leaders of each group present their points as agreed in their groups.The group leader asks one of the members to write down the teacher’s correction and contribution for further discussion during group meeting.

Corrections, Explanations and Note-taking.

Determination of the Rate of Dissolution of Marble Chips in conc. HCl

The teacher presents each group with the following materials for the experiments. (a)a beaker.(b) giving amount of

marble chips.(c)a known volume of

hydrochloric acid.(d) stop watch.He/she writes the chalkboard asking each group to dissolve the marble chip in the acid and measure the rate of dissolution of the chips. He/she moves round each group to supervise the experiment been carried out by each group.

He/she moves round to supervise the group discussion and checking the result of their experiment.

He/she ask the group to present the result of the

The group leaders of each group collected the materials for their group and distributed each of every member of the group. The group leader coordinates the experiment as follows. One member to pour the acid

in the beaker. Another member should

operate the stop watch while noting the time for dissolving the marble in the acid.

Another member was asked to pour the marble chips into the acid.

The group leader observed the dissolution of the marble chips in the acid while alerting the member handling the watch to stop after the marble chip have completely dissolved in the acid.

The group discussed about the experiments with each member making response while a member of the group writes down the responses of each group members.

The group leaders of each group present their results to the class

Stimulus variation,

Experimentation, Individual contributes and Observation.

Group discussion, Explanation, Questioning and Observations.

Listening, Presentation,

109

experiment to the class.

He/she make necessary contributions and corrections on the results of the group experiment.

giving some explanations about the experiment while each student writes down the explanations of each group leaders. The group leader asks one of the members to write down the teacher’s contribution and correction for further discussion during group meeting.

Note-taking.

Listening, Explanation, Rewarding and Note-taking.

Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the students the following questions:(1) Define rate of

chemical reaction.(2) List four simple

ways of measuring the rate of chemical reactions.

(3) List five factors that can affect the speed of chemical reaction.

(4) What time does it take for a 5grams of marble chips to dissolve in 100ml of concentrated hydrochloric acid

The students in their various group’s works cooperatively to provide answer to the questions ask by the teacher. The group leader went further to copy the question for further discussion during group meeting.

Questioning, Explanation and Note-taking and Closure.

Assignment: Define the following:

1. Heat of neutralization.2. Heat of reaction.3. Energy.

110

Week: 3rd Week

Subject: Chemistry

Topic: Energy and Chemical Reactions

Sub-topics: Rate of reaction and mathematical expression, ways of measuring

reaction rates. Rate curve, collision theory, factors affecting rates of

reaction.

Class: SS 2

Duration: 80 Minutes

Date:

Instructional Materials: Sodium hydroxide pellets, Beakers thermometers, water, energy

profile chart, working/sheet cardboard.

Instructional Objective: At the end the lesson, student should be able to

1. Define the concept of energy

2. Define heat of reaction

3. Define exothermic and exothermic reaction

4. Draw the energy diagram for exothermic and exothermic reaction.

Entry Behaviour: Students have little knowledge of the concept of energy and energy

conversion.

Entry Behavior Test:

1. State the law of conservation of energy

2. List five forms of energy

Instructional Procedure

Content Development Teacher’s Activity Students’ Activity Strategy Introduction The teacher introduces

the new topic by giving each group a beaker half-filled with water and some quantity of sodium hydroxide pellets.

He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to feel the beaker containing water and record the

The group leaders of each group coordinate the other members in preparation for the days learning activity. The group leaders of each group ask each group members to feel the beaker containing water and record the temperature. Each members of the group feel the beaker of water and recorded the temperature.

Set Induction.

Experimentation, Individual accountability and Discussion.

111

temperature. He/she went round to supervise the students as they feel the beaker of water in their respective groups. He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to pour the sodium hydroxide pellets into the beaker of water and record their observations. He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to define energy from their observations from the simple experiment they have carried out. He/she moves round each group to supervise the group discussion and encourage active participation of every group members.

He/she listened to their definitions and make necessary corrections.

All members of the group submitted their values to the group leader and discussed about their observations.

Starting with the group leader each members of the group feel the beaker after pouring the sodium hydroxide pellets and recorded their observations.

