Effects of Student-centered Approach of Teaching in the Performance of Basic Science Junior Secondary School Students
CHAPTER ONE
Objective of the study
The objectives of the study are;
- To ascertain the effect of student-centered approach of teaching on the performance of basic science Junior Secondary School Students
- To ascertain the significant difference between the pre and last test scores of the test group where student centered teaching approaches were applied and the control group where teacher centered teaching approaches were applied
- To ascertain whether Student centered approach aims at training child according to its own nature, not depending on what adult’s want.
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
STUDENT CENTERED INSTRUCTION
Drawing from constructivist theory, student-centered instruction is a form of teaching based on conceptual understanding and incremental growth through discourse, collaboration, and honoring and respecting students’ voices (Meece, 2003). It is explicitly focused on the student and shifts intellectual authority back to them (Felder & Brent, 1996). When college students were exposed to this type of instruction, they asked more questions, shared more information, and generated more ideas compared with students taught using more traditional methods (Greeson, 1988). In general, student-centered instruction is focused on improving student’s competence, autonomy, and relatedness to others in line with the APA’s learner centered principles (Workgroup, 1997). In contrast, teacher-centered instruction is focused on the teacher (Loyens & Rikers, 2011) and on the teacher’s authority. In this style, the teacher typically talks or lectures to students (Cuban, 2006), the emphasis is on the rote memorization of procedures rather than conceptual understanding (Stein, Kinder, Silbert, & Carnine, 2005), and little time is allotted for activities that validate students, such as opinion sharing or reflecting on what they are learning (Cuban, 1984). Student-centered instruction is preferred by students (Lea, Stephenson, & Troy, 2003), including student teachers (Baeten, Dochy, Struyven, Parmentier, & Vanderbruggen, 2016), and has shown to improve students’ motivation to learn when introduced slowly (Baeten, Dochy, & Struyven, 2013). Although many of its characteristics are aimed at improving the dimensions of students’ engagement, this mechanism has not been fully explored either with regard to mathematics or even more specifically with regard to racial group learning. Some evidence indicates that the implementation of student-centered mathematics instruction reduces the racial achievement gap (Jamar & Pitts, 2005; Salinas & Garr, 2009), but the evidence has problems 4 with endogeneity or is anecdotal. One study examined the “best practices” of only one mathematics teacher (Jamar & Pitts, 2005). The other study looked at student-centered instruction only at the school-level, not at the classroom- or teacher-levels (Salinas & Garr, 2009). Because many policies have been enacted by local and state agencies to reform mathematics instruction in accordance with student-centered instruction’s principles (Resnick, Stein, & Coon, 2008), it is important to examine student-centered instruction’s implications. Any race-based differences are of particular interest given that by 2020 over half of the children in the United States will belong to a minority race or ethnic group (Colby & Ortman, 2015).
Traditional Versus Student Centered Learning
Figuring out how people learn is a complicated task, and understanding how and when people learn has been researched extensively. Teachers have always strived to find effective ways to deliver instructional materials and information to students. There has been a healthy discussion regarding when students are prepared cognitively to take on progressively more complex and sophisticated ideas or concepts. So what does it mean to learn? What is required to have knowledge of a thing? According to developmental psychologist Jean Piaget: Knowledge is not a copy of reality.
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research design
The researcher used descriptive research survey design in building up this project work the choice of this research design was considered appropriate because of its advantages of identifying attributes of a large population from a group of individuals. The design was suitable for the study as the study sought to effects of student-centered approach of teaching in the performance of basic science Junior Secondary School Students
Sources of data collection
Data were collected from two main sources namely:
(i)Primary source and
(ii)Secondary source
Primary source:
These are materials of statistical investigation which were collected by the research for a particular purpose. They can be obtained through a survey, observation questionnaire or as experiment; the researcher has adopted the questionnaire method for this study.
Secondary source:
These are data from textbook Journal handset etc. they arise as byproducts of the same other purposes. Example administration, various other unpublished works and write ups were also used.
Population of the study
Population of a study is a group of persons or aggregate items, things the researcher is interested in getting information on effects of student-centered approach of teaching in the performance of basic science Junior Secondary School Students. 200 staff selected secondary school in Uyo, Akwa Ibom state was selected randomly by the researcher as the population of the study.
Sample and sampling procedure
Sample is the set people or items which constitute part of a given population sampling. Due to large size of the target population, the researcher used the Taro Yamani formula to arrive at the sample population of the study.
CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION ANALYSIS INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Introduction
Efforts will be made at this stage to present, analyze and interpret the data collected during the field survey. This presentation will be based on the responses from the completed questionnaires. The result of this exercise will be summarized in tabular forms for easy references and analysis. It will also show answers to questions relating to the research questions for this research study. The researcher employed simple percentage in the analysis.
DATA ANALYSIS
The data collected from the respondents were analyzed in tabular form with simple percentage for easy understanding.
