Effect of Scaffolding Instructional Strategies on Pupils’ Attitude to Basic Science and Technology in Rivers State, Nigeria
Archives of Current Research International,
This study examined the effect of scaffolding instructional strategies on pupils’ attitude to Basic Science and Technology in public primary schools in Rivers State. Four purpose and four null hypotheses guided the study. Non-randomized pretest, posttest control group experimental design was adopted for the study. The population consisted of 42,409 basic four pupils; 147 pupils in the intact classes of the sampled schools using simple random sampling technique served as sample. The modified Fennema-Sherman Attitude Scale was used for data collection. The data was analyzed using Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA). The findings of the study revealed that there is a significant difference in the Basic Science attitude mean score of pupils taught with modeling and cueing questions and those taught with conventional method; the Basic Science attitude mean scores of boys and girls, high achievers and low achievers taught with modeling and cueing questions do not differ significantly with those taught with conventional method; there is no significant interaction effect of treatment, gender and achievement levels on the attitude of pupils towards Basic Science and Technology (BST). Recommendations were made which include that scaffolding instructional strategy should be used in classroom teaching/learning interaction to enhance the teaching and learning of pupils as well as improve their attitude towards Basic Science and Technology.
- cueing questions
How to Cite
Ivowi UMO. Practical Application of STS approach to science and technology education for the successful implementation of UBE programme. In Teetito AE, Wasagu MA, Obasi FE (Eds) Proceedings of STAN, STS Panel Workshop on Practical Application of STS to Science and Technology Education for Successful Implementation of UBE Programme, Ibadan.2001;33-39.
Reiser BJ. Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. The Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2004;13(3):26–278.
Dorn LJ, Soffos C. Scaffolding young writers: A Writers’ Workshop Approach. Portsmouth, ME: Stenhouse; 2001.
Olson J, Prath T. The instructional cycle: Teaching children and adolescents with special needs. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc; 2000.
Chang U, Sung A, Uhem O. The effects of concept mapping to enhance test comprehension and summarization. Journal of Experimental Education; 2002. 71(1):5-23.
Adodo SO, Gbore LO. Prediction of attitude and interest of science students of different ability on their academic performance in basic science. International Journal Psychology and Counseling. 2012;4(6):68-72.
Ifayefunmi SA. Method of attitudes assessment. The Teachers Journal of School of Pure Science. 1984;1(2):331-337.
Goodlad JI. A Place Called School: Prospects for the Future. New York: McGraw Hill; 1984.
Alsop S, Watts M. Science education and affect. International Journal of Science Education. 2003;25(9):1043-1047.
Jenkins EW. Public understanding of science and science education for action. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 1994;26(6): 601.
Lepkowska D. The Non-Appliance of Science. Evening Standard. 1996;3:33- 34.
Mathews B. Promoting emotional literacy, equity and interest in science lessons for 11-14 year olds: The improving science and emotional development project. International Journal of Science Education, 2004;26(3):281-308.
Osborne J, Simon S, Collins S. Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education. 2003;25(9):1049-1079.
Jones MG, Howe A, Rua MJ. Gender differences in students’ experiences, interests, and attitudes towards science and scientists. Science Education. 2000; 84:180-192.
Simons S. Students’ attitudes towards science. In Monk M, Osborne J. (Eds): Good practice in science teaching. What research has to say. Buckingham: Open University Press; 2000.
Ramsden JM. Mission Impossible? Can anything be done about attitudes to science? International Journal of Science Education .1998;20(2):125-137.
Olotu B. The main causes of students underperformance in agricultural science. Journal of Science Teachers Association. 1992;72(2):76-80.
NRC. How students Learn History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom. Washington, D.C.: The National Academy Press; 2005.
Wee B, Fast J, Shepardson D, Harbor J, Boone W. Students' perceptions of environmental-based inquiry experiences. School Science and Mathematics. 2004; 104(3):112-112.
Guzeller CO, Akin A. The effect of web-based mathematics instruction on mathematics performance, attitudes, anxiety and self-efficacy of 6th grade students. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development. 2012;1(2): 42-54.
Liu M. Examining the performance and attitudes of sixth graders during their use of a problem-based hypermedia learning environment. Computer in Human Behaviour. 2004;20(3):357-379.
Casem RQ. Scaffolding strategy in teaching mathematics: Its effect on students’ performance and attitude. Comprehensive Journal of Educational Research. 2013;1(1): 9-19.
Oyetunda OA. Effects of models on attitude and academic achievement of auto-mechanics students in technical colleges in Lagos State. Unpublished thesis submitted to University of Nigeria, Nsukka; 2010.
Mata ML, Monteiro V, Peixoto F. Attitudes towards mathematics: Effects of individual, motivational, and social support factors. Child Development Research. 2012;34:1-10.
Abstract View: 1626 times
PDF Download: 713 times