Effectiveness of Transmitter of Knowledge and Conventional Teaching Models On Secondary School Students' Achievement On Circle Geometry and Trigonometry
Effectiveness of Transmitter of Knowledge and Conventional Teaching Models On Secondary School Students' Achievement On Circle Geometry and Trigonometry
Effectiveness of Transmitter of Knowledge and Conventional Teaching Models On Secondary School Students' Achievement On Circle Geometry and Trigonometry
35-47
ISSN 2219-7184; Copyright ICSRS Publication, 2012
www.i-csrs.org
Available free online at http://www.geman.in
36
Silas A. Ihedioha
items generated using the West African Examination Councils (WAEC) past
questions. These questions are used as both pre-test and post-test items. The
experimental group is exposed to the treatment of transmitter of knowledge model
while the control group is provided with conventional teaching. Though not
statistically significant, It is found that experimental group had better mean score
better than the control group taught using the conventional method. This result
may be investigated for further confirmation. A blend of models may be used
because there is no single model that is exclusively best for teaching all the topics
at all levels to all students, considering individual differences among students.
Keywords: Transmitter of knowledge, effectiveness, students, academic
achievement conventional, teaching.
Introduction
The process of teaching and learning is as old as human beings on the earth. It has
been carried out by human beings and even by animals to teach their young ones
for successful adjustment in the environment. Teaching, as conventionally
understood by a traditional teacher, is just the act of disseminating information to
the learner in the classroom. If we observe traditional classroom teaching, we find
that either the teacher is delivering information or one of the students is reading
from the text book and other students are silently following him in their own text
books. Conventional teaching is simply chalk-talk approach in which students
remain passive learners. Instruction is ill organized and rote learning is heavily
emphasized. Mostly the results of students are not satisfactory due to the presence
of this approach. Ever since the beginning of 20th Century, research on teaching
has generated useful knowledge about teaching skills, methods and models that
can be usefully employed by teachers to promote students learning.
The century old history of research on effective teaching includes three milestones
namely, identification of specific teaching skills, integrating these skills into a
systematic pattern of instruction and formulation of general models of instruction.
Walberg identified seven skills of effective teaching on the basis of his metaanalysis. These include use of academic learning time, reinforcement, cues and
feedback, cooperative learning, classroom morale, higher order questions and
advance organizers. According to Sprinthall and Sprinthall (1990), one of the
weaknesses of such a meta-analysis as Walbergs is that the skills do not depict
actual patterns of teaching.
As the present study sought to compare the effectiveness of the Transmitter of
knowledge model and Conventional teaching model in the teaching of circle
geometry and trigonometry at senior secondary school level, the available
research study relevant to this study problem are reviewed.
The analysis of instruction developed by Flanders (1970) shows how these
elements fit together in actual classroom interaction. Teaching elements have also
been combined into general models of teaching. A model is a cluster of strategies
that is logically consistent with a certain set of assumptions about how students
learn best. Sprinthall and Sprinthall have simplified research generated teaching
37
38
Silas A. Ihedioha
In this model, the teacher uses advance organizers. At the outset of a lesson, the
teacher presents the pupils with the general rule, the generalization or the main
point of the activity. The concrete examples help them understand the
connections between the facts and the general point. The teacher would proceed to
a presentation of a long series of facts (Sprinthall and Sprinthall, 1990).
It includes providing the general rules, correlations and then asking students to
apply these to solve problems. This is the most common teaching method, where a
lecturer represents the principles of the subject; followed by a tutorial where the
students practice the application of the knowledge they are taught. For a crash
course or to transmit large chunks of information, this technique would be more
suitable. The technique provides a sequence of instruction that can be applied to
solve a problem.
This model in extreme becomes a set of boring monotonous lectures followed by
tutorials. Also the students are asked to derive corollaries from the given facts and
principles, Rao and Reddy, (1992). The presentation of examples, finally, is
followed by the restatement of the generalized principle. In this sense, the
transmission of knowledge model is often called guided discovery. But the
researcher is of the view that guided discovery and unguided discovery both come
under Bruners inquiry model to be described later because, according to Prince
and Felder(2007) in enquiry based learning also known as guided enquiry,
students are presented with a challenge and accomplish the desired learning in the
process of responding to that challenge. Through various examples, all pupils are
led to the same generalization. Probably the strongest example of his model of
transmitting information is the lecture format. Although it can be used with other
teaching strategies, this model is most effectively used as a format for lectures or
for mini lectures. This model is based on deductive teaching.
