Combining Inquiry-Based Hands-On and Simulation Methods with Cooperative Learning on Students’ Learning Outcomes in Electric Circuits

Godwin Kwame Aboagye^1, , Theophilus Aquinas Ossei-Anto¹ and Joseph Ghartey Ampiah¹

¹Department of Science Education, University of Cape Coast, Ghana

Cite this paper:
Godwin Kwame Aboagye, Theophilus Aquinas Ossei-Anto and Joseph Ghartey Ampiah. Combining Inquiry-Based Hands-On and Simulation Methods with Cooperative Learning on Students’ Learning Outcomes in Electric Circuits. American Journal of Educational Research. 2018; 6(8):1172-1181. doi: 10.12691/education-6-8-16

Abstract

Concepts in electric circuits are reported in literature as being problematic for students at all levels of pre-tertiary education [1] and the situation in Ghana is not different [2]. Hence, innovative ways of teaching are being explored by researchers to remediate the problem. This study, therefore, was premised on the fact that combining inquiry-based real hands-on and computer simulation methods with cooperative learning has the potential of improving students’ learning outcomes. In all, 110 senior high school Form 2 students from two schools who participated were put into heterogeneous-ability and friendship cooperative learning groupings. Each group was taught electric circuits with the combination of inquiry-based real hands-on and computer simulation method. The aim was to compare the two groups in terms of their scientific reasoning and conceptual understanding. Within each group, the hypothetical-deductive and empirical-inductive students were also compared along the two learning outcomes. The results showed among others that the heterogeneous-ability group outperformed their counterparts in conceptual understanding of electric circuits but not scientific reasoning. Hypothetical-deductive and empirical-inductive students in the heterogeneous-ability group outperformed their counterparts in scientific reasoning and conceptual understanding. Implications of the findings for teaching and learning are discussed.

Keywords:
learning outcome scientific reasoning hypothetical-deductive reasoning empirical-inductive reasoning conceptual understanding

