INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION IN NIGERIA by Ebele C. Okigbo, Nneka R. Nnorom, Ernest O. Onwukwe (the ebook reader .txt) 📖

There is no significant difference in the mean achievement scores of students who were exposed to reinforcement with regard to locations

Method

The study is quasi-experimental research design. This is an experimental study which adopted post-test only control group design. It aimed at identifying the effect of reinforcement on students’ achievement in chemistry. The sample of the study consisted of an education zone and 6 schools (2 coeducational, 2male and 2 female schools) and. Awka education zone was selected by simple random sampling from the six education zones in Anambra state. 6 schools were selected from the 61secondary schools in the zone. First 2 coeducational, 2male and 2 female schools were selected from the forty-six coeducational, seven male and eight female schools respectively. Chemistry lesson plan and Chemistry achievement test (CAT) were used to collect data for the study and were validated by three experts in Science Education and Measurement / evaluation. The lesson plan was written in two forms, the plan that integrated the use of reinforcement in each lesson for the experimental group and ordinary lesson plan used in conventional classroom for control group. Each plan covered these topics: salt, allotropes of carbon and hardness of water. The lesson plan was used to teach both the experimental and the control group.

Chemistry achievement test (CAT) was constructed to measure students’ achievement. It was based on the following topics taught in S.S1; salts, allotropes of carbon hardness of water. CAT had twenty items assessed on multiple choices scoring scale. Each correct answer was scored 5marks; this gave the maximum of 100marks. Therefore, students that score below 50(0-49) performed poorly and those who scored 50(50-100) and above performed well.

The Kuder Richardson formula (procedure) was used to establish the internal consistency of the instrument. 20 S.S1 chemistry students who were not part of the sample, were used and their responses analyzed using Kuder-Richardson’s formula (KR-21) method. A coefficient of 0.82 for CAT was obtained and it was high enough to attest to the reliability of the instrument.

The six schools consisting of 120students were used for this study. The four experiment groups from the urban and rural schools were taught using reinforcement strategies (positive and negative reinforcement). Careful effort were taken to select specific positive and negative rein forcers for the learning and academic achievement of the students of the experimental group. Categories of rein forcers used were  gestures and non-verbal rein forcers( encouraging gestures  such as smile, nodding , pat on the back, claps), verbal reinforces: good verbal remarks by the teacher (great, terrific, outstanding,  you are doing well, I knew you can do this, excellent and announcement of the star of the day),  negative  rein forcers( taking away: threats, criticisms and unattractive assignment, removing bad grades, withdrawing an intrusive stare and cancelling a chore) were used for reinforcing the response of the students. These rein forcers were given to the students intermittently in order to avoid the students getting used to the reinforcement strategies. The rein forcers were constantly varied in order to create a variety in the teaching and learning process. .

The two co-educational schools that served as control were not exposed to any reinforcement during the process of teaching. These schools were taught by the researchers for a period of four weeks. At end of the teaching period, Chemistry achievement test was administered to both the control and experimental groups. The mean scores of the experimental group were compared with that of the control group in order to determine the effectiveness of the treatment.

The data generated were analyzed using mean and standard deviation. Z-test was used to test the hypothesis at 0.05 level of significance.

Result

Research Question 1: what are  the difference in the mean achievement scores of students who were exposed to reinforcement and their counterpart who were not?

Table1: The Mean and Standard deviation of students in experiment and control group.

Group  N                   SD

Experiment  60  64.00  16.51               

Control  60  31.67  17.60

From Table 1, the students in the experimental group who were exposed to reinforcement strategies had a higher mean score (64.00) than those in the control group who had a mean score of 31.67. This reveals that students taught with reinforcement strategies achieve better.

Research Question 2: what are the differences in the mean achievement scores of male and female students who were exposed to reinforcement?

Table 2: Mean and Standard deviation of male and female students in experiment group.

Gender  N   SD

Male  30  62.83  18.83

Female  30  65.17  14.05

The result in Table 2 shows that female students had a higher mean scores (65.17) than male students in the same experimental group. The standard deviation score for male in the experimental group is 18.83 and that of females is 14.05.This shows that both sex maintain an unequal intellectual level even when exposed to the same learning environment and strategies.

Research Question 3: what are the differences in the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students who were exposed to reinforcement?

CAT and lesson plan was used to answer research question 3.

Table 3: Mean and Standard deviation of urban and rural students in experimental groups

Location  N   SD

Urban  30  71.67  10.53

Rural  30  56.33  17.95

Table 3 shows that the mean achievement scores of urban students were slightly higher than rural students. The mean score of urban students is 71.67 and that of rural students is 56.33.

Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of  the experimental group and the control group

Table 4: Z-test for difference between the mean achievement scores of the experimental group and the control group

Group  N   SD  Z-cal  Z-crit  Decision

Experimental  60  64  16.51

 10.36  1.96  Reject HO

Control  60  31.67  17.60

The result in Table 4 shows that Z-cal (10.36) is greater than Z-crit (1.96) at 0.05 level of significance and 2-tailed. The null hypothesis is therefore rejected for this reason and alternative hypothesis which states that there is significant difference between the mean achievement scores of students exposed to reinforcement and their counterpart who were not is upheld.

Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of students exposed to reinforcement with regard to gender.