Deductive teaching (also called direct instruction) is much less constructivist and
is based on the idea that a highly structured presentation of content creates
optimal learning for students. The instructor, using a deductive approach,
typically presents a general concept by first defining it and then providing
examples or illustrations that demonstrate the idea. Examples that do not fit the
idea are helpful in confirming the idea. Students are given opportunities to
practice, with instructor guidance and feedback, applying and finding examples of
the concept at hand, until they achieve concept mastery, Landmark College,
(2005).
Conventional teaching refers to the long established customs found in schools that
societies have traditionally deemed appropriate. Traditional teacher centered
method focus on rote learning and memorization. Conventional education focuses
more on teaching than learning. It assumes that for every activity teaching, there
is some level of learning by those who are taught. As a result of conventional
teaching, what so ever that is taught in classroom setting is forgotten soon, and
what is remembered is irrelevant. It often leads to passive learning and rigid
classroom with few opportunities for real world and collaborative learning,
Santrock (2006).
39
Conventional teaching is concerned with the teacher being the controller of the
learning environment. Power and responsibility are held by the teacher and he
plays the role of instructor (in the form of lectures) and decision maker (regarding
curriculum content and specific outcomes). He regards the students as having
knowledge holes that need to be filled with information. In short, the
conventional teacher views that it is the teacher that causes learning to occur, and
classroom discipline is based upon fear, Koacher (1986).
Folker as cited by Khan and Siddique (1991) investigated the effects of adjunct
post-questions and expository advance organizers on problem-solving from prose
text. The sample consisted of 88 introductory psychology students. A post-test
only control group was utilized. The findings showed that there were no
significant performance differences between having and not having advance
organizers, and there were no significant interaction effects.
Nixt as cited by Khan and Siddique (1991) investigated the relative effects of
frequent use of advance organizers and structural reviews in a college
mathematics course for students who were not physical science, engineering, or
mathematics majors. The sample consisted of students enrolled in a freshman
mathematics course. He found that there was no significant difference for
treatment effect, recitation effects, or interaction.
Neol (1983) investigated the influence of advance organizers in a systematically
designed lesson to teach rule-using behavior on transfer of rule learning to
problem solving situations. The sample consisted of 72 5th and 6th grade
elementary students. The findings show that while students benefit from
systematically designed instructions to teach rules, advance organizers
incorporated in that instruction do not necessarily enhance learning transfer.
Dennis (1984) investigated the effectiveness of advance organizers and repetition
on achievement in a high school biology class. The sample consisted of four
groups of 10th grade students. California Achievement test, a Lindquist type I
Research Design and A Multivariate analysis of Variance were utilized. The
findings showed that there was no significant interaction between treatments on
the two dependant variables. However, there was a significant gain in
achievement by students in all groups from pre-test to post-test.
Martorella (1979) found that no conclusion from research has emerged to
establish clearly the superiority of inquiry over the traditional approaches.
Learning through inquiry is often more enjoyable to the students. Generally
speaking, the students are more interested, or more enthusiastic, or just more
active in the inquiry process as they are generating more knowledge like a social
scientist. Inquiry teaching seems to have a positive effect on discipline, retention
and attitude towards social studies.
Research evidence on the use of transmitter of knowledge model as a method of
teaching circle geometry and trigonometry with respect to student achievement is
not so common, more research is needed.
40
Silas A. Ihedioha
1. To expose the experimental group to the transmitter of knowledge model.
2. To compare the academic achievement of experimental group taught
through the transmitter of knowledge and the control group taught through
conventional teaching on their post test scores.
Research Hypotheses
The null and alternative hypotheses of the study are as follows:
41
Methodology
Research Instrument
In order to measure academic achievement of the sample in Circle Geometry and
Trigonometry an achievement test was designed and conducted before and after
the experiment. It contained 50 fifty multiple choice test items generated using the
West African Examination Councils (WAEC) past questions covering the content
42
Silas A. Ihedioha
This section deals with the analysis and interpretation of the data pertaining to
the study:
Table 1: Mean and standard deviation of pretest scores of the experimental group and the
control group
Group
Mean
S.D
Experimental
Control
30
30
22.53
22.30
2.99
3.14
Coefficient of Variation
13.2
14.0
The table 1 indicates that the mean pretest scores of comparison group are 22.53
and 22.30 respectively. Spread (standard deviation) of individual scores around
their respective means is from 2.99 to 3.14.
