Home⇛International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research⇛vol. 4 no. 2 (2023)

Effectiveness of Computer-Aided Instruction on Students’ Conceptual Understanding in Life Science

Alvin M. Mahawan | Milagros a Celedonio

 

Abstract:

The study aimed to determine the effectiveness of computer-aided instruction (CAI) on students’ conceptual understanding in Life Science. The objectives of the study is to develop lesson plans with computeraided instruction packages; assess the developed lesson plans in terms of congruency of objectives, learning experiences, assessment of learning outcomes, features of computer-aided instruction packages, and to determine the effect of CAI on students’ conceptual understanding. The study utilized the pre-experimental method. The study involved 27 students who took a Bioenergetics Achievement Test (B.A.T) before and after CAI. It was found out that developed daily lesson plans are excellent; congruency of lesson objectives (WM = 4.80), learning experiences (WM =4.76), assessment of learning outcomes (WM =4.79), and features of computer-aided instruction (WM =4.39). The test of the difference between the pre-test and post-test scores showed a significant result (t26=-14.30, p<0.01), and it was supported with the positive increase on the Learning Gain Score (LGS=3.18) which showed an increase in conceptual understanding and mastery in the learning competencies. Hence, there is sufficient evidence to show that the students’ scores improved significantly after being taught in computer-aided instruction. Therefore, the developed lesson plans with the integration of computer-aided instruction are excellently and effectively improved the students' conceptual understanding and mastery of the learning competencies.



References:

