Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 13, Issue 1, Article 7 (Jun., 2012) Ananta Kumar JENA Does constructivist approach applicable through concept maps to achieve meaningful learning in Science? Previous Contents

Appendix

1.Cooperative hierarchical concept map on chemical reaction

2. Cooperative spider concept map on chemical reaction

 

TABLE

 Table-1 illustrates M, SD, SEm and t-ratio of SCMA group of students with respect to their cooperative and individual modes of learning in chemical science with regards to their Immediate Map Test (AIMT) and Delayed Map Test (DMT) scores.

Groups	Modes	Tests	N	M	SD	SEm	df	t-ratio	p
SCMA	cooperative	IMT	20	22.55	1.605	0.358	19	0.000	Not significant
		DMT	20	19.9	2.403	0.537
	Individual	IMT	14	18.714	0.726	0.149	13	3.677	Significant at 0.01 & 0.05
		DMT	14	11	0.877	0.234

Table-2 represents One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on Immediate Map Test (IMT) & Delayed Map Test (DMT) among SCMA group of chemical science with respect to their cooperative and individual modes of leaning.

Source of variation	df	Sum of squares	Mean square	F	Level of significance
Treatments (between columns)	3	281.64	93.881	30.248	Significant at 0.01 & 0.05
Residuals (within columns)	64	198.64	3.104
Total	67

Table-3 illustrates the M, SD, SEm and t-ratio of HCMA group of students with respect to their cooperative and individual modes of learning in chemical science with regards to their Immediate Map Test (IMT) and Delayed Map Test (DMT) scores.

Groups	modes	Tests	N	M	SD	SEm	df	t-ratio	significance
HCMA	cooperative	IMT	15	22.333	1.759	0.454	14	0.017	Not significant
		DMT	15	20.866	1.884	0.486
	Individual	IMT	15	19.867	1.533	0.395	14	5.134	Significant at 0.01 & 0.05
		DMT	15	12.666	1.345	0.347

Table-4 represents One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on Immediate Map Test (IMT) & Delayed Map Test (DMT) among HCMA group of chemical science with respect to their cooperative and individual modes of leaning.

Source of variation	df	Sum of squares	Mean square	F	Level of significance
Treatments (between columns)	3	181.34	60.446	31.204	Significant at 0.01 & 0.05
Residuals (within columns)	56	112.35	1.937
Total	59	293.69

Table-5 illustrates the M, SD, SEm and t-ratio of SCMA & HCMA group of students with respect to their cooperative and individual modes of learning in chemical science with regards to their Immediate Map Test (IMT) and Delayed Map Test (DMT) scores.

Multiple comparison	modes	Tests	N	M	SD	SEm	df	q-value	significance
SCMA     vs. HCMA	Cooperative	IMT	20	22.55	1.605	0.358	33	0.353	Not significant
			15	22.333	1.759	0.454
SCMA     vs. HCMA	Individual	IMT	14	18.714	0.726	0.149	27	0.016	Not significant
			15	19.867	1.533	0.395
SCMA     vs. HCMA	Cooperative	DMT	20	19.9	2.403	0.537	33	0.103	Not significant
			15	20.866	1.884	0.486
SCMA     vs. HCMA	Individual	DMT	14	11	0.877	0.234	27	0.000	Not significant
			15	12.666	1.345	0.347

Table-6 represents One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on Immediate Map Test (IMT) & Delayed Map Test (DMT) among SCMA & HCMA group of chemical science with respect to their cooperative and individual modes of leaning.

Source of variation	df	Sum of squares	Mean square	F	Level of significance
Treatments (between columns)	7	450.56	64.366	25.048	Significant at 0.01 & 0.05
Residuals (within columns)	120	308.37	2.570
Total	127	758.93

 

---

Copyright (C) 2012 HKIEd APFSLT. Volume 13, Issue 1, Article 7 (Jun., 2012). All Rights Reserved.