Effects of Computer-Assisted Jigsaw II Cooperative Learning Strategy on Physics Achievement and Retention

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of computer-assisted jigsaw II cooperative strategy on physics achievement and retention. The study also determined how moderating variables of achievement levels as it affects students' performance in physics when Jigsaw II cooperative learning is used as an instructional strategy. Purposive sampling technique was used to select two senior secondary school class II (SSSII) physics students from two intact classes in Minna, Niger State, Nigeria. Eighty students from two intact classes were assigned into Jigsaw II and Individualized Computer Instruction (ICI) groups. ComputerAssisted Learning Package (CALP) on physics and Physics Achievement Test (PAT) were used as treatment and test instruments. Analysis of Covariance and Scheffe’s test were used for data analysis. Findings indicated that students taught physics using computerassisted Jigsaw II performed better and retained the physics concepts longer than those taught using individualized computer instruction. In addition, achievement levels had significant influence on their performance. Based on the findings, it was recommended among other that physics teachers should be encouraged use computer-assisted Jigsaw II cooperative strategy to enhanced students’ performance.

Keywords

• Jigsaw II,Computer assisted instruction,Cooperative learning,Achievement levels,Retention,Physics

References

1. Adegoke, B. A. (2011). Effect of multimedia instruction on senior secondary school students’ achievement in physics. European Journal of Educational Studies, 3(3), 537-541.
2. Adetona, A. A. & Rafiu, A. A. (2006). Application of M learning to distant learning programmes: A case study of open university system of Nigeria. Book of proceedings, 2nd School of Science and Science Education Annual Conference, FUT Minna. Nigeria.
3. Ajaja, O. P. & Eravwoke, O. U. (2010). Effects of cooperative learning strategy on junior secondary school students’ achievement in integrated science. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 14(1). Retrieved from http://ejse.southwestern.edu
4. Alshammari, N. M. (2015). Effects of cooperative learning on academic performance of college students in Saudi Arabia. Unpublished Master Thesis, State University of New York at Fredonia, Fredonia, New York.
5. Altiparmak, M. & Nakiboglu-Tezer, N. (2009). Hands on group work paper model for teaching DNA structure, central dogma and recombinant DNA. Online submission, US-China Education Review, 6(1), 19-23.
6. Azmin, N. H. (2016). Effect of the Jigsaw-based cooperative learning method on student performance in the general certificate of education advanced-level psychology: An exploratory Brunei case study. International Education Studies, 9(1), 91-96. doi:10.5539/ies.v9n1p91
7. Bajah, S. T. (2000). The state of science technology and mathematics education in Africa. UNESCO, (925) 3-4.
8. Cohen, E. (1994). Designing group work: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom (2nded.). New York: Teachers College Press.

