A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF BIOLOGY PRACTICAL LESSONS IN SELECTED WELL-ENDOWED AND LESS-ENDOWED SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS IN GHANA

Godwin Tordzro, Kennedy Nyeseh Ofori

Abstract


The teaching and learning of biology in the Senior High Schools has of late not been very effective since the practical aspect of the subject is seemingly neglected by many teachers. The main objective of this study was to investigate and compare how biology practical lessons were conducted in some well-endowed and less-endowed Senior High Schools in Ghana. The main instruments used for gathering the data for the study were questionnaires, document analysis and informal observation of some biology lessons. This enabled the Researchers to capture as closely as possible, the real picture of what happened during the observed lessons. The sampled population for the study consisted of 408 students and 24 biology teachers from twelve selected Senior High Schools in the Eastern and Central Regions of Ghana. Data collected were analyzed using frequency counts and percentages. The research findings showed that the time allotted to practical lessons in biology varied from one school to another, as 35.8% of students from well-endowed schools complained of insufficiency of time as against 78.9% of students from less-endowed schools. The study also found that the teaching strategies employed in the two categories of Senior High Schools were not different. However, students from the selected well-endowed schools tend to have a greater advantage than their counterparts from the less-endowed schools, as they were exposed to less lecture method 7.4% compared to 27.9% from the low-endowment schools. To ensure efficiency in the teaching of the practical aspect of biology in the Senior High Schools, the study recommends that the government and all other stakeholders in education must supply laboratories in all Senior High Schools with the necessary equipment, materials and chemicals to enable students to develop the necessary skills, attitudes, and interest in science.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

DOI

Keywords


well-endowed, less-endowed, practical, equipment, laboratory

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adedapo, K. (2010). The effects of experimental approach to teaching science on academic performance. Journal of science teachers of Nigeria, 19 (2), 57-64.

Adepoju, J.A. (1991). Factors and problems in the teaching and learning of mathematics in Nigeria schools: National school curriculum review conference proceedings. Lagos: Federal Ministry of Education.

Agboala, J.A. (2011). Activities for developing critical thinking skill. A paper published in the Department of Education, Ahmade Bello University, Nigeria.

Anamuah-Mensah, J. (1995). The race against underdevelopment: A mirage or reality? A paper presented at the 3rd Dean’s Lecture at the University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana.

Angell, C., Guttersrud, O., Henriksen, E. K., & Isnes, A. (2004). Physics: Frightful, but fun. Pupils’ and teachers’ views of physics and physics teaching. Science Education,88(5), 1-24.

Babbie, E. (2001). The practice of social research (9thed.). Belmont, California: Wardworth Publishing Company.

Banahene, W. O. (2008). Principle and practice of teaching. Kumasi: KNUST Publishing

Barnes, D. (1985). Practical curriculum studies. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Beatty, J.W., & Woolnough, B.E. (1982). Why do practical work in 11-13 science? School Science Review, 63 (225), 768-770.

Bryman, A., & Cramer, C. (2001).Quantitative data analysis: A guide for social scientists. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis Inc.

Ghana Government (2006). A Public-Private Partnership Programme between Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, Maks Publications & Media Services. Retrieved on June, 03, 2010, from http://www.ghanadistricts.com/region/Ghana.htm.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1998). Cooperation in the classroom. Edina: MN, Interaction Book Company.

Joppe, M. (2000).The research process. Retrieved November, 18, 2009, from http://www.ryerson.ca/~mjoppe/rp.htm

Kraft, R. (1994).Teaching and learning in Ghana; A curriculum, textbooks, syllabus and handbook analysis. A report submitted to the Agency for international Development USAID mission in Accra, Ghana.

Lord, T. (2001). 101 reasons for using cooperative learning in biology teaching.The American Biology Teacher,63, 30-38.

McCombs, B.L. (1996). Alternative perspectives for motivation. In L. Baker, P. Afflerback, & D. Reinking (Eds.), Developing Engaged Readers in School and Home Communities (pp. 67–87). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

National Institute for Science Education - College Level One.(1997). Collaborative learning, small group learning page. Madison: University of Wisconsin.

Ogunyemi, B. (1990). The relationship between instructional resources and socio-economic status in selected population of high school. Dissertation Abstract International, 25 (2), 120-126.

Okebukonla, P.A.O. (1984). Effects of cooperative competitive and individualistic laboratory interaction pattern on students’ performance in biology. Ibadan: University of Ibadan

Partridge, N. (2003).Science out of the classroom. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 56-57.

Schreiner, C., & Sjoberg, S. (2004). Sowing the seeds of ROSE. Background, Rationale Questionnaire Development and Data Collection for ROSE.A comparative study of students’ view of Science Education. Acta Didata: Department of Teacher Education and School Development, University of Oslo, Norway.

Serwaa O. O. (2007). The status of science teaching and learning at the Upper Primary levels: A case study of selected schools in Kwahu South District. Unpublished Masters’ Thesis, UEW.

Slavin, R. (1990). Cooperative learning. In C. Rogers & P. Kutnick (Eds.), The Social Psychology of the Primary School.(pp.327-369).London: Routledge.

Smith, M. L. (1982). Benefits of Naturalistic methods in Research in Science Education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19 (8), 627-638.

Springer, L., & Stanne, M. E. (1999).Effects of cooperative learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research,69, 21-51.

Tranter, J. (2004). Biology: Dull, lifeless and boring? Journal of Biological Education,38(3), 104-105.

WAEC. (2010).Chief Examiner’s Reports, for WASSCE biology. Ghana: WAEC.

WAEC. (2011).Chief Examiner’s Reports, for WASSCE biology. Ghana: WAEC.

WAEC. (2012).Chief Examiner’s Reports, for WASSCE biology. Ghana: WAEC.

WAEC. (2013).Chief Examiner’s Reports, for WASSCE biology. Ghana: WAEC

WAEC. (2014).Chief Examiner’s Reports, for WASSCE biology. Ghana: WAEC.

WAEC. (2015).Chief Examiner’s Reports, for WASSCE biology. Ghana: WAEC

Young, B.L. (1990). Teaching primary science. England: Longman Group.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Godwin Tordzro, Kennedy Nyeseh Ofori

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2018. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.


This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).