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[2]	Aboagye, G. K., Ossei-Anto, T. A., & Johnson, E. A. (2011). Comparison of learning cycle and traditional teaching approaches on students’ understanding of selected concepts in electricity. International Journal of Educational Research and Administration, 8 (2), 28-35.
[3]	Abdullah, S., & Shariff, A. (2008). The effects of inquiry-based computer simulation with cooperative learning on scientific thinking and conceptual understanding of gas laws. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 4 (4), 387-398
[4]	Bybee, R. W., Powell, J. C., & Trowbridge, L. W. (2008). Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing scientific literacy (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
[5]	Cavallo, A. M. (1996). Meaningful learning, reasoning ability, students’ understanding and problem solving of topics in genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 625-656.
[6]	Plotnik, R. (2006). Introduction to psychology (7th ed.). Singapore: Wadsworth.
[7]	Lawson, A. E., Alkhoury, S., Benford, R., Clark, B. R., & Falconer, K. A. (2000).What kinds of scientific concepts exist? Concept construction and intellectual development in college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 996-1018.
[8]	Tekkaya, C., & Yenilmez, A. (2006). Relationships among measures of learning orientation, reasoning ability, and conceptual understanding of photosynthesis and respiration in plants for grade 8 males and females. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 18 (1), 1-14.
[9]	Shayer, M., & Adey, P. S. (1993). Accelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students IV: Three years after a two-year intervention. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 351-366.
[10]	Fah, L. Y. (2009). Logical thinking abilities among form 4 students in the interior division of Sabah, Malaysia. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 32 (2), 161-187.
[11]	Hart, C. (2008). Models in physics, models for physics learning, and why the distinction may matter in the case of electric circuits. Research in Science Education, 30, 529-544.
[12]	McDermott, L. C., & Shaffer, P. S. (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding. American Journal of Physics, 60 (11), 994-1013.
[13]	Carlton, K. (1999). Teaching electric current and electrical potential. Physics Education, 34 (6), 341-344.
[14]	Pfister, H. (2004). Illustrating electric circuit concepts with the Glitter circuit. The Physics Teacher, 42, 359-363.
[15]	The West African Examination Council. (2002). West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) Chief Examiners’ reports. Accra: Wisdom Press.
[16]	The West African Examination Council. (2006). West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) Chief Examiners’ reports. Accra: Wisdom Press.
[17]	The West African Examination Council. (2011). West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) Chief Examiners’ reports. Accra: Wisdom Press.
[18]	The West African Examination Council. (2012). West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) Chief Examiners’ reports. Accra: Wisdom Press.
[19]	The West African Examination Council. (2013). West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) Chief Examiners’ reports. Accra: Wisdom Press.
[20]	Carlson, N., & Buskist, W. (1997). Psychology: The science of behavior (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
[21]	Griffiths, P. E., & Gray, R. D. (1994). Developmental systems and evolutionary explanation. The Journal of Philosophy, 91 (6), 277-304.
[22]	Remigio, K. B., Yangco, R. T., & Espinosa, A. A. (2014). Analogy-enhanced instruction: Effects on reasoning skills in science. The Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Science, 2 (2), 1-9.
[23]	Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
[24]	Kuhn, D. (2010). Formal operations from a twenty-first century perspective. Human Development, 51, 48-55.
[25]	Chiu, M. H., & Lin, J. W. (2005). Promoting fourth graders’ conceptual change of their understanding of electric current via multiple analogies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 429-464
[26]	Tsai, C. C. (2003). Using a conflict map as an instructional tool to change student alternative conceptions in simple series electric-circuit. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (3), 307-327.
[27]	Ates, S. (2005). The effects of learning cycle on college students’ understandings of different aspects in resistive dc circuits. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 9 (4), 1-20.
[28]	Baser, M. (2006a). Promoting conceptual change through active learning using open source software for physics simulations. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22 (3), 336-354.
[29]	Baser, M. (2006b). Effects of conceptual change and traditional confirmatory simulations on pre- service teachers’ understanding of direct current circuits. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15 (5), 367-381.
[30]	de Jong, T. (2006). Computer simulations: Technological advances in inquiry learning. Science, 312, 532-539.
[31]	Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behaviour. Academy of Management Review, 31 (2), 386-408.
[32]	Farrokhnia, M. R., & Esmailpour, A. (2010). A study on the impact of real, virtual and comprehensive experimenting on students’ conceptual understanding of DC electric circuits and their skills in undergraduate electricity laboratory. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 2, 5474-5482.
[33]	Jaakkola, T., & Nurmi, S. (2008). Fostering elementary school students’ understanding of simple electricity by combining simulation and laboratory activities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24 (4), 271-283.
[34]	Jaakkola, T., Nurmi, S., & Veermans, K. (2011). A comparison of students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simulation only and simulation-laboratory contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48 (1), 71-93.
[35]	Zacharia, Z. C. (2007). Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: An effort to effort to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuit. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23 (2), 120-132.
[36]	Kutnick, P., Blatchford, P. & Baines, E. (2005). Grouping of pupils in secondary school classrooms: Possible links between pedagogy and learning. Social Psychology of Education, 8, 349-374.
[37]	Thanh, P. T. H., & Gillies, R. (2010). Group composition of cooperative learning: Does heterogeneous grouping work in Asian classrooms? International Education Studies, 3 (3), 1913-1939.
[38]	Lawson, A. E. (2001). Using the learning cycle to teach biology concepts and reasoning patterns. Journal of Biological Education, 35 (4), 165-169.
[39]	Miell, D., & MacDonald, R. (2000). Children's creative collaborations: The importance of friendship when working together on a musical composition. Social Development, 9 (3), 348-369.
[40]	Piaget, J. (1952). Child’s Conception of Number. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
[41]	Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[42]	Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Poulsen, C., Chambers, B., & d’Apollonia, S. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 423-458.
[43]	Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). London: Routledge.
[44]	Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
[45]	Gay, L. R., & Airasian, P. (2003). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
[46]	Roadrangka, V., Yeany, R. H., & Padilla, M. J. (1983). The construction and validation of group assessment of logical thinking (GALT). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas, TX.
[47]	Saleh, A. W., & De Jong, T. (2005). Effects of Within-Class ability grouping on social interaction, achievement and motivation. Instruction Science, 33, 105-119.
[48]	Gillies, R. (2006). Teachers' and students' verbal behaviours during cooperative and small-group learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 271-287.
[49]	Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66 (2), 211-227.
[50]	Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.