Relative Abstract Nature of the Three Core Science Subjects at the Senior Secondary Level in Nigeria as Exemplified by Classroom Interaction Patterns

Öz

 This study examined relative abstract nature of Biology, Chemistry and Physics offered at the senior secondary schools (SSS) in Ankpa education zone of Kogi State of Nigeria based on the analysis of classroom interactions. In each of the three comparable public schools used, the same class of Senior Secondary 2 (SS 2) or 11th grade students were each taught Biology, Chemistry and Physics. In each school, reproduction, chemical kinetics and refraction were taught in Biology, Chemistry and Physics respectively. The researchers personally took record of interactions during the 9 periods (taught by 9 science teachers) lasting for 35 minutes each using Flanders’ Interaction Analysis Categories (FIAC). Inter observer’s rater reliability was 0.69 using Scott’s Phi coefficient. Using a 10 by 10 matrix and percentage for final analysis, the extent of students’ participation in the lesson which its decreasing order was used to estimate the degree of the abstract nature or difficulty experienced in each subject was determined. The result revealed that the physical sciences were more abstract than the biological science with physics having the highest index. There was no close match between teachers’ level of motivation during the lessons and students’ participation except in Biology. Consequent upon these, it was recommended that chemistry and physics teachers should always ensure that there is a close match between cognitive ability of learners and cognitive demands of the subjects or lessons taught; that concrete teaching materials be used in the two  more abstract subjects to reduce the formal reasoning or abstract requirements in the lessons to concrete demand levels, among others.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• abstract,Classroom interaction,cognitive ability,cognitive demand,motivation,teacher talk,student talk,concrete

Kaynakça

1. Achor, E E & Orji, B C (2009). Level of students’ motivation in classroom interactions in Integrated Science. Journal of Research in Curriculum and Teaching, 4(1), 294-303.
2. Achor, E E (2004). The relationship between curriculum demands and physics achievement of senior secondary school students in Kogi State. Journal of the National Association of Science, Humanities and Education Research, 2(1), 20-26.
3. Achor, E E (2003). Cognitive correlates of physics achievement of some Nigeria senior secondary students. Journal of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 38(1&2), 10-15.
4. Anwukah, T. G. (1990). An after use reflection on the observation technique of interaction analysis, procedure and limitations. International Journal of Education Research, 4, 6-123.
5. Chauhan, S.S. (1979). Innovations in teaching learning process. New Delhi: Vilas publishingHouse.
6. Flander, N. A. (1970). Analyzing teacher behavior. Addison-Wesly: Reading Mass. FRN (2004). National policy on education. Yaba, Lagos- Nigeria: NERDC press.
7. Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (2000). Cooperative learning method. University of Minnesota, http://www.co-operation.org. Retrieved 22/05/09.
8. Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget theory. In P.H. Musen (Ed.): Garnichael’s manual of child psychology (703-732). New York: Wiley.

9. Prosser, M. (1983). Relationship between the cognitive abilities of a group of tertiary physics students and the cognitive requirements of their textbooks. Science Education, 67(1),075-083.
10. Shayer, M & Adey, P (1981). Towards a science of science teaching: Cognitive development and curriculum demand. London: Oxford Pub.
11. Shuaibu, A.A.M & Iroegbu, N. (2003). A study of the relationship between parents and teachers’ motivational support and secondary school students’ achievement in science.
12. Jos Journal of Education, Vol.6, No.2, pp.114-121.
13. Udoh, A. O. (2008). An analysis of classroom interaction of senior secondary school chemistry teachers in Ikot Ekpene Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom State Nigeria.
14. Journal of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 43(1&2), 16-22.
15. Vigotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Pub.