EFFECT OF SCAFFOLDING AND THINK-PAIR-SHARE TEACHING STRATEGIES ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AND LOCUS OF CONTROL IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION OF SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ABIA STATE

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00007030

No of Pages: 246

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $

ABSTRACT


The study investigated the effect of Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share teaching strategies on academic achievement and locus of control in English language comprehension of senior secondary students in South East Nigeria. Eight specific objectives were developed to guide the study. Eight research questions were answered for the study while eight null hypotheses were formulated and tested at 0.05 level of significance to guide the study. The study adopted a quasi-experimental pre-test, post-test control group design. The study was carried out in Abia state. The population of the study was 4,649 senior secondary two students in 2020/2021 academic session in Abia state. Sample for the study consisted of 48 senior secondary two students drawn from three co-educational schools in Ohafia education zone. Instruments used for data collection for the study were English Language Achievement Test (ELAT) which was validated by five experts and Locus of Control Scale (LOCS) which was adopted from Ekennia (2017).The reliability coefficient of ELAT was established using Kuder-Richardson (K-R20) formula and a coefficient of 0.81 was obtained. Mean and standard deviation were used to answer the research questions while Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was used to test the null hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance. The result revealed that students taught English language comprehension using Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share teaching strategies respectively recorded higher mean achievement scores than their counterparts taught with Lecture method. The study also found that Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share strategies have no significant effect on male and female students’ academic achievement in English language. It was recommended among others that English language teachers should be given adequate training by the government on the effective use of innovative teaching strategies such as Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share. Teachers should be encouraged to incorporate these innovative teaching strategies in classroom instructions.






TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Title page                                                                                                                    i

Declaration                                                                                                                  ii

Certification                                                                                                                iii

Dedication                                                                                                                  iv

Acknowledgements                                                                                                    v

Table of contents                                                                                                        vi

List of Tables                                                                                                              ix


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION1

1.1 Background to the Study                                                                                     1

1.2 Statement of the Problem                                                                                     11

1.3 Purpose of the Study                                                                                            12

1.4 Significance of the Study                                                                                     14

1.5 Research Questions                                                                                               16

1.6 Hypotheses                                                                                                           17

1.7 Scope of the Study                                                                                               18


CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE                                  19

2.1 Conceptual Framework                                                                                         19

2.1.1 Concept of scaffolding                                                                                      19

2.1.2 Forms of scaffolding technique                                                                         22

2.1.3 Scaffolding procedures                                                                                      25

2.1.4 Features of scaffolding                                                                                      27

2.1.5 Role of the teacher in a scaffolding classroom                                                  28

2.1.6 Benefits of instructional scaffolding                                                                 29

2.1.7 Concept of think-pair-share                                                                               29

2.1.8 Rationale for think-pair-share                                                                            31

2.1.9 Implementation of think-pair-share in the classroom                                         33

2.1.10 Role of think-pair-share in language learning                                                  34

2.1.11 Advantages of think-pair-share                                                                       35

2.1.12 Concept of lecture method                                                                              36

2.1.13 Gender and learning situation                                                                          38

2.1.14 Concept of academic achievement                                                                              40

2.1.15 Concept and nature of orientation of locus of control                                    41

2.1.16 The role of English language in the Nigerian nation                                        43

2.2    Theoretical Framework                                                                                      45

2.2.1 Constructivist theory                                                                                          45

2.2.2 Socio-cultural theory                                                                                          47

2.3    Review of Empirical Studies                                                                             48

2.4    Summary of the Reviewed Literature                                                               67       


CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY                                                                          70

3.1  Design of the Study                                                                                             70

3.2  Area of the Study                                                                                                            71

3.3  Population of the Study                                                                                       72

3.4  Sample and Sampling Techniques                                                                       72

3.5  Instrument for Data Collection                                                                            73

3.6  Validation of the Instrument                                                                                           74

3.7   Reliability of the Instrument                                                                               75

3.8   Method of Data Collection                                                                                 75

3.8.1 Training of research assistants                                                                           76

3.8.2 Experimental procedure                                                                                     76

3.8.3 Control of extraneous variables                                                                         77

3.9   Method of Data Analysis                                                                                    79


CHAPTER 4: RESULT AND DISCUSSION                                                                   80

4.1 Results                                                                                                                  80

4.2 Summary of Findings                                                                                          94

4.3 Discussion of Findings                                                                                         95


CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS             101

5.1 Summary of the Study                                                                                          101

5.2 Conclusion                                                                                                            102

5.3 Educational Implication of the Study                                                                  103

5.4 Recommendations                                                                                                105

5.5 Limitations of the Study                                                                                       107

5.6 Suggestions for Further Study                                                                             107

References                                                                                                                  109

Appendices                                                                                                                 119

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

4.1:  Pre-test and Post-test Mean Scores of Students Taught English Language

Comprehension using Scaffolding Teaching Strategy and Lecture Method              80

4.2:  Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Effect of Scaffolding on Students’

       Mean Scores in English Language Comprehension                                             81

4.3:  Pre-test and Post-test Mean Scores of Male and Female Students Taught

       English Language Comprehension using Scaffolding Teaching Strategy           82

4.4:  Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Achievement Scores of Male and

       Female Students Taught English Language Comprehension using Scaffolding

       Teaching Strategy                                                                                               83

4.5:  Pre-test and Post-test Mean Scores of Students Taught English Language

       Comprehension using Think-Pair-Share Strategy                                                83

4.6:  Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Effect of Think-Pair-Share Strategy

on Students Taught English Language Comprehension                                             84

4.7:  Pre-test and Post-test Mean Scores of Male and Female Students Taught

       English Language Comprehension using Think-Pair-Share Strategy                  85

4.8:  Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Achievement Scores of Male and

       Female Students Taught English Language Comprehension using

       Think-Pair-Share Teaching Strategy                                                                    86

4.9:  Pre-test and Post-test Mean Scores of Male and Female Students Taught

       English Language Comprehension using Scaffolding Teaching Strategy

and Think-Pair-Share Strategy                                                                                    86

4.10: Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Achievement Scores of Students

        Taught English Language Comprehension using Scaffolding Teaching

         Strategy and Think-Pair-Share Strategy                                                            87

4.11:  Pre-test and Post-test Locus of Control Mean Scores of Students Taught

        English Language Comprehension using Scaffolding Strategy and those

        Taught using Lecture Method                                                                            88

4.12:  Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on Effect of Scaffolding Teaching

         Strategy on Students’ Locus of Control in English Language Comprehension 89

4.13:  Pre-test and Post-test Scores of Locus of Control of Students Taught English

         Language Comprehension using Think-Pair-Share Strategy and those Taught

using Lecture Method                                                                                                90

4.14:  Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Locus of Control Scores of Students

         Taught English Language Comprehension using Think-Pair-Share and

those Taught using Lecture Method                                                                           91

4.15:  Mean Interaction Effect of Gender and Methods on Students’ Academic

         Achievement in English Language Comprehension                                          92

4.16:  Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Interaction Effect of Gender and

         Methods on Students’ Academic Achievement in English Language

         Comprehension                                                                                                  93

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1:       Illustration of the Design of the Study                                      70

 

 

 

 

 



CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Language is the hallmark of any group of people, community or society. It is one enormous advantage man has over other living and non-living things. Oxford dictionary of English (2020) defines language as the system of communication in speech and writing that is used by people of a particular country or area. Language enables people to influence the action of others as well as talk about past, present and future events. Linguists have defined language in various ways but what stands out in all is the fact that language is a code that links the encoder with the decoder. For instance, Azikiwe in Udosen (2016) sees language as the relationship between words and experience which could be produced and received in form of verbalization of experience or experience of verbalization. Language is an abstract and complex system of communication which has distinguished humans from non-humans (Udosen, 2016). Although all languages serve the communication function among its users, some languages tend to occupy the number one position and enjoy more patronage than others. English language in Nigeria is one of such in spite of its foreign nature.

The importance of English language in Nigerian education sector cannot be overemphasized. It is an official and a compulsory subject for all students in Nigeria (Patrick & Ogwu, 2019). All school subjects except indigenous languages are written in English language. It is a prerequisite for admission into the tertiary institutions according to Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN, 2013). English language consists of four skills: speaking, listening, writing and reading (Afan, Marhaeni & Dantes, 2013).