  1. Ambrose, S., Bridges, M., Lovett, M., DiPietro, M., & Nor man, M. (2010). 7 Research-based Principles for Smart Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
  2. Achuonye, A. (2011). Using computer in science class: The interactive effect of gender. Journal of African Studies and Development, 3(7), 131–134.
  3. Bernardo, A.B., Limjap, A., Prudente, M., & Roleda, L., (2008). Students' perceptions of science classes in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9(3), 285-295.
  4. Brecht, H.D. & Ogilby, S. M., (2008). Enabling comprehensive teaching strategy: Video lectures. Journal of Information Technology Education, 7(1) 10. http://www.informingscience.org/jite/vol7/jite/Vol.7,2/6/10.
  5. Broto, A. S., (2016). Statistics Made Simple (2nd Edition) Quezon City, Philippines. National Bookstore. Corpuz, E. 1998. Effects of a computer instruction program on college students' performance in solving simple problems in mechanics, Master's thesis, De La Salle University, Manila.
  6. Carido, C., & Bautista, J. (2000). Correlation analysis of admission test and academic performance in mathematics of freshmen students in Notre Dame Univer- sity. N.D.U. Faculty Journal, 1.
  7. Desberg, P. (1994). Hypre interactive C.A.I.: Using Hypercard to Develop Computer-assisted Instruction. Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.
  8. Diculen, L. B.. (2002). Design development and summative evaluation of computer-assisted instruction (C.A.I.) on selected topics in high school physics. MMSU CTE Research Journal, 1(1). http://ejour-nals.ph/form/cite.php?id=9287
  9. Fetalvero, E. G., 2017). Consensus-based education: Its effect on college students' achievement in Bioenergetics as moderated by gender and learning styles. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(4), 533-548. https://search.proquest.com/openview/4313ed8bcbe4529bd58f1c22e17e351f/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=4477238
  10. Finky, D. L. (2005). Integrated course design. Manhattan, KS: The IDEA Center. http://ideaedu.org/wpcon-tent/uploads/2014/11/Idea_Paper_42.pdf.
  11. Gredler, M. E. (2004). Games and simulations and their re lationships to learning. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (2nd ed), 571-82, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  12. Hennessy, S., Deaney, R., & Ruthven, K., (2015). Situated expertise in integrating use of multimedia simulation into secondary science teaching. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500404656.
  13. Huppert, J., Lomask, S. M., Lazarowitz, R., & Lomask, S. M. (2010).: Students' cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in microbiology. International Journal of Computer Simulations in the High School, 37–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690110049150
  14. Imam, O., (2010). Reading skill predictors of students' performance in Mathematics and Science. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Notre Dame University, Cotabato City, Philippines.
  15. Imam, O. A., Mastura, M. A., Jamil, H., Ismail, Z., City, C., Avenue, S., & City, C. (2014). Reading comprehension skills and performance in science among high school, 29, 81–94.
  16. Jamwal, G., (2012). Effective use of interactive learning modules in classroom study in computer science. All Graduate Plan B and other Reports,318. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/gradreports/318
  17. Keles, E., & Kefeli, P., (2010). Determination of student misconceptions in "photosynthesis and respiration" unit and correcting them with the help of C.A.I. material. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3111-3118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.474
  18. Kose, S., (2008). Diagnosing student misconceptions: using drawing as a research method. World Applied Science Journal, 3(2), 283-293. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239919266_Diagnosing_Student_Misconceptions_Using_Drawings_as_a_Research_Method
  19. Lapada, A. A., & Lapada, A. A., (2017). Audio-visual aided instruction in science among high school students in the Philippines. International Journal of Education and Research, 5(7), 139–156.
  20. Limjap, A., Santos, G. N., Rose, M., Lapinid, C., & Roleda, L., (2017). Gearing K to 12 Philippine Science for National Development and ASEAN Competitiveness, (March Edition). https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2017.7497
  21. McFarlene, A., & Sakellariou, S., (2002). The role of I.C.T. in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 219-232
  22. McKeachie, W. (1999). Teaching Tips. (10th ed.) Boston: Houghton Mifflin
  23. Meltzer, D.E. & Manivannan, K., (2002). Transforming the lecture-hall environment: The fully interactive physics lecture. American Journal of Physics, 70(6), 639-654.
  24. Mishra, S., (2001). Designing online learning. Vancouver, Canada: Commonwealth of Learning. http://outer-limitresearch.wikispaces.com/Research
  25. Navarra, T. (1997). Personality traits and performance in science of students in selected Notre Dame high schools. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Notre Dame University, Cotabato City, Philippines.
  26. Parker, J.M., Andreson, C.W., Heidemenn, M., Merrill, Merritt, B., Richmond, G., & Urban-Laurian, M., (2012). Exploring undergraduates' understanding of photosynthesis using diagnostic question cluster. CBE-Life Science Education, 11, 47-57. https://www.lifescied.org/doi/pdf/10.1187/cbe.11-07-0054
  27. Rutten, N., Joolingen, W. R. Van, & Veen, J. T. Van Der. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58(1), 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.017
  28. Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2012). Simulations to support science instruction and learning : A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Computer, 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.605182
  29. Svandova, K., (2014). Secondary schools' misconceptions about photosynthesis and plant respiration; Preliminary results. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(1), 59-67. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Katerina_Gazova/publication/287299200_Secondary_School_Students'_Misconceptions_about_Photosynthesis_and_Plant_Respiration_Preliminary_Results/links/56b8879708ae44bb330d2ca8.pdf
  30. Tambade, P. S., & Wagh, B. G., (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of computer-assisted instructions in physics at undergraduate level. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Education, 3(2), 127–136.
  31. Tanner, K., & Allen, D., (2005). Approaches to biology teaching and learning: Understanding the wrong answers-teaching toward conceptual change. Cell Biology Education, 4, 112-117. https://www.lifescied.org/doi/full/10.1187/cbe.05-02-0068
  32. Tatar, E., & Oktay, M., (2007). Students' misunderstanding about the energy conservation principle: a general view to studies in literature. International Journal of Environment and Science Education, 2(3), 79-81. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ901271.pdf
  33. Tenizo, E. (2006). The factors related to the science education performance of fourth year students in the public high schools in Region XII. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Notre Dame University, Cotabato City, Philippines.
  34. Tubeza, P. (2009). We aren't better than we were 10 years ago. http://www.undp.org.ph/?link=news&news_id=231&fa=1
  35. Underwood, J.D.M. & Underwood, G. (1990). Extending Children's Minds. Massachusetts: Basil Blackwell Ltd.
  36. White, C.S., & Hubbard, G. (1998). Computers and Education. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic