Analysis of Undergraduate Biology Laboratory Manuals

Year 2016, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 0 - 0, 20.07.2016

Getachew Fetahi Gobaw

https://doi.org/10.20876/ijobed.99404

Cited By: 1

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the undergraduate biology laboratory manuals of Ethiopian Universities. It focuses on assessing how they promote the basic and integrated science process skills that are involved in scientific inquiry with seven levels of Laboratory Task Analysis Instrument (LAI). A total of 22 undergraduate biology laboratory manuals were collected from three sample universities with different age. Manipulating materials, measuring and using numbers and pre - lab activities were common activities, and were found in every manual and in every university. However, students rarely asked to plan and design and to communicate and interpret the results. The results also show high percentage rate of basic science process skills (75.4%) as compared to the integrated science process skills (24.6%).  Implications for universities and the Ministry of Education should develop standard harmonized biology laboratory manuals with all the necessary scientific skills that would promote the students’ use of much integrated scientific skills.

 

Key words: Scientific skills; undergraduate biology laboratory manuals; laboratory task analysis instrument

References

• AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy: A Project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Abraham, I. and Millar, R. (2008). Does Practical Work Really Work? A Study of the Effectiveness of Practical Work as a Teaching and Learning Method in School Science, International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1945-1969.
• Akinbobola, A.O. and Afolabi, F.( 2010). Analysis of Science Process Skills in West African Senior Secondary School Certificate Physics Practical Examinations in Nigeria, American-Eurasian Journal of Scientific Research, 5 (4): 234-240.
• Banchi, H., and Bell ,R.(2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and Children, 46 (2), 26–29. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/
• Basey, J. M., Mendelow, T. N. and Ramos, C. N.(2000). Current trends of community college lab curricula in biology: an analysis of inquiry, technology, and content. Journal of Biological Education, 34 (2), 80 -86.
• Domin, D.S (1999). A content analysis of general chemistry laboratory manuals for evidence of higher-order cognitive Tasks. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(1), 109-112.
• Gauchet, C. (2011). Effects of a novel science curriculum versus tradition science curriculum on problem solving skills and attitudes for 10th grade students. Doctoral dissertation presented to Trevecca Nazarene University. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI number: 3413101)
• Germann, P. J., Haskins, S. and Auls, S. (1996) Analysis of Nine High School Biology Laboratory Manuals: Promoting Scientific Inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 475-499.
• Harmonized Curriculum for BSc Degree Program in Biology (2009), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (unpublished), 3-5
• Haskins, S. (2000). An analysis of Laboratory Activities found in Applications in Biology/Chemistry: A contextual approach to Laboratory Science (ABC). A doctoral dissertation presented to The Faculty of the Graduate school, University of Missouri-Colombia. Available from Bell and Howell information and learning database. (UMI number: 9999294)
• Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V.N. (2003). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54.
• Hofstein, A., and Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2007). The laboratory in science education: the state of the art. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8 (2), 105-107.
• Hunt, L., Koender, A. and ynnild, V. (2012). Assessing practical laboratory skills in undergraduate molecular biology courses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(7), 861–874.
• Jack, G.U. (2013). The Influence of Identified Student and School Variables on Students’ Science Process Skills Acquisition, Journal of Education and Practice, 4(5), 16-22
• Katchevich, D., Holstein, A. and Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2013). Argumentation in the Chemistry Laboratory: Inquiry and Confirmatory Experiments. Research in Science Education, 43, 317–345.
• Kuddus, R.H. (2013). Who Should Change Biology Education: An Analysis of the Final Report on the Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education Conference. International Journal of Biology Education, 3(1):63-83.
• National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment.(1993). National science education standards: An enhancement sampler. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
• Ongowo, R.O. and Indoshi, F. C. (2013). Science Process Skills in the Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education Biology Practical Examinations. Creative Education, 4(11), 713-717.
• Özgelen, S. (2012). Students’ Science Process Skills within a Cognitive Domain Framework. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(4), 283-292.
• Pešaković, D., Flogie, A. and Aberšek, B. (2014). Development and Evaluation of a Competence-Based Teaching Process for Science and Technology Education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(5), 740-755.
• Peters, C.J. (2006). An Assessment Template for Introductory College Biological Laboratory Manuals. A doctoral dissertation Submitted to Illinois State University in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education, Illinois State University. Available from ProQuest Dissertation and Thesis database. (UMI Number: 3233946)
• Psillos, D. and Niedderer H. (2002. The Teaching and learning in the science Laboratory, (eds) , Kluwer Academic Publishers , (pp 9-20).
• Saha, G.S. (2001). Implementing the Science Assessment Standards: Developing and validating a Set of Laboratory Assessment Tasks in High School Biology. A doctoral dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of State University of New York at Buffalo. Available from Bell and Howell information and learning database. (UMI number: 9997996)
• Sheeba, M.N. (2013). An Anatomy of Science Process Skills In The Light of the Challenges to Realize Science Instruction Leading to Global Excellence in Education. Educationia Confab, 2(4), 108-113.
• Sundberg, M. D. and Moncada,G.J. (1994) Creating effective investigative laboratories for undergraduates. BioScience, 44(10), 698-704. http://doi.org/10.2307/1312513
• Tamir, P. and Lunetta, V.N. (1978). An Analysis of Laboratory Inquiries in the BSCS Yellow Version. The American Biology Teacher, 353-357.
• Tarrant, T.M. (2005). Construction, Implementation, and evaluation of an undergraduate Biology Laboratory Teaching model. A doctoral dissertation submitted to Michigan State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy in biology. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI number: 3204806)
• Tessier, J. (2010). An Inquiry-Based Biology Laboratory Improves Pre-service Elementary Teachers’ Attitudes about Science. Journal of College Science Teaching, 84-90.
• Tweedy, M.E. and Hoese, W.J (2005). Diffusion activities in college laboratory manuals. Journal of Biological Education, 39(4), 150-155.