All members of the group discussed about their observations and came to a common conclusion. The group leader and all members of each group discuss about the observations from the experiment and reached a consensus on the definition of energy. The group leader for each group defined energy as agreed by the group members.The group leader asks one of the members to write down the correction for further discussion after the lesson.

Observation and Discussion.

Listening, Explanation and Note-taking.

Heat of Reaction The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to define heat of reaction with reference to the experiment they have carried out. He/she moves round each group to supervise and ensure that all members of the group are contributing to the

The group leader asks each members of the group to define heat of reaction individually based on the experiment.

All members of the group discuss on their various definitions and reached a consensus of the definition of

Discussion, Explanation, Individual accountability and Group interaction.

112

learning. He/she listens to each group leader’s definition of heat of reaction.He/she goes further to make necessary corrections and contributions on the concept of heat of reaction.

heat of reaction.

The group leaders of each group present the definition of heat of reaction of their group to the entire class.The group leader asks one of the members to write down the teacher’s correction and contribution for further discussion during group meeting.

Listening, Explanation.

Explanation, Listening and Note-taking.

Exothermic and Endothermic Reaction

The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to define exothermic and endothermic reaction with reference to the simple experiment they have carried out. He/she moves round the groups to guide and supervise the group learning activities.

He/she listens to their definitions and makes corrections and contributions. He/she also answers the questions ask by the students

The group leader coordinates the members. He/she ask the individual students to define exothermic and endothermic reactions. All members of the group submitted their individual definitions to the group leader and they brainstorm on their definition before reaching a consensus of the definition.

The group leaders of the various groups defined exothermic and endothermic reaction to the hearing of the entire class while the students write down their definitions. The group leaders ask members of their group to write down the corrections and contributions made by the teacher for further discussion during group meeting.

Individual accountability.

Discussion, Explanations and Questioning. Guiding, Discussion and Encouraging.

Listening, Presentation and Note-taking.

Listening, Explanation and Note-taking.

Energy Diagram for Exothermic and Endothermic Reaction

The teacher gives worksheet to the group leaders to be shared among group members.He/she writes on the

The group leaders distributed the worksheet to every members of the group.The group leaders coordinate the group members and ask

Listening, Explanation, Demonstration and Note-taking.

113

chalkboard asking the students to draw the energy profile diagram for exothermic and endothermic reaction from their theoretical knowledge of the terms.He/she moves round each group to guide and supervise the learning activity while also encouraging group work among members.

He/she listens to the group leader’s explanation and went further to make necessary corrections and contributions on the diagram.

them to sketch a raw diagram of exothermic and endothermic reactions on their work sheet. After some minutes all members come together to examine individual sketch and discuss on the final outlook of the two diagrams. All members of the consensus on how the energy profile diagram should look like. The group leaders of each group presented the energy level diagram of their groups to the entire class explaining the meaning of each curves on the diagram. The group members write down the teacher’s corrections and contributions for further discussion during group meeting.

Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the following questions from the students: 1. Define energy.2. Define heat of

reaction.3. Define exothermic

and endothermic reaction.

4. Draw the energy profile for exothermic and endothermic reactions.

The group leaders of each group shares the evaluation questions among the group members and they individually made attempt to provide answers to each them. The group leader of each group summarizes the questions by making contributions on behalf of their group.

Closure

Assignment:

1. List two oxidizing agents.2. List two reducing agents.

Week: 4th Week

114

Subject: Chemistry

Topic: Oxidation and Reduction Reaction

Sub-topics: Definition of oxidation and reduction, oxidizing and reducing agent,

oxidation number, rules for determining oxidation numbers.

Class: SS 2

Duration: 80 Minutes

Date:

Instruction Materials: Bottled concentrated potassium iodide, concentrated tetra

oxosulphate (vi) acid.

Instruction Objective: At the end of the lesson, students should be able to:

1. Define oxidation and reduction reaction.

2. Distinguish between, oxidizing and reducing agent.

3. Give examples of oxidizing and reducing agent.

4. Calculate the oxidizing number of element in a compound

Entry Behaviour: Students are familiar with the concept of oxidation number from their

lower class (i.e. SS1).