It is used as a means of instruction from primary to tertiary education level to provide students the opportunity to acquire knowledge, values and skills in essay writing, figures of speech, summary, grammar, oral English, reading comprehension among others (Patrick & Ogwu, 2019).

Reading comprehension is the ability to understand what is being read in a material. It is a process of constructing and extracting meaning through interaction with text (Abidin, Pour-Mohammadi, Mohamad & Zainol, 2012). This shows that comprehension in English language involves the capability to perceive and understand the meanings communicated by texts. Reading comprehension, according to Van den Broek and Espin (2012), is a complex interaction between instinctive and strategic cognitive processes that allows the reader to form a mental image of the text. Reading comprehension, according to Moore (2015), is one of the foundations of the act of reading. According to the author, when someone reads a text, they participate in a complicated set of cognitive processes. It requires the reader to be able to understand and interpret what is read. Invariably, it implies that reading comprehension takes place when the reader understands and interprets what has been encoded (Adedekun, 2019).

The wide spread use of English language is attributed to British colonisation process which left the colonised nations including Nigeria with no option than to properly learn and speak English. English language is a subject taught in all schools in Nigeria. The purpose of teaching English language at the senior secondary level is for the learners to acquire literary skills and ability to communicate effectively. National Universities Commission (NUC, 2007) while acknowledging the essential role English plays in Nigeria, in spite of being a foreign language stipulates that greater attention be devoted to the achievement of sufficient oral and written skills in it. To accomplish this, teaching methods that enhance students’ achievement in English language should be used for instructional delivery.

There are different methods of teaching English language, and these methods determine the extent of the achievement of set goals in the subject. Nwani, Akuma and Okechi (2019) observe that appropriate instructional strategies help students to walk on the path of independent learners and awaken their desire to learn. Also, Agwu and Ogbonnaya-Iduma (2016) state that teaching methods are key issues in the teaching profession. It is seriously advocated that teachers use the right teaching methods that would suit the need of the students per lesson. According to the authors, a good teacher employs the right method in each lesson that would accommodate the learning needs of the students. Supporting the views above, Nwanekezi and Emereonye (2016) state that:

Effective teaching methods enhance teaching and learning. Therefore, for effective teaching to take place, a good method must be adopted or adapted by a teacher; and before such adoption of methods, some factors like student learning style, instructional objective, group size or class size, learners’ characteristics, age and maturity of students need to be considered (p.190).

In this respect, English language teachers should employ teaching methods that enable students understand whatever concepts that are taught. Akinbola in Ekpoudo and Udofia (2019) reports that one of the causes of poor academic achievement in English language has to do with instructional method used by the teacher. The author further states that the lecture method of teaching is teacher-centred rather than student-centred and is predominantly used for instructional delivery in Nigerian schools. In order to avert the ugly trend in the continuous poor performance of secondary school students in English language, the use of innovative teaching methods should be intensified. Innovative teaching strategies foster cooperation, courage, self-discipline and tolerance among students, and also help them develop communication skills (Edegbo & Shuaibu, 2016). Chukwuma-Nosike and Mbakwem (2017) are of the view that selection of teaching methods totally depends on the classroom teacher, and are of the opinion that teachers should utilize methods that promote the interest and abilities of the learners. The appropriateness of instructional strategies in English language is of great importance. This is because students learn better when they are active participants in the learning process. Due to the importance of English language in Nigeria education system, students especially those at the senior secondary school level should show proficiency in reading and writing the subject. This is because English language is a core subject that every student must pass at credit level at the Senior Secondary Certificate Examination (SSCE) to enable him/her gain admission into the university. The use of innovative teaching methods in the teaching of English language lessons can increase students’ academic achievement.

