Research Article

Fostering science process skills through constructivist-based module among form two students of different cognitive levels

Ibrahim Alhassan Libata 1 * , Mohd Norawi Ali 2 , Hairul Nizam Ismail 2
More Detail
1 Department of Science Education, faculty of Education, Kebbi State University of Science and Technology, Aliero, NIGERIA2 School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, MALAYSIA* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 4(1), 2023, ep23005, https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/12747
Published Online: 29 December 2022, Published: 01 January 2023
OPEN ACCESS   1144 Views   1102 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The present study was undertaken to investigate the 7E-inquiry integrated module (7E-IIM) effect in fostering form two junior secondary school students’ science process skills (SPS). This study employed pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test quasi-experimental design. 73 students aged 12 years on average constitute the sample of this study. The science process skills test was used to measure the participants’ process skills; meanwhile, the Lawson classroom test of scientific reasoning was administered to classify the participants into the concrete and formal cognitive developmental levels. Repeated measure ANOVA and independent Mann-Whitney U test were used for data analysis. The repeated measure ANOVA findings indicated a significant mean difference between experimental and control groups (p<0.05). However, no significant difference existed in student’s SPS between concrete and formal cognitive levels in the experimental group (p>0.05). On the contrary, there is a significant difference in student’s SPS between concrete and formal cognitive levels in the control group (p<0.05). Overall, the 7E-IIM effectively promotes students’ SPS regardless of their cognitive developmental level. Instructors are therefore recommended to adopt the 7E-IIM in fostering students’ process skills to close the gap in students’ learning differences and difficulties.
Keywords: science process skills, cognitive level, constructivism, the 7E-inquiry integrated module

CITATION (APA)

Libata, I. A., Ali, M. N., & Ismail, H. N. (2023). Fostering science process skills through constructivist-based module among form two students of different cognitive levels. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 4(1), ep23005. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/12747