Entry Behaviour Test:

i. Calculate the oxidation number of chromium (cr) in K2 Cr2Or.

ii. Manganese (Mn) KMnO4.

Instructional Procedure

Content Development Teacher’s Activity Students’ Activity Strategy Introduction The teacher asks the

students to seat together with their various group members as they prepare for the learning activity for the day.

The students sit together in their normal group with each students waiting for the commencement of the day’s learning activity.

Set-Induction.

Oxidation and Reduction Reaction

The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to define oxidation and reduction making reference to their previous knowledge of oxidation number.The teacher moves

The group leaders of the various groups ask each member of their group to give the definition of oxidation and reduction. All members of the group come together to discuss about the definitions given by individual member. They

Individual accountability, Group Interactions.

Discussion, Explanation.

Supervision,

115

round the class to supervise the learning activity and interactions of members in their groups.He/she listens to the definitions of oxidation and reduction presented by the group leaders. He/she goes further to make necessary corrections and contributions on their definitions.

went further to reach a consensus on the definition of oxidation and reduction.

The group leaders present the definition of oxidation and reduction on behalf of their groups. Group members listened to the teacher’s correction and contributions. They went further to write them in their notebooks for further discussion during group meeting.

Discussion and Group Interaction.

Listening, Explanation Corrections and Contributions.

Oxidizing and Reducing Agents.

The teacher give two reagent bottles containing: - concentrated

potassium Iodide (KI).

- concentrated tetraoxosulphate (vi) acid (H2SO4) to the group leaders of each group.

He/she writes on the chalkboard asking the students to identify which one is reducing agent and which one is oxidizing agents. He/she moves round each group to supervise the students learning activity and group discussion.He/she listens to the group leaders comments.

He/she goes further to make necessary

The group leaders of each group collected the reagents bottles for their groups. The group leaders ask each group members to identify and write down which of the chemical is reducing agent and which one is the oxidizing agent. All members of the group submit their response to the group leader and they went further to discuss among themselves. The group reached an agreement on which chemical are oxidizing and which one is reducing and the definitions of the terms. The group leaders present their result to the entire class.All members of the class listened attentively to the teacher’s contribution on oxidizing and reducing agent. The group leader asks one of the members to write down

Observation, Inferences.

Individual task.

Discussion, Group Interactions and Supervision.

Listening, Explanation, Correction and Contribution.

Note-taking.

116

contributions on the students’ observations and definitions giving about oxidizing and reducing agent.

the teacher’s corrections and contributions for further discussion during their group meeting.

Examples of Oxidizing and Reducing Agents.

The teacher writes on the chalkboard asking the students to list more examples of oxidizing and reducing agents.

He/she moves round the class to supervise and guide the students in their group discussion of the sub-topic.

He/she listened to the group response of examples of oxidizing and reducing agent as listed by the group leaders.He/she goes further to comment on their results, make necessary corrections and contributions.

The group leaders in their various groups ask each member to write down two examples each of oxidizing and reducing agents.

All members of the group submitted their responses to the group leader and they discuss about their responses with each member contributing to the group discussion. The group reached a consensus on examples of oxidizing and reducing agents from the response of individual students. The group leaders of each group listed other examples giving by their group to the entire class.The group members write down the teacher’s comment and contribution for further discussion during group meeting.

Individual contributions, Group discussion and Supervision.

Note-taking.

Calculation of Oxidation Number

The teacher write the following compound on the chalkboard and ask the students to calculate the oxidation number of oxygen in each of them:i. CaCO3

ii. SO4

iii.CO2

iv.HNO3

(Ca = +2, C = -4, S = -

The group leader directs each members of the group to copy the compounds and calculate the oxidation number one of them. Each member picked his/her own compound and calculated the oxidation number of oxygen in the compound. All members submitted their individual answers to the group leader and all group

117

2, H = +1, N = +3).He/she moves round each group to supervise and guide them to solving the questions given to the group.

He/she listened to their answers, make necessary corrections and reward the group that scored the highest.

members discussed together and cross-checked their various calculations for any mistake.

The group leaders of reach group present the answers of their group to the class.The students listened to the teacher and write down the corrections made for further discussion after the lesson.