Academic achievement is an important educational variable that expresses the success or failure of a teaching and learning process. Ekpoudo, Kufre and Udofia (2019) refer to academic achievement as the learning outcome of the students which can be measured by any form of assessment technique to ascertain academic gain of the students. Agboh (2015) describes academic achievement as the learning outcome or the determination of the extent to which a student has achieved educational goals. Abakpa (2011) postulates that academic achievement is the measure of accomplishment in a specific field of study. In the words of Bacon (2011), academic achievement refers to standardized test scores, grades and overall academic ability and performance outcomes. Similarly, Ogundokun and Adeyemo in Umaru and Umaa (2015) describe academic achievement as the outcome of instruction; the end product of a learning experience. A good teacher who adopts an interactive teaching method produces active students. Methods of teaching language are as important as curriculum content, and as such determine to a great extent how children learn. Unfortunately, some teachers of English language have continued to use the traditional lecture method of teaching instead of the innovative teaching methods in their day to day teaching activities (Nwachukwu, 2015).

Lecture method of teaching is a teaching method where students learn by memorizing rather than understanding through their own active involvement. In this case, teachers are seen as learned scholars who talk continuously to the students without getting any feedback or response. This results in insufficient interaction between a teacher and his/her students. Nwachukwu (2015) explains that lecture method usually is one-way communication and allows for little or none audience participation. The result is audience misunderstanding, loss of information, low achievement and poor retention. A student’s talent (creativity and rational thinking) cannot develop fully because some students are afraid of their teachers. It is against this backdrop that Dikeocha, Nwagu, Ugochukwu and Okoronkwo (2019) say that:

Teachers in the 21st century need to move away from using teaching methods that promote rote or memory learning to interactive, collaborative, task based and learner centred methods. They are not expected to be givers of information but generators of information. (p. 249).

Teaching approaches are usually named after the dominant activity employed in the process of the lesson. The way a teacher presents a lesson to learners may make them like or dislike the subject. It may create in them a love for or push them away from school. Since the method of presenting a lesson is important, teachers should be interested with the integration of innovative teaching methods that are activity-oriented in the teaching of English language. Innovative teaching strategies are grouped under constructivism.

Constructivism is the theory that says that learners construct knowledge rather than just passively take in information. Learning is done in groups in a constructivist classroom, and it is interactive and dynamic. Constructivism is a form of active learning in which the teacher offers students with opportunities to predict, manipulate things, pose questions, explore, investigate, and come up with solutions on their own (Ike, 2016). The teacher's responsibility is to facilitate this process so that students may make sense of the task and build knowledge. This is in contrast to the traditional classroom, when learning is accomplished by repetition and subjects are rigidly adhered to and led by a textbook. Traditional education relies on imparting information to students, but constructivism contends that this information cannot be directly imparted (Bruzga & Grady, 2020). Many innovative teaching methods exist for the teaching of English language. They include: Scaffolding, Think-Pair-Share, Jigsaw, Simulation, Guided-Discovery, Concept-Mapping, Peer-Tutoring to mention but a few. English language needs constructivist and innovative teaching methods that are practical and learner-centred to increase students’ academic achievement in English language. One of such teaching methods is Scaffolding.

Scaffolding is a phrase coined by Lev Vygotsky in 1978 to describe a process that permits children to advance from their current level of understanding to a higher level. Owenvbiugie and Iyoha (2017) view Scaffolding as the strategy that a teacher uses to help learners bridge a cognitive gap in their learning to a level they were previously unable to accomplish. In Scaffolding instructional strategy, supports needed in the development of learners’ cognitive, psychomotor and social skills may include resources, compelling task, templates and guidance. It is support provided during the learning process that is targeted to the learner's needs with the goal of assisting the learner in achieving his or her learning objectives. Scaffolding in the domain of learning refers to the provision of temporary assistance for the completion of a task that learners would otherwise be unable to finish. This assistance can be supplied in a variety of ways, such as modeling and the posing of questions for various subjects (Jannelle, Volman & Beishuizen, 2020). The scaffolding technique offers pupils with a supportive and conducive learning environment. Students are not only free to ask questions, provide feedback, assist their peers in learning new materials, and become more responsible and accountable for their responsibilities in a Scaffolding learning environment, but they are also encouraged to go beyond their current skill and knowledge levels.