The variability the control group (14.0) is more than that of the experimental
group (13.2) as shown by the coefficient of variation. The control group is found
to be a bit more variable than two experimental groups implying that the
experimental group is more homogenous than the control group.
The equality on pretest scores, among comparison group is also statistically
determined through simple Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) as given in the table 2.
Table2: Significance of difference between mean pre-test scores of the groups
Sum of squares Df
Mean square F
Sig.
279.050
12
23.254
121.637 0.000
Between Groups
3.250
17
0.191
Within Groups
282.300
29
Total
Mean
S.D
Experimental
Control Group
30
30
36.40
34.13
3.4
3.3
Coefficient of Variation
9.34
9.40
43
The table 3 above indicates that the mean post-test scores of the experimental
group taught through transmitter of knowledge model is 36.40 and the mean posttest score of the control group is 34.13. The above comparison has a spread of
scores around their mean scores; 3.4 for the experimental group and 3.3 for the
control group. It means that the experimental group taught through the transmitter
of knowledge model has higher average mean score achievement than control
group with an average mean score of 34.13 on the post-test. The coefficient of
variation of the experimental group taught through transmitter of knowledge
model is 9.34.This is slightly lower than 9.40 of the control group taught through
the conventional method.
Scheffe test is applied to compare the mean scores of the groups if there is no
significant difference between the mean post-test achievement scores of students
exposed to the transmitter of knowledge model and those taught through
conventional teaching .The result is shown in table 4 below.
Table 4: Comparison of the experimental group and the control group on the mean posttest scores through Scheffe test.
Group
Mean
36.4
Experimental
1.10
>0.05
35.1
Control
Entries in table 4 show that mean post-test scores of the experimental group
(Transmitter of knowledge model) and control group are not statistically
significantly at .05 level of significant. Therefore, the groups are not found to be
significantly different in their post-test performance. Therefore, the null
hypothesis
that there is no significance difference between the mean post-test
achievement scores of students exposed to the transmitter of knowledge model
and those taught through conventional teaching using Scheffe test is retained.
Further, the difference in post-test achievement among the groups being compared
is statistically tested by simple ANOVA, as shown in table 6 below.
Table 5: Significance of difference between mean post-test scores of the groups
Sum of squares
df
Mean square
F
Sig.
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
346.783
8.417
355.200
12
17
29
28.899
0.495
58.369
0.000
Table 5 shows that the calculated F value of 58.369 and a significance of 0.00 at
0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis
that there is no
statistical significant difference between the mean post-test scores of students
taught through the Transmitter of knowledge model and those students taught
44
Silas A. Ihedioha
5.2 Findings
The findings of the study are:
1. The mean post-test scores of the comparison groups are 36.40 and 34.13
with a spread of individual scores around their respective means as 3.4 and
3.3 for the experimental and control groups respectively. The coefficient
of variation of the experimental group
, taught through
transmitter of knowledge model and the control group
taught through Conventional Teaching Method shows that the
experimental group is a little more homogeneous ,(table 3).
2. There is no significant statistical difference between the mean post-test
scores of the experimental (taught through Transmitter of knowledge
model) and the control group (taught through conventional teaching) as
tested through Scheffe test. Therefore, the null hypothesis is retained (table
4).
3. There is no significant statistical difference between the post-test scores of
the experimental group (taught through Transmitter of knowledge model
and the control group taught through conventional teaching as tested
through Analysis of variance (ANOVA), (table 5).
Discussion
45
Conclusions
Recommendations
46
Silas A. Ihedioha
3. The results of this study may have been confounded as the experimental
group was taught by the researchers. To avoid experimental bias, regular
teachers of the same institution should be selected to provide the treatment
to the experimental groups after ensuring adequate training and practice in
the methodology. This step may control the critical teacher variable,
polluting the effect of the independent variable.
4. Similar studies should be also replicated on students at both secondary as
well as elementary levels for teaching mathematics and other subjects
other than mathematics in order to confirm and generalize the present
result.
5. As the present study centers on transmitter of knowledge model,
experimental studies may be conducted for the evaluation of the
effectiveness of other teaching models like cooperative learning, direct
instruction, indirect instruction and concept attainment models of teaching
etc.
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
47
[18]