Exploring Annotated Drawing For Improving Nigerian Secondary School Students Achievement in Genetics

Abstract

The search for ways to bring about effective teaching and learning of biology in secondary schools has provided the impetus for this study. Therefore, the study investigated the effect of annotated drawing on the understanding of genetics by secondary school biology students. 110 secondary school students drawn from two intact classes constituted the sample for the study. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to collect data using the research questions raised and hypotheses formulated for the study. A Genetics Achievement Test (GAT), a 50-item multiple choice test was used to collect quantitative data and an Interview Schedule (IS) was employed to elicit responses which constitute data for the qualitative method. A reliability coefficient of 0.82 was obtained for the GAT using the split-half method. Findings revealed that annotated drawing strategy had a significant positive effect on students understanding and achievement in genetics, male and female students alike benefited from the strategy. The analysis of data also showed that students had some misconceptions in biology which hitherto, hindered their understanding of genetics concepts. Suggestions elicited from biology students on how they could be assisted to learn biology and indeed, genetics meaningfully were obtained from their responses on the Interview Schedule (IS). Implication of the study included that, when appropriate instructional strategies are employed in the dissemination of science knowledge in the classroom, students’ understanding of concepts and learning become meaningful

Keywords

• exploring, annotated drawing, achievement, genetics

References

1. Araz, G. and Sungur, S. (2007). Effectiveness of problem based on learning on academic performance in genetics. Journal of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. 35(6), 448-451.
2. Australian Academy of Science (2009). Literacy focuses across curriculum connections units, primary connection project stage 3 from www.qualityteaching(2006-2008)deewi.gov.ali
3. Bahar, Johnstone and Hansell (1999). Revisiting learning difficulties in biology. Journal of Biological Education 33(2). 84-86.
4. Ball, E. C (2010).Annotation an effective device for student feedback: A critical review literature. Journal of Nurse Education in Practice 10, 138-142
5. Cavallo, A.M.L. (1996). Meaningful learning, reasoning ability and students understanding and problem-solving of topics in genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 33, 625-656.
6. Conley, M. (2008). Cognitive strategy instruction for adolescents: What we know about the promise, what we don’t know about the potential. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1) 84-108
7. Danmole, B.T. (1998). Gender, Location and Type of school as predictors of science knowledge among Fresh Entrants into Junior Secondary School in Kwara. Journal of Research in Education, 2(2) 44-51.
8. Danmole, B.T and Femi-Adeoye, K.O. (2004). Effect of concept mapping technique on senior secondary school students’ Achievement and Retention of Ecology Concepts. Journal of the Science Teacher Association of Nigeria, 39 (1&2).

9. Danmole, B.T and S.A. (2005). Effect of Concept Mapping on Students Academic Performance in Junior Secondary School Integrated Science in Ilorin Metropolis. African Journal of Education Studies 3(1) 249-266.
10. Federal Republic of Nigeria FRN (2008). National Policy on Education
11. Hander, C. and Grelson, G. (2006). Laboratory work: Teachers perceptive. Journal of Biological Education 40(3), 113-118
12. Igbokwe, C.O. (2010). The Effect of Multicultural Learning Environment of Cognitive Achievement of Pupils in Primary Science. Journal of the Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 45, 1&2, 9-19
13. Keogh, B and Nayhor, S. (1996). Teaching and Learning in science. A new perspective on annotations presented at the BERA conference, Lancaster, www.gogglesearch.com
14. Knippels, M.C. P.J. (2002). Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education. The yo-to learning and teaching strategy. Utreacht.in:htto//igitun-achive library unil dissertation/2012- 0930-0984/full pat 15.12. 2011
15. Lameed, S.N. (2002). The use of Guide Discovery and its Effect on the Performance of Students in Biology. Unpublished M.ED Project, Lagos State University.
16. Lewis, J. and Leach, J. (2004). Traits genes, particles and information: revisiting tament understanding of genetic. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 165-206.
17. Lewis, J. and Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). Genes, Chromosomes cell division and inheritance – Do students see any relationship? International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 177-195.
18. Lewis, J. Leach, J. and Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). All in the genes young people’s understanding of the nature of genes. Journal of Biological Education, 34(2), 74-79
19. Lewis, J. Leach, J. and Wood-Robinson, C. (2000b). What’s in a cell? Young people’s understanding of genetics relationship between cell within an individual. Journal of Biology Education 32(3), 129-132
20. Okebukola, P.A.O. (1991). Concept Mapping in Biology with a Cooperative Learning Flavour, American Biology Teacher, 23, 12-19
21. Pressley,M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced instruction. New York: Guilford.
22. Schwartz, R.S., Lederman, N.G. and Graford, B.A. (2004). Developing view of science in an authentic context; An Exploit Approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education 88(4) 610-645
23. Uhumuavbi, P.O and Eromosele, A.O. (2006) Relative Effects of Guided Inquiry and Expository Strategies of Learning Physics Concepts and Performance school level. Nigerian Journal of Professional Teachers, 1(3).
24. West African Examination Council (2012). Syllabus.
25. West African Examination Council (2009;2010). Chief Examiner Report
26. Wood-Robinson, C. Lewis, J and Leach, J. (2000). Young people’s understanding of the nature of genetic information in the cells of an organism. Journal of Biological Education, 35(1) 29-36
27. Wolf, J.L (2002). Marginal Pedagogy: How annotation texts affect Writing from source texts. Written Communication 19(2), 297-333
28. Zywica, J. and Gomez, K. (2008). Annotating to Support Learning in the Content Areas: Teaching and Learning Science. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literature 52(2) retrieved 05/09/2012 from www.igenlit.pbworks.com/f/JAAL-52-2Zywica.pdf