 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 9, Issue 1, Article
10 (Jun., 2008) |
| |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 9, Issue 1, Article
10 (Jun., 2008) |
ResultsBefore and after instruction, the achievement test and attitude scale towards science were administered to both the experimental and control groups. Each correct response in the achievement test was scored as one point. Comparisons were made in terms of the experimental and control groups’ pre and post-test achievement score means with t-test analysis. The attitude scale with 5 gradations was scored between 5-1 points, with 5 points for fully agree and 1 point for fully disagree. The findings were analyzed by a t-test.
Table 1. Comparison of Mean Scores of the Experimental Group (EG) and Control Group (CG) in Biology Achievement (pre-test)
Groups N Sd t p EG 31
4.12
1.94 -.838 .405 CG 34
4.50
1.61
Table 1 shows that there was no statistically significant difference between the mean scores of students in the control and experimental groups in the Biology Achievement Test before the instruction (p>.05). Consequently, the two groups were equivalent on this dependent measure. Thus, it can be said that students in both groups had similar knowledge about the cell topic that was examined in this study prior to the teaching.
Table 2. Comparison of Mean Scores of Control Group and Experimental Group in Biology Achievement Test (post-test)
Groups N Sd t p EG 31
10.87
2.64
5.77
.000* CG 34
7.73 1.54
Table 2 shows that there was a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the experimental and control groups in favor of the experimental group (*p<.001). The pre and post-test scores of both groups were compared within themselves. The achievement of both groups was higher than before (experimental group t= -11.111, p=.000, control group t= -6.544, p=.000). It can be seen from Tables 1 and 2 that the improvement in the mean score of the experimental group was 6.75 points, while in contrast, the corresponding increase in the control group was only 3.23 points. In addition to the pre- and post-tests of the control and the experimental groups, their gain scores were also compared (each subject’s pre-test score was subtracted from his or her post-test score. The gain score of each student and the mean gain score of both groups was found. The two means were tested for statistical significance using the t-test for independent samples) and it was recorded that there was a significant difference between the groups in favor of the experimental group (t= 3.541, p= .001). These results indicate that when interactive computer animation and concept mapping are used together, the students more easily grasp the cell concepts.
Table 3. Comparison of Mean Scores of the Control Group and Experimental Group in Attitude Scale (pre-test)
Groups N Sd t p EG 31
53.00 8.13 -.990 .326
CG 34
54.82
6.13
Table 3 shows that there was no statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the students in the control and experimental groups with respect to attitude toward science before the instruction.
Table 4. The Analysis of Data for the Group Comparison with Respect to Attitude Scale Toward Science as a School Subject Results (post-test)
Groups N Sd t p EG 31
56.83
9.50
1.372
.175 CG 34
54.12 6.03
Table 4 indicates that there was no significant difference between the post-test mean scores of the two groups of students with respect to their attitudes toward science as a school subject after instruction. However, the post-test mean score of the experimental group was higher than that of the control group. In addition to the pre and post-tests of the control and the experimental groups, their attitude gain scores (EG= 3.83, CG=-.70) were also compared. It was concluded that there was a statistically significant difference between the gain scores of the two groups in favor of the experimental group (t=2.156, p=. 039 (p<.05)). This result shows that the method used with the experimental group may have had a positive effect on the student’s attitudes toward science.
Copyright (C) 2008 HKIEd APFSLT. Volume 9, Issue 1, Article 10 (Jun., 2008). All Rights Reserved.