REFERENCES

  1. AAAS. (1994). Benchmarks for science literacy. Oxford University Press.
  2. Abd Rauf, R. A., Rasul, M. S., Mans, A. N., Othman, Z., & Lynd, N. (2013). Inculcation of science process skills in a science classroom. Asian Social Science, 9(8), 1911-2017. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n8p47
  3. Akani, O. (2015). Levels of possession of science process skills by final year students of colleges of education in South-Eastern States of Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(27), 94-101.
  4. Aktamis, H., & Ergin, O. (2008). The effect of scientific process skills education on students’ scientific creativity, science attitudes and academic achievements [Paper presentation]. The Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching.
  5. Aktamis, H., Higde, E., & Ozden, B. (2016). Effects of the inquiry-based learning method on students’ achievement, science process skills and attitudes towards science: A meta-analysis science. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 13(4), 248-261.
  6. Ali, R., Ghazi, S. R., Khan, M. S., Hussain, S., & Faitma, Z. T. (2010). Effectiveness of modular teaching in biology at secondary level. Asian Social Science, 6(9), 49. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v6n9p49
  7. Amansoi, E. O. I., & Basseyii, B. A. (2017). Assessment of selected science process skills acquisition among senior secondary schools students in Calabar Education Zone of Cross River State, Nigeria. International Journal of Scientific Research in Education, 10(1), 119-126.
  8. Ango, M. L. (2002). Mastery of science process skills and their effective use in the teaching of science: An educology of science education in the Nigerian context. International Journal of Educology, 16(1), 11-30.
  9. Animashaun, V. (2015). Effects of cognitive apprenticeship and critical exploration teaching strategies on basic science students’ learning outcomes in selected secondary schools in Osun State, Nigeria. https://afribary.com/works/effects-of-cognitive-apprenticeship-and-critical-exploration-teaching-strategies-on-basic-science-students-learning-outcomes-in-selected-secondary-schools-in-osun-state-nigeria
  10. Aydin-Gunbatar, S., Oztay, E. S., Tarkin-Celikkiran, A., & Ekiz-Kiran, B. (2019). Experienced chemistry teachers’ science process skills (SPSs) development and their use of SPSs in activity plans. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2, 149-161.
  11. Ayodele, M. O. (2016). Attitude, self-concept, and achievement of junior secondary school students in basic science in Ekiti State, Nigeria. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 6(1), 167. https://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2016.v6n1p167
  12. Bete, A. O. (2020). Students’ knowledge and process skills in learning grade-8 chemistry. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers and Teacher Education, 10(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.37134/jrpptte.vol10.1.1.2020
  13. Bruner, J. (1985). Models of the learner. Educational Researcher, 14(6), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X014006005
  14. Cantu, L. L., & Herron, J. D. (1978). Concrete and formal Piagetian stages and science concept attainment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15(2), 135-143. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660150208
  15. Chongo, S., Osman, K., & Nayan, N. A. (2021). Impact of the plugged-in and unplugged chemistry computational thinking modules on achievement in chemistry. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(4), em1953. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/10789
  16. Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. Science Scope, 23(6), 42-44.
  17. Demirbas, M., & Tanriverdi, G. (2012). The level of science process skills of science students in Turkey [Paper presentation]. The International Conference New Perspectives in Science Education.
  18. Duda, H. J., Susilo, H., & Newcombe, P. (2019). Enhancing different ethnicity science process skills: Problem-based learning through practicum and authentic assessment. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 1207-1222. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12177a
  19. Ergul, R., Sımsekli, Y., Calis, S., Ozdilek, Z., Gocmencelebi, S., & Sanli, M. (2011). The effects of inquiry-based science teaching on elementary school students’ science process skills and science attitudes. Bulgarian Journal of Science & Education Policy, 5(1), 48-68.
  20. Feyzioglu, B. (2009). An investigation of the relationship between science process skills with efficient laboratory use and science achievement in chemistry education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(3), 114-132.
  21. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS: (and sex and drugs and rock’n’roll). SAGE.
  22. Finley, F. N. (1983). Science processes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(1), 47-54. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660200105
  23. Gagné, R. M. (1965). The psychological bases of science--A process approach. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED012236
  24. Gagné, R. M. (1967). The conditions of learning. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  25. George, G. (2016). The effect of constructivist 7-E model in teaching geography at secondary school level. International Journal of Applied Research, 2, 239-242.
  26. Gok, G. (2014). The effect of 7E learning cycle instruction on 6th grade students’ conceptual understanding of human body systems, self-regulation, scientific epistemological beliefs, and science process skills [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
  27. Guido, R. M. D. (2014). Evaluation of a modular teaching approach in materials science and engineering. American Journal of Educational Research, 2(11), 1126-1130. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-2-11-20
  28. Hartman, S. A. (2017). Development of “teachers integrating physical activity into the curriculum” (TIPAC) using a systems model approach [PhD dissertation, University of Akron].
  29. Ibe, E., & Nwosu, A. A. (2017). Effects of ethnoscience and traditional laboratory practical on science process skills acquisition of secondary school biology students in Nigeria. British Journal of Multidisciplinary and Advanced Studies, 1(1), 35-46.
  30. Idowu, D. (2011). Developing Nigerian integrated science curriculum. International Journal of Science and Technology Education Research, 2(8), 134-145.
  31. Jack, G. U. (2013). The influence of identified student and school variables on students’ science process skills acquisition. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(5), 16-22.
  32. Jegede, O. J., & Okebukola, P. A. (1991). The relationship between African traditional cosmology and students’ acquisition of a science process skill. International Journal of Science Education, 13(1), 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069910130104
  33. Kimba, A., Giwa, A., Libata, I., & Wakkala, G. (2018). The relationship between science process skills and student attitude toward physics in senior secondary school in Aliero Metropolis. African Educational Research Journal, 6(3), 107-113. https://doi.org/10.30918/AERJ.63.18.038