Similarly, Mohammed (2016) avers that Scaffolding is a framework that helps students step beyond age-related limitations by breaking up the learning into chunks and then providing a tool, or structure through which a child can gradually build up knowledge. It functions as a tool that allows learners to accomplish a given task. Another innovative teaching strategy used in the delivery of English language lessons which is also grouped under constructivism is Think-Pair-Share teaching strategy.

Think-Pair-Share instructional strategy is a cooperative learning strategy proposed by Frank Lyman in 1981. Think-Pair-Share is a strategy which gives students the opportunity to interact, reason together and learn from one another. The strategy is a very useful teaching method that is applied in many teaching and learning processes including reading comprehension ((Davis, 2010). In Think-Pair-Share, learners are encouraged to think about a reading passage or question and then refine it through discussion with a partner (Davis, 2010). According to Eke (2019), the Think-Pair-Share technique is a cooperative learning strategy that emphasizes individual participation and may be used at all grade levels and in all class sizes. According to the author, the Think-Pair-Share technique improves the types of personal communications that students need to absorb, organize, and remember information internally. Instead of relying exclusively on the authority of the teacher, students take control of their learning and negotiate meanings by expressing their thoughts.

In a similar spirit, Simon (2020) claims that the Think-Pair-Discuss technique is intended to differentiate education by giving students time and structure to think about a topic, allowing them to generate individual ideas and share them with a peer. By fostering a high level of student reaction, this teaching technique fosters classroom participation. It allows all students to share their ideas with at least one other student, increasing their sense of classroom involvement. Gender may have an impact on students' success in English language comprehension tasks such as scaffolding and think-pair-share. As a result, it is necessary to investigate gender and its impact on students' English language academic accomplishment.

Gender is defined as all socio-economic, cultural and political roles and behavior a given society ascribes to its citizens based on their biological category as man, woman, boy and girl (Iwuji, 2016). Nlemchi and Okwulehie (2015) state that gender is used to describe a set of qualities, characteristics and behaviours expected from men and women by their society. This implies that gender comprises the general beliefs, attributes and relationships that streamline the roles of the men and women in the society. Gender has engaged the attention of scholars and the general public in recent times. In a study on assessment of Mathematics/numeracy learning achievement of pupils, Anukam in Uzomah (2017) posits that male pupils performed better in numeracy in most schools than female pupils, thus creating an impression that under normal condition, male pupils are more likely to acquire and perform numeracy tasks than their female counterparts.

In the same vein, Uzomah (2017) notes an academic disparity against women (girls) in Science, Technology and Mathematics. These subjects, he says are perceived as masculine subjects. Similarly, Attah and Ita (2017) report that females perform better than their male counterparts in English language. This they say could be because the subject area does not involve much analytical skills like the sciences where the males perform significantly better than the females. Agbolor in Urenyere (2014) in independent study observes the superiority of girls over boys in the science process skill. In the study, girls were found to be superior in the use of skill of observing, inferring, predicting, hypothesizing, making operational definitions and interpretation of data; while the boys were better than girls in experimenting and measuring. Amedu (2015) reports that the boys achieved significantly higher than the girls in Biology. He is of the view that boys perform better in science subjects while the girls perform better in languages and art subjects. These researches show that in education, there is need for more experimental studies which can further investigate the impact of gender as a variable. It's also a good idea to check into locus of control orientation, since it's been shown that male and female pupils belong to one of two types of locus of control orientation.

The apparent causality of behavioral consequences is referred to as locus of control orientation. Julian Rotter created the company in 1966. The locus of control is a psychological term that refers to how much people believe they have control over events that influence them (Anakwe, 2018). It is a person's perception of the causes of his or her experiences, as well as the variables to which he or she credits success or failure. It is one's perception of how much control they have over occurrences in their lives. Students' perceptions of the causes of their academic success or failure are referred to as locus of control. There are two types of loci of control: internal and exterior loci of control (Araromi,2010).

 Students with an internal locus of control believe that their educational success or failure is determined by their efforts and hard work. Students with an external locus of control, on the other hand, feel that their triumphs or failures are due to forces beyond their control, such as fate, bias, circumstance, luck, injustice, or inept, prejudiced, or unfair professors (Fakeye, 2011). Students with internal locus of control are more likely to work hard so as to learn, progress and succeed while those with external locus of control are more likely to believe that working hard is pointless because something or someone is holding them back or treating them unfairly.