Listening, Encouraging, Rewarding and Note-taking.

Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the following questions from the students. 1. Define oxidation

and reduction.2. Distinguish

between oxidizing and reducing agents.

3. Give four examples each of oxidizing and reducing agents.

4. Calculate the oxidation number of Sulphur (S) in the following compounds:i. H2SO4

ii. K2SO4

(Note: H = +1, K = +1, O = -2).

The students in the various group work cooperatively, and discussed on the questions asked by the teacher and provide answers one after the other.

Closure

Assignment: List the first twenty elements on the periodic table given their symbols.

118

LESSON PLAN FOR THE CONTROL GROUP BASED ON LECTURE METHOD

Week: 1ST Week

Subject: Chemistry

Topic: The Periodic Table

Sub-topics: Brief history of the periodic table, Definition of the Period table,

periodic law, electronic configuration as basis of the periodic table,

groups and periods et the periodic table.

Class: SS 2

Average age of Learners: 15 years and above

Date:

Duration: 80 minutes

Instructional Materials: Chalk boards, chalk, and the modern periodic table on chart.

Specific Objectives: By the end of the lesson, the students should be able to:

i. State the periodic law

ii. Define electronic configuration

iii. List 3 characteristics of elements in the same group and period of the periodic table.

iv. Using the cardboard sheet, arrange the first 20 elements into groups and periods.

Entry Behaviour: Students are familiar with some elements on the periodic table.

Test on Entry Behaviour: The teacher asks the students to list the first ten elements on the

periodic table.

Instructional Procedure

Content Development Teacher’s Activities Students’ Activities Strategies Introduction The teacher introduces the

lesson by asking students to list the first ten elements on the periodic table.

The studentsresponded by listing to the first ten element on the periodic table.

Set induction

The periodic law The teacher states the periodic law He/she want further to explain how the law governs the arrangement of elements on’ the periodic table by stating that the periodic law clearly states that elements do vary regularly not with their atomic mass but with their atomic number.

The students listenthe teacher’sexplanations of theperiodic law.

Listening and explanation

119

Electronic configuration

The teacher defines the electronic configuration as the arrangement of electrons in atoms of elements in increasing order of atomic number at various distances from the nucleus. He/she further explain that the electrons and their arrangement in the atoms of an element are responsible for the many properties of the element hence the key (basis) to the periodicity (i.e. regular repeating properties) of elements lie, in the electronic configuration of their atoms.

The students listen tothe teacher’sexplanation

Listeningexplanation

Groups and Periods The teacher defines Group as: the arrangement of elements with the similar chemical properties on the vertical column of the periodic table. He/she went .further to define period as: the arrangement of elements with similar physical properties on the horizontal row of the periodic table. The teacher states that the Group is numbered in roman numeral from O – VllA while the numbers from I – 7.

The students listening to the teachers definition and explanation of the Group and periods using the chat

Listening andExplanation

120

Characteristic of elements in the same group and period

The teacher mentions two characteristics of elements in the same group as follow: (i) they have the same number of electron shells e.g. elements in period 2 have two electron shells etc. (ii) the numbervalence electrons of the elements increases progressively by one across the period from left to right. (iii) they show similar physical properties.

The students listensthe teacher’sexplanation of each characteristic of elements in the same group and period

Listening and explanation

Question and Answer The teacher allows the students to ask questions on every area of the topic. He went further to write the notes on the chalk board for the students

The students ask questions from the teacher on every areas of the topic. They went further to copy their note

Question and answer, note-taking.

Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the students the following questions:

i. State the periodic law of elements.

ii. Define briefly electronic configuration

iii. List 3 characteristics each of elements in the same group and period of the periodic table.

iv. Using the worksheet draw a table and arrange the first 20 elements into groups and periods

Closure.

Assignment: Using the S,P,D,F, notation, arrange the electrons of the first five elements on

the periodic table

121

Week: 2nd Week

Subject: Chemistry

Topic: Rates of Chemical Reactions

Sub-topics: Rate of reaction and mathematical expression, ways of measuring

reaction rates. Rate curve, collision theory, factors affecting rates of

reaction.