  34. Koksal, E. A., & Berberoglu, G. (2014). The effect of guided-inquiry instruction on 6th grade Turkish students’ achievement, science process skills, and attitudes toward science. International Journal of Science Education, 36(1), 66-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.721942
  35. Liu, C. C., & Chen, I. J. (2010). Evolution of constructivism. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 3(4), 63-66. https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v3i4.199
  36. Longo, C. M. (2012). Effects of an inquiry-based science program on critical thinking, science process skills, creativity, and science fair achievement of middle school students [Doctoral dissertation, Western Connecticut State University].
  37. Mari, J., & Gumel, S. A. (2015). Effects of jigsaw model of cooperative learning on self-efficacy and achievement in chemistry among concrete and formal reasoners in colleges of education in Nigeria. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(3), 196. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2015.V5.501
  38. Matanluk, O., Mohammad, B., Kiflee, D. N. A., & Imbug, M. (2013). The effectiveness of using teaching module based on radical constructivism toward students learning process. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 607-615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.132
  39. Njoku, Z. (2002). Enhancing girls acquisition of science process skills in co-educational schools: An experience with sex grouping for practical chemistry. Journal of the Science Teacher Association of Nigeria, 37, 69-75.
  40. Nor, N. M. (2014). Development of a classroom instruction based on constructivist 5E-learning cycle approach to enhance students’ conceptual understanding in data communications and networking [Dissertation, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia].
  41. Nwagbo, C., & Chukelu, U. C. (2011). Effects of biology practical activities on students’ process skill acquisition. Journal of the Science Association of Nigeria, 46(1), 58-70.
  42. Oloyede, O. I., & Adeoye, F. A. (2012). The relationship between acquisition of science process skills, formal reasoning ability and chemistry achievement. International Journal of African & African-American Studies, 8(1), 1-4.
  43. Osuolale, O. J. (2014). Problems of teaching and learning science in junior secondary schools in Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(34), 109-118.
  44. Ozgelen, S. (2012). Students’ science process skills within a cognitive domain framework. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(4), 283-292. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.846a
  45. Ozturk, N., Tezel, O., & Acat, M. B. (2010). Science process skills levels of primary school seventh grade students in science and technology lesson. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(3), 15-28.
  46. Perinpasingam, P. T. S., & Balapumi, R. (2017). Designing and evaluating a web-based lesson for English language instruction. The English Teacher, 22.
  47. Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget’s theory Piaget and his school. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-46323-5_2
  48. Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education, 130(2).
  49. Pritchard, A. (2017). Ways of learning: Learning theories for the classroom. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315460611
  50. Renken, M., Otrel-Cass, K., Chiocarriello, A., Girault, I., & Peffer, M. (2016). Scaffolding science learning: Promoting disciplinary knowledge, science process skills, and epistemic processes. In M. Renken, M. Peffer, K. Otrel-Cass, I. Girault, & A. Chiocarriello (Eds.), Simulations as scaffolds in science education (pp. 23-28). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24615-4_5
  51. Samuel, I. (2017). Assessment of basic science teachers’ pedagogical practice and students’ achievement in Keffi Educational Zone, Nasarawa State, Nigeria [Unpublished master’s dissertation]. Nasarawa State University.
  52. Samuel, K., Libta, I. A., & Sabitu, A. (2018). Efficacy of process-based instruction in enhancing secondary school students’ academic performance and science skills acquisition in identification of cations in Faskari, Katsina State-Nigeria. Issues and Ideas in Education, 6(1), 87-97. https://doi.org/10.15415/iie.2018.61005
  53. Saputro, A. D., Atun, S., & Wilujeng, I. (2019). The impact of problem solving instruction on academic achievement and science process skills among prospective elementary teachers. İlköğretim Online [Primary Education Online], 18(2), 496-507. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2019.561896
  54. Scoular, C., Eleftheriadou, S., Ramalingam, D., & Cloney, D. (2020). Comparative analysis of student performance in collaborative problem solving: What does it tell us? Australian Journal of Education, 64(3), 282-303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944120957390
  55. Tan, M., & Temiz, B. K. (2003). The importance and role of the science process skills in science teaching. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 1(13), 13.
  56. Telaumbanua, Y. N., Sinaga, B., Mukhtar, & Surya, E. (2017). Development of mathematics module based onmetacognitive strategy in improving students’ mathematical problem solving ability at high school. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(19), 73-80.
  57. Turiman, P., Osman, K., & Wook, T. S. M. T. (2020). Inventive thinking 21st century skills among preparatory course science students. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 35(2), 145-170. https://doi.org/10.21315/apjee2020.35.2.9
  58. Turkmen, H., & Usta, E. (2007). The role of learning cycle approach overcoming misconceptions in science. Kastamonu Education Journal, 15(2), 491-500.
  59. Ukoh, E. E. (2012). Determining the effect of problem-based learning instructional strategy on NCE pre-service teachers’achievement in physics and acquisition of science process skills. European Scientific Journal, 8(17), 102-113.
  60. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.
  61. Wadsworth, B. J. (1979). Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. Lomgman Inc.
  62. Wijayanti, Y., Hartono, H., & Rachman, I. (2014). Effect of learning cycle 7E towards science process skills of eleventh science graders in state senior high school 4 in Palembang. In Proceedings of the 1st Sriwijaya University Learning and Education International Conference (655-661).
  63. Wilke, R. R., & Straits, W. J. (2005). Practical advice for teaching inquiry-based science process skills in the biological sciences. The American Biology Teacher, 67(9), 534-540. https://doi.org/10.2307/4451905
  64. Woolfolk Hoy, A., Davis, H. A., & Anderman, E. M. (2013). Theories of learning and teaching in TIP. Theory into Practice, 52(sup1), 9-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.795437
  65. Yin, Q., Yang, W., & Li, H. (2020). Blending constructivism and instructivism: A study of classroom dialogue in Singapore kindergartens. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 34(4), 583-600. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2019.1709926