Teachers are therefore expected to use Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share teaching methods in order to increase the academic achievement of male and female students regardless of their ability levels. The way boys and girls react in classroom often reveal their capabilities. Many teaching methods such as Scaffolding, Think-Pair-Share, Concept-Mapping, Guided-Discovery to mention a few are, therefore, available for achieving gender-free teaching in the classroom. It is up to the teacher to adopt the teaching methods that have great effect on students’ academic achievement in secondary schools.

Effect is a change that would occur in students’ academic achievement due to the use of modern teaching methods like Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share methods. According to Oxford Dictionary of English (2020), effect is a change which is a result or consequence of an action or other causes; the extent to which something succeeds or is operative. It is the way an event or action changes someone or something. Therefore, in this study, effect is the difference that arises in students’ academic achievement in English language comprehension as an outcome of the treatment using Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share methods of teaching. The question is, which of the methods of teaching (Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share) has greater effect on students’ academic achievement in English language irrespective of their gender in Abia state? It is on this premise that this study sought to ascertain the effect of Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share teaching strategies on academic achievement and locus of control in English language comprehension of senior secondary students in Abia state.

 

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

English language is the official language of communication in Nigeria. It is a compulsory subject at secondary school level, and admissions into higher institutions are dependent on candidates’ achievement in English language. As such, it is a subject that must be mastered by students at school levels of education. Unfortunately, students’ performance in this subject has consistently remained very poor especially in external examinations.

The statistics of result released by the National Examination Council (NECO) 2015-2019 and West African Examination Council (WAEC) 2016-2018 in English language showed that the performance of students have been fluctuating (see Appendix F, pg.221). According to the registrar/chief executive of NECO report for 2015-2019, the scores of students in English language fell within 68.56%, 84.54%, 70.85%, 84.77% and 71.59% respectively. National bureau of statistics has it that the West African Examination Council (WAEC) 2016-2018 results are as follows: 52.3%, 56.53% and 48.15% respectively. Many of the students, parents and other stakeholders have attributed this ugly situation to teachers’ competence and methods of teaching especially, the use of lecture method alone (Nwachukwu, 2015). Williams and McClure (2010) advised that in order to improve the declining poor achievement of students in both internal and external examinations, teachers must find the most suitable methods to teach the students so as  to find out the best practices for classroom delivery and minimize achievement loss, using the resources available to them. Consenting to this view, Uloko in Nwachukwu (2015) suggested that the poor achievement of students in internal and external examinations have necessitated the fact that teachers should evolve strategies that would ensure active participation of students and be practical and result-oriented. English language is a subject that requires practical and result-oriented approaches that will involve active participation of every student; Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share instructional methods are examples of the approaches that can offer this opportunity. Based on the importance of Scaffolding, some educators believe that Scaffolding method of teaching which involves a teacher’s assistance and support to learners during instruction and withdrawal when learners can study alone boosts academic achievement. However, the researcher perceived that some other teachers, especially teachers of English language argued that Think-Pair-Share method of teaching is better since it involves students’ active participation in the process of teaching and learning from the beginning of a lesson to its conclusion. It is then necessary to examine the effect of Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share methods of teaching on students’ academic achievement in English language. This could be probably because these two groups of teachers have not employed the two teaching methods to ascertain their efficacy. Is it true that Think-Pair-Share method would have better or equal effect on the students’ academic achievement in English language in secondary schools than Scaffolding method of teaching as some teachers of English language claimed? It is on this background that the researcher is motivated to carry out this study to compare Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share teaching methods in order to determine the one that is more effective on students’ academic achievement in English language comprehension in secondary schools in Abia state.