9. Crosby, M. S. & Owens, E. M. (1993). The disadvantages of tracking and ability grouping: A look at cooperative learning as an alternative. In National dropout prevention center Bulletin: Solutions and strategies, 5, 1-8.
10. Dishon, D., & O'Leary, P. (1984). A guidebook for co-operative learning: A technique for creating more effective schools. Holmes Beach, FL: Learning Publications.
11. Essien, M. I. F. (2000). Tertiary institutions’ administrators’: Perception of students’ levels of attainment of self-reliance through the implementation of 6-3-3-4 Educational System in Cross River State (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Calabar, Nigeria.
12. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2013). National policy on education. Lagos: Federal Government Press.
13. Fuligni, J. A., Eccles, J. S. & Barber, B. L. (1995). The long-term effects of seventh-grade ability grouping in mathematics. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 15(1), 58-89. Retrieved on 14 December 2009 from http://jea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/58
14. Gambari, I. A. (2010). Effect of computer-assisted cooperative learning strategies on the performance of senior secondary students in physics, in Minna, Nigeria (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria.
15. Hanze, M. & Berger, R. (2007). Cooperative learning, motivation effects, students’ characteristics: An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes. Learning and Instruction, 17(1), 29-41.
16. Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Johnson-Holubec, E. (1993). Co-operation in the classroom (6th ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
17. Johnson, R. T., Johnson, D. W., & Stanne, M. B. (1996). Comparison of computer-assisted cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. American Educational Research Journal, 23(3), 382-392.
18. Kara, I. (2008). The effect on retention of computer assisted instruction in science education. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(4), 357-364.
19. Keramati, M. (2010). Effect of cooperative learning on academic achievement of physics course. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 29(2), 155 -173.
20. Mathew, F. (2002).The effect of gender and parental influence on students' achievement in the teaching and learning of science. Keynote address delivered on the speech and prize giving day: Government day secondary school, Idofin.
21. Mattingly, R. M. & VanSickle, R. L. (2009). Cooperative learning and achievement in social studies: Jigsaw II. Retrieved on 24 December 2009 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ ERICWebPortal/Home.portal=ED348267.
22. Michael, P. (2006). The importance of physics: Breakthroughs drive economy, quality of life, world leaders, public increasingly take scientific advances for granted. Retrieved on 29 April 2007 from http://www.physics2005.org.
23. Moreno, R. (2009). Constructing knowledge with an agent-based instructional program: A comparison of cooperative and individual meaning making. Learning and Instruction, 19(5), 433 - 444.
24. Okebukola, P. (1999). An assessment of laboratory facilities in Nigeria schools and its effect on students' achievement. Journal of Science Teacher's Association of Nigeria (STAN) Special edition, 21-43.
25. Olorukooba, S. B. (2007). Science, technology and mathematics (STM) education is for all students: Promoting effective teaching of STM subjects in our schools through teacher preparation. Proceedings of the 50th Anniversary Conference of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria. Pp3-6
26. Omosewo, E. O. (2000). Effect of family type on secondary school students' performance in physics in Ilorin metropolis. The Nigeria Journal of Guidance and counselling, 7(1), 184- 195.
27. Osemwinyen, A. C. (2009). Effects of e-learning on retention and achievement in secondary school mathematics in Abuja, Nigeria (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
28. Shaaban, K. (2006). An initial study of the effects of cooperative learning on reading comprehension, vocabulary acquisition, and motivation to read. Reading Psychology, 27(5), 377-403.
29. Ross, M. C., Seabborn, A. W., & Wilson, E. K. (2002). Is cooperative learning a valuable instructional method for teaching social studies to urban African American students? Retrieved on 5 February 2008 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home. portal=(ED480458).
30. Schmidt, K. (2002). Computer-assisted cooperative work and learning. Retrieved on 5 May 2007 from http://www.uoc.edu/web/esp/art/uoc/schmidt0202/schmidt0202.html 30/ 04/2011.
31. Sengul, S. & Katranci, Y. (2014). Effects of jigsaw technique on mathematics self-efficacy perceptions of seventh grade primary school students. Procedia of5th World Conference on Educational Sciences - WCES 2013. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 333-338. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.217
32. Shawl, A. (2003). An adoption of problem based teaching and problem-based learning to improve the teaching of radioactivity. Chinese Journal of Elementary Science, 3 (1), 14- 18.
33. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Retrieved on 5 May 2007 from http://www.scov.csos.jhu.edu/sfa/ cooplear.html
34. Stephen, B. M. (2003). The design of construction of a tickertape vibrator for teaching physics in secondary schools (Unpublished M. Tech. Project). Department of Science Education. Federal University of Technology, Minna.
35. Tran, V. D. & Vietnam, A. G. (2014). The effects of cooperative learning on the academic achievement and knowledge retention. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(2), 131-140. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v3n2p131-140
36. West African Examination Council, (WAEC, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 & 2008). May/June. Chief Examiner’s Report. Lagos.
37. Yager, S., Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Oral discussion, group-to-individual transfer, and achievement in cooperative learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 60-66.
38. Yar’adua, U. M. (2008). The presidential speech. Retrieved on 9 January 2009 from http://www.centralbank.org.
39. Yusuf, A. (2004). Effects of cooperative and competitive instructional strategies on junior secondary school students’ performance in social studies, in Ilorin, Nigeria (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Curriculum Studies and Educational Technology, University of Ilorin, Nigeria
40. Yusuf, M. O. & Afolabi, A. O. (2010). Effects of computer assisted instruction (CAI) on secondary school students’ performance in biology. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1). Retrieved on 15 January 2010 from http://www.tojet.edu. com
41. Yusuf, M. O., Gambari, A.I. & Olumorin, C. O. (2012). Effectiveness of computer-supported cooperative learning strategies in learning physics. International Journal of Social Sciences & Education, 2(2), 94-109.
42. Zakaria, E., Solfitri, T., Daud, Y. & Abidin, Z. Z. (2013). Effect of cooperative learning on secondary school students’ mathematics achievement. Creative Education, 4(2), 98-100. Retrieved on 13 March 2015 from http://www.scirp.org/journal/ce.