A total of 133(one hundred and thirty three) questionnaires were distributed and 133 questionnaires were returned.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Introduction
It is important to ascertain that the objective of this study was to ascertain effects of student-centered approach of teaching in the performance of basic science Junior Secondary School Students.
In the preceding chapter, the relevant data collected for this study were presented, critically analyzed and appropriate interpretation given. In this chapter, certain recommendations made which in the opinion of the researcher will be of benefits in addressing the challenges effects of student-centered approach of teaching in the performance of basic science Junior Secondary School Students
Summary
This study was on effects of student-centered approach of teaching in the performance of basic science Junior Secondary School Students. Three objectives were raised which included; To ascertain the effect of student-centered approach of teaching on the performance of basic science Junior Secondary School Students, to ascertain the significant difference between the pre and last test scores of the test group where student centered teaching approaches were applied and the control group where teacher centered teaching approaches were applied and to ascertain whether Student centered approach aims at training child according to its own nature, not depending on what adult’s want. In line with these objectives, two research hypotheses were formulated and two null hypotheses were posited. The total population for the study is 200 staff of selected secondary schools in Uyo, Akwa Ibom state was selected randomly. The researcher used questionnaires as the instrument for the data collection. Descriptive Survey research design was adopted for this study. A total of 133 respondents made up principals, vice principal adm, senior staff and junior staff was used for the study. The data collected were presented in tables and analyzed using simple percentages and frequencies
Conclusion
Depending on the findings of the study, there became an increase at the success of active participation of the students into learning, teaching processes. As a consequence of the study, it was observed that there became an increase after training applications given to both groups, however, the success of experiment group where student centered approaches were applied was significantly higher than that of the control group
Recommendation
Learning, teaching strategy, methods and techniques putting the student into the center should be paid more attention in the processes of learning and teaching.
Learning environments should be rearranged depending on student centered applications and the needs of students.
Teachers should be given in – service training over student centered applications
References
- Çubukçu, Z.,(2007). Ö÷renci Merkezli Ö÷renmede Kablosuz Internet Kullanımı,[Student Centered Wireless Internet Use] XVI. National Congress of Educational Sciences, Gaziosmanpasa University, Faculty of Education, Tokat, 5-7
- September, 2007. Ercan, O.,(2004). Bir Ö÷renme Süreci Olarak Aktif Ö÷renme[ Active Learning as a learning Processes ]Journal of Bilim ve Aklın Aydınlı÷ında E÷itim, 54,55. Retrieved, December 10, 2008. from, http://yayim.meb.gov.tr /dergiler/sayi54-55/ercan.htm.
- Gür, B.S. (2006). Ö÷renci-Merkezli E÷itimin Çıkmazları[Dilemmas of Student Centered Learning], Eski Yeni, 3, 34-45.
- Klenowski, V.,(1995). Student Self-Evaluatıon Processes In Student-Centred Teachıng And Learnıng Contexts Of Australıa And England, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice; Vol. 2, 2, 145-163
- Korkmaz, ø.,(2007). Ö÷renci Merkezli Ders Uygulamalarına øliúkin Ö÷renci Görüúleri[Students Opinions about the Student Centered Course Practice], III Congress of Social Sciences Education (18-20 June 2007 Cukurova University, Adana).
- Lea,S., Stephenson, D., Troy,J.,(2003) 2003 Higher Education Students’ Attitudes to Student-Centred Learning: Beyond ‘Educational Bulimia’? Studies in Higher Education Vol: 28, 3, 321-334.
- Nakibo÷lu,C.,(2001). “Maddenin Yapısı” Ünitesinin øúbirlikli Ö÷renme Yöntemi Kullanılarak Kimya Ö÷retmen Adaylarına Ö÷retilmesinin Ö÷renci Baúarısına Etkisi[The Effect of Teaching the Unit of “the Structure of Material” to Pre-service Chemistry Teachers with the Method of Cooperative Learning on Student Success ] G.Ü. Faculy of Gazi Education Journal, Vol:21, 3, 131-143.
- ùenol, H., Bal, ù., Yıldırım, H.ø.,(2007). ølkö÷retim 6. Sınıf Fen Bilgisi Dersinde Duyu Organları Konusunun øúlenmesinde øúbirlikli Ö÷renme Yönteminin Ö÷renci Baúarısı Ve Tutum Üzerinde Etkisi[The Effect of Teaching the Unit of “Organs of Sense” at the Course of Science at 6th Grade of Primary Schools with the Method of Cooperative Learning on Student Success and Attitudes], Kastamonu Journal of Education, Vol:15, 1, 211-220.
- Saban, A.,(2004) Ögrenme Ögretme Süreci Yeni Teoriler ve Yaklaúımlar[The Process of Learning Teaching, New Theories and Approaches], Ankara: Nobel Publications..
- Scott, J, Buchanan, J and Haigh, N.(1997) Reflections on Student-Centered Learning in a Large Class Setting, British Journal of Educational Technology Vol, 28, 1, 19–30.
- Sparrow, L., Sparrow, H. and Swan, P. (2000). Student centered learning: Is it possible? In A.