Table 5: Z-test for difference between the mean achievement scores of the experimental group based on gender

Gender  N   SD  Z-cal  Z-crit  Decision

Male  30  62.83  18.83  

 -0.55  1.96  Accept Ho

Female  30  65.17  14.05

The result in Table 5 shows Z-cal (-0.55) is less than Z-critical (1.96). Therefore the null hypothesis is upheld which states that there is no significant difference between mean achievements scores of male and female students.

Hypothesis 3: There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of students exposed to reinforcement with regard to location.

Table 6: Z-test for difference between the mean achievement scores of the students exposed to reinforcement based on location.

Location  N   SD  Z-cal  Z-crit  Decision

Urban  30  71.67  10.53

Rural  30  56.33  17.95  

0.

4.04  1.96  Reject Ho

The result in Table 6 indicates that the calculated Z –cal (4.04) is greater than the Z-crit of 1.96 at 0.05 level of significance. Therefore the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis which states that there is significant difference between the mean achievement scores of urban and rural students exposed to reinforcement.

Discussion

Result from Table 4 shows that there is significant difference in the mean achievement scores of students in experimental group who were taught using positive and negative reinforcement and those in the control who were not. The result was in favour of students in the experimental group because they had a higher mean achievement score of 64.00 than students in the control group who had the mean score of 31.67. The result of the analysis showed that students in the experimental group performed better than those in the control group. The result also exposed that for a better performance in chemistry, student are expected to be exposed to positive and negative reinforcement. This is in agreement with the views of Muhammed (2011) who discovered that students were taught using positive and negative reinforcement achieved better than those who were not.  Also Snider (2012) stated that positive reinforcement can motivate the once unmotivated students and ultimately and directly affect students’ achievement.  Ruiz (2011) also stated that there is a positive relationship between students’ achievement and positive reinforcement and a strong positive relationship between negative reinforcement and achievement. Morin (2019) concluded that both positive and negative reinforcement have a very important role in achieving good student achievement during the teaching and learning interaction in the classroom. Both reinforcements (negative and positive) are basically good to increase the students’ motivation that later on will affect their achievement during the teaching and learning process.

The result in Table 5 showed that the mean achievement scores of male is 62.83 and that of female is 65.17. The result showed that there is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of male and female students exposed to reinforcement. This result is in agreement with Busolo (2011) and Wolf (2013) who noted that the effect of reinforcement (positive and negative) is not based on gender. Also the result is not in agreement with the views  of Johnson, Wardlow and Franklin(2010) who noted that there is significant difference between the mean achievement scores of male and female exposed to reinforcement where the post test scores shows a higher scores in females than males.

From the result in Table 6, the students exposed to positive and negative reinforcement in the urban had a mean achievement score of 71.67 and that of rural was 56.33. The result showed that there is significant difference between the mean achievement scores of urban and rural exposed to positive and negative reinforcement. This result is in agreement with Ali, Igbal, Shahzad, Qadeerand UmarAli (2011) who stated that urban students’ attitude towards positive and negative reinforcement practices is more positive compared to rural students. From the above discussion, it is clear that reinforcement (positive and negative) leads to students’ success and contribute a lot to effective classroom learning.

Conclusion

Whatever the constraint involved in the teacher’s attempt to efficiently reinforce students’ responses for effective learning; we have to accept that reinforcement is an important concept in psychology whose relevance to teaching and learning is underscored everyday in every classroom. Its knowledge is worthwhile for a professional teacher. Thus we conclude that reinforcement (positive and negative) in the classroom is a must in modern day education system. By employing reinforcement strategies in teaching and learning process, the achievement of students were enhanced. This study has created the awareness to chemistry teachers who hitherto did not include reinforcement strategies in their teaching. Lack of reinforcement, therefore reduces students’ achievement but practicing or using reinforcement strategies through rewards, grades, positive comments, removing threats and criticisms are most rewarding.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations were made:

Teachers should use variety of teaching techniques such as reinforcement (positive and negative) strategies to provide students with successful learning environment.

 Teachers should use reinforcement to increase positive behavior  from students, which results in a conducive learning environment

It is important for teacher to provide as many opportunities as possible for catching children doing good things in the classroom and making positive comment to reinforce the behavior.

Ministry of education (Federal and State) should organize seminars and workshops to keep teachers (chemistry teachers inclusive) abreast of the application of reinforcement strategies for instructional delivery.

References

Adesoji, F. & Olatunbosun S.M. (2008).  Student, teacher and school environment factors as determinants of achievement in senior secondary school chemistry in Oyo State, Nigeria. Journal of International Social Sciences, 1(2), 9-1

Ali, R,Igbal, S.; Shahzad, S.; Qadeer, M.Z. &Umar, A.K.(2011). Use of  reinforcement practices in education institution and its implication on students motivation. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(1), 960.

Bajah, S.T.(1999). The challenges of science technology and teacher  education in

 Nigeria beyond the year 2000.African Journal of Education, 1(11), 43- 49.

Busolo, A.J.(2011). Gender difference in students’ achievement in chemistry in secondary school. http//172.24.15.15:8080/etd/123456787

Debney, M.(2010).Rewards and punishments in intermediate schools.Journal  of English Education, 1(5),45-61  

Dhiabat, M. & Tawalbeh E.J. (2019). The effect of reinforcement on the teaching of reading to children with learning disabilities. Health Science  Journal,13(12),26-39

Fakeye, D. O. (2007).Teacher questioning behavior and classroom interaction patterns. Journal Humanities and Social