Class: SS2

Age: 15 years and above

Date:

Duration: 80 minutes

Instructional Materials: Chalkboard, measuring balance, conc. HCL, Marble chips, cotton

wool, breaker, charts showing reaction rate curves.

Specific Objectives: By the end of the lesson, students should be able to:

i. Define rate of reaction

ii. List simple ways of measuring reaction rates

iii. List the factors affecting reaction rates

iv. Carry out a simple experiment on reaction rates of some compounds

Entry Behaviour: Students are familiar with the speed at which athlete runs in a race.

Test on Entry Behaviour: The teacher ask the students to compare the time it takes for a nail

to rust and for leaves to decay.

Instructional Procedure

Content Development

Teacher’s Activities Students’ Activities Strategies

Introduction The teacher explains to the students that different reactions proceed at different rates. Some are slow while some occurs at intermediate speeds. He went further to give the reaction rates of some reactions e.g. rusting of iron nails and reaction between Ag No 3 and HCl.

The students listing to the teachers explanation

Explanation and Discussion

Definition ofRate ofFraction

The teacher defines the term rates of reaction s the number of moles of reactant converted or product formed per unit time. It is the speed at which reactants are used up or products are formed. He went further to state the mathematical expression of rate of

The students listen to the teacher’s explanation

Explanation and discussion

122

reaction as follows: (i) Rate of reaction:Amount of substance (Moldm3 time taken (mm)(ii) Rate of reaction is the change in concentration of reactant/product time taken for the change

Ways of measuring reaction rates

The teacher list two simple ways of measuring the rates of chemical reactions as follows:(i) when the reactants taken parts in the reaction is decreasing

The student listen to the teachers explanation

Explanation

Factors affecting the rate of chemical reaction

The teacher list the factors affecting the rate of chemical reaction as including the following: (i) the nature of reactant(ii) the concentration of the reactant (iii) the surface area of context of reactants (iv) Temperature (v) pressure for gasecus reactants (vi) Light and (vii) catalyst. He went further to briefly explain each of the factors giving relevant examples.The teacher allowed the students to ask questions on every aspect of the topic. He goes further to answer their questions.

The students listen to the teacher’s explanation.

Explanation

Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson byasking the students to answer thefollowing questions:(i) Define the term rate of reaction (ii) List four simple ways of measuring reaction rates (iii) List four factors affecting the rates of chemical reactions (iv) what time does it take for a 5grams of marble chips to dissolve in 100ml of conc. hydrochloric acid.

The students listen to thequestions and respond by providing answers

Closure.

Assignment: Define the following:

1. Heat of neutralization 2. Heat of reaction 3. Energy.

123

Week: 3rd Week

Subject: Chemistry

Topic: Energy and Chemical Reactions

Sub-topics: Definition of energy, energy changes in chemical reactions, Heat

content (H)

Heat of reaction, exothermic and exothermic reactions. Heat of

formation

Class: SS 2

Age: 15 years and above

Date:

Duration: 80 minutes

Instructional Materials: Sodium hydroxide pellet Ammonium chloride salt, energy profile,

glass wares distilled water, thermometers etc.

Specific Objectives: By the end of the lesson, students should be able to:

i. Define the concept of energy

ii. Define heat of reaction

iii. Define Exothermic and endothermic reactions

iv. Draw the energy level profile for exothermic and endothermic reactions

Entry Behavior: Students have been taught rates of chemical reactions.

Test on Entry Behavior: Teacher asks the students to define reaction rate and list some of

the factors affecting the rates of chemical reaction.

Instructional Procedure

Content Development Teacher’s Activities Students’ Activities

Strategies

Introduction The teacher introduces the lesson by asking the students to define energy. He considers the students definition and went further to define energy as theability or capacity to do work

The studentsanswer the teachersquestion by definingenergy.

Question and Discussion

Concept of Energy changes in chemical reaction

The teacher explains the concept of energy changes during a chemical reaction as follows: as reactants changes to product in chemical reactions, energy changes also occur. This is because the reactant and the product of a chemical

The students listento the teacher’sexplanations

Explanation

124

reaction possesses different amount of chemical energy. He went further to state how the energy can be measured as follows (i) In the form of Heat e.g. reaction of a strong acid and a strong base (ii) light and heat e.g. when magnesium is burnt in air.

Heat of Reaction The teacher define Meat content (H) as the energy possessed by substance as a result of it’s structure and physical state. Also in a chemical reaction, heat is either absorbed or evolved because the heat contents of the substances involved in the reaction is different. He went further to define heat of reaction as the amount of heat or energy,evolved (released) or absorbed (collected) when a chemical reaction occurs between molar quantities of the substances as represented in the equation of the reaction under standard conditions. Energy changes associated with chemical reactions are usually in thousands of Joules.

The student listen tothe teachersdefinition andexplanation

Explanation and discussion

Exothermic and Endothermicreaction

The teacher define Exothermic reaction and explain briefly as follows Exothermic reaction:- isa reaction In which heat energy is librated (or given off) to the surrounding of the reaction system. The total heat content of the product is less than that of the reactant; hence the excess heat energy will be given off to the surrounding as the reaction goes into completion. Endothermic reaction:- is a reaction which heat energy is absorbed (or taken in) from the surrounding of the reacting system. The total heat

The students listento the teacher’sexplanation

Explanation and discussion

125

content of the product is more than that of the reactant; hence heat energy must be absorbed from the surrounding for the reaction to proceed to completion. He went further to give some examples of exothermic and endothermic reactions (i) Exothermic reactions CaO(s) + H2O(-) Ca(OH)2(s) - HcL ÷ Nao(aq)

NacL(aq) + H2O (L).(ii) Endothermic reactions – CaCo3CaO(S) + CO2(a)

- NH4CL(s) → NH3 (g) + HCL (g). He went further to briefly explain each of the factors giving relevant examples.

Energy profilefor exothermicandendothermicreaction

The teacher pasted the energy profile. chart for both, exothermic and endothermic reactions on the chalkboard using thumb pin, He went further to explain the energy profiles using the previous definitions of exothermic and endothermic reactions.

The students listento the teacher’sexplanations usingthe energy profilediagrams

Explanation and discussion.

Evaluation The evaluates the lesson by asking the students thefollowing questions(i) Define energy(ii) Briefly explain energy changes in chemical reaction (iii) Define heat of reaction and heat content (iv) Define exothermic and endothermic reactions(v) sketch the energy profile for endothermic reaction(vi) Define the term heat of formation.

The students listento the questions andgive their answers

Closure.

Assignment:

1. List two existing agent

2. List two reducing agent

126

Week: 4th Week

Subject: Chemistry

Topic: Oxidation – Reduction Reactions

Sub-topic: Definition of oxidation and reduction oxidizing and reducing agents,

oxidation number, rules for determining oxidation numbers etc.

Class: SS 2

Age: 15 years and above

Date:

Duration: 80 minutes.

Instructional Materials: Oxidizing and reducing agents e.g. H2S04, HNo3, NH3, Co etc

chalkboard, chalk.

Specific Objectives: By the end of the lesson, students should be able to:

i. Define oxidation and reduction reaction

ii. Distinguish between oxidizing and reducing agents

iii. Give examples of oxidizing and reducing agents

iv. Calculate the oxidation number of elements in a compound

v. State the rules for determining oxidation number

vi. Balance simple redox-reaction

Entry Behaviour: Students already have a knowledge of oxidation number from the

Test on Entry Behaviour: The teacher asks the students to – define oxidation number and

determine the oxidation number of oxygen in H2SO4.

Instructional Procedure

Content Development Teacher’s Activities Students’ Activities Strategies Introduction The teacher give the old

definitions of oxidation and reduction as follows: (i) oxidation is the addition of oxygen to a substance e.g. burning of magnesium in air 2Mg + 02(g) → mgO(S)

(ii) Reduction is the removal of hydrogen from a substance e.g.2H2S(g) O2(g) → 2H2O(L) + 2S(S)

The students listen to the teachers explanation of the old definitions

Explanation and Discussion

Oxidation and oxidizing agents

The teacher define oxidation and oxidizing agent as follows (i) oxidation: is a process

The students listen to the teachers explanations on oxidation and oxidizing

Explanation and discussion

127

involving a loss of electron e.g. 2mg(s) ÷ O2(g)

→ 2mgO(s). Each magnesium atom in the reaction above losses two electron to oxygen to 2MgO(s) (ii) oxidation is the process involving an increase in oxidation number of an atom or ion e.g. H2(g) + CL2(g) 2HCL(g)

- oxidizing agent: are substances which accept electron, They undergo oxidation and are reduced during redox – reaction examples include: conc H2SO4, HNO3 etc.

agent

Reduction and reducing agents

The teacher define reduction and reducing agents as follows: (i) Reduction is a process involving the gain of electron e.g. 2Mg + O2(g) 2MgO(S). in the above reaction, each oxygen atom gained two electrons to form an oxide i.e O2 + 4e- 2O2-

(ii) Reduction is a process involving a decrease in oxidation number of an atom(s) e.gH2(g) + Cl2(g) → HCL(g). In the above reaction the oxidation number of each chlorine atom has decreased from zero to – 1 - Reducing agent: Are substances which donate electrons. They are oxidized in an oxidation - reduction reaction.

Explanation and copy their notes.

Explanation and Discussion.

Oxidation number and rules for DeterminingOxidation Number of Atoms

The teacher define oxidation number as follow oxidation number:Also called the oxidation state is defined as the electrical

The students listen to the teacher and calculate the oxidation number of some atoms in compounds giving by

Explanation and discussion.

128

charge an atom appears to have in a molecule as determined by a set of arbitrary rules. He went further to state the rules for calculating the oxidation number of an atom in a molecule as follows:(i) The oxidation, number of all elements in the free state is zero e.g Na = 0, CL2 0 mg = 0(ii) The oxidation number of simple ion (i.e. consisting of a single element) has the same size and sign as the charge on the ion hence Na+ = +1, mg2+ = +2(iii) The algebraic sum of the oxidation number of all the elements in a compound is zero e.g. MgCL2 = 0.

the teacher.

Evaluation The teacher evaluates the lesson by asking the students the following questions:(i) Define oxidation and reduction(ii) Distinguish between oxidizing and reducing agent(iii) Give four examples each of oxidizing ‘reducing agent (iv) calculate the oxidation number of S in the following compounds: (a) H2SO4

(b) K2SO4

Note; H= +1

The students listen the teacher and responded to the questions by providing answers

Closure.

Assignment: List the first twenty elements on the periodic table.

129

CHEMISTRY INTEREST INVENTORYName:ClassSex: Female: Male:Instruction: This inventory is designed to help you indicate the level of interest in chemistry.

Indicate your extent of agreement or disagreement with the following

statements about chemistry interest questions by ticking right (√) in the

appropriate box.

S/N ITEMS SA A D SD

1 I enjoy studying chemistry

2 Chemistry is a subject I enjoy a great deal

3 I am happier studying chemistry than other science subjects

4 Carrying out solutions to chemistry practical is very interesting

5 Participating in chemistry activities is very boring

6 I am always happy whenever I’m doing chemistry assignments

7 I enjoy studying chemistry because it relates to the course I want to

study.

8 I do not like going to the class when lessons on chemistry are taught

9 I do not like taking part in discussions about chemistry

10 I like chemistry because it improve my problem solving skills

11 I like telling my friends and parents what I learnt in chemistry

12 I like to attempt any question based on chemistry

13 I feel happy copying notes on any topic in chemistry

14 When I get to higher institution, I will choose a course that will involve

chemistry always

15 I have never liked studying chemistry

16 I do not like chemistry because it is difficult to understand

17 I like chemistry because I would want to be a good chemist

18 I like chemistry because I love scientific inventions

19 I like chemistry but I can’t tell if I’m good at it

20 I like chemistry because I score high mark in it

21 I make out time to study chemistry

22 I don’t study chemistry at all

23 Whenever we are study chemistry I become angry

130

24 Whenever we are study chemistry I become happy

25 I prefer other science subjects to chemistry

26 Chemistry is difficult

27 I don’t learn chemistry because it is not necessary

28 I am unable to express ideas when solving chemistry problems

29 I am more of a follower than a leader in chemistry learning situations

30 I lack self-confidence in chemistry learning situations