1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The main purpose of this study is to find out the effect of Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share teaching strategies on academic achievement and locus of control in English language comprehension of senior secondary students in Abia state. Specifically, the objectives of the study were to:

  1. determine the effect of Scaffolding teaching strategy and Lecture method on students’ academic mean achievement in English language comprehension at post-test.
  2. find out the mean achievement scores of male and female students taught English language comprehension using Scaffolding teaching strategy at post-test.
  3. determine the effect of Think-Pair-Share teaching strategy and Lecture method on students’ academic mean achievement in English language comprehension at post-test.
  4. find out the mean achievement scores of male and female students taught English language comprehension using Think-Pair-Share teaching strategy at post-test.
  5. find out the difference in the mean achievement scores of students taught English language comprehension using Scaffolding strategy and those taught using Think-Pair Share strategy at post-test.
  6. determine the difference in the locus of control of students taught English language comprehension using Scaffolding teaching strategy and those taught using Lecture method.
  7. ascertain the difference in the locus of control of students taught English language comprehension using Think-Pair-Share teaching strategy and those taught using Lecture method.
  8. determine the interaction effect of gender and methods on students’ mean academic achievement scores in English language comprehension at post-test.

 

1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The findings of this study would be of immense benefit to students, teachers of English language, curriculum planners in education for senior secondary two, researchers in education, parents and the society if published.

The result of this study would be of advantage to the students. The students would benefit from the study by being exposed to the teaching of English language through interactive methods of teaching that equip them with the appropriate knowledge and skills that will enable them to improve their academic performance in English language comprehension.

The study would provide information to the teachers of English language on the effectiveness of Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share teaching methods in the teaching of English language. In the same way, it would motivate teachers to change from conventional lecture method and introduce Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share methods (when necessary) where every student will actively participate in lessons. To the teachers, the identification of better methods of teaching would make teaching and learning process more interesting because students’ performance would be improved upon and their interest sustained, thus enabling the realisation of the stated instructional objectives which is the goal of every academic enterprise.

The study would provide information to curriculum planners in education on innovative methods of teaching English language. It would give curriculum planners information that will help them during curriculum revision in English language. Curriculum planners can utilize the result of this study in designing programmes for Senior Secondary English courses, bearing the performance of both sexes in mind. The recommendations from the study would give curriculum planners for Senior Secondary two an idea that there is need to organize seminars, workshops, and conferences for English language teachers. This would enable teachers undergo some in-service trainings on how to effectively use innovative and interactive teaching methods for the teaching of English language.

The study would provide information to future researchers in education by providing them with empirical data on some effective teaching methods for the implementation of English language curriculum. The result of this study when properly explored by other researchers would positively affect students’ performance in English language.

The study would be beneficial to parents as their children would be taught with innovative and interactive teaching methods which would help them become independent learners and problem solvers. It would help parents to know one of the factors that increases or hinders their children’s achievement in school, to enable them guide their children at home so as to achieve their set goals.

The study would also be of immense benefit to the society by producing well behaved students through interactive and activity-oriented teaching strategies. The study would enable learners and teachers see learning as a fun-filled activity, especially through the atmosphere of collaboration that pervades the classroom during instruction with Scaffolding and Think-Pair-Share strategies. This helps to raise the reading interest of students which may be presently considered to be low. This would also help to improve the low literacy level being experienced among students in our society. The stakeholders mentioned above would benefit from the study more if it is published.

 

1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The following research questions guided the study:

  1. What is the effect of Scaffolding teaching strategy and Lecture method on students’ academic mean achievement scores in English language comprehension at post-test?
  2. What is the effect of Scaffolding teaching strategy on male and female students’ academic mean achievement scores in English language comprehension at post-test?
  3. What is the effect of Think-Pair-Share teaching strategy and Lecture method on students’ academic mean achievement scores in English language comprehension at post-test?
  4. What is the effect of Think-Pair-Share teaching strategy on male and female students’ academic mean achievement scores in English language comprehension at post-test?
  5. What is the difference in the mean achievement scores of students taught English language comprehension using Scaffolding strategy and those taught using think-Pair-Share strategy at post-test?
  6. What is the difference in the locus of control of students taught English language comprehension using Scaffolding teaching strategy and those taught using Lecture method?
  7. What is the difference in the locus of control of students taught English language comprehension using Think-Pair-Share teaching strategy and those taught using Lecture method?
  8. What is the interaction effect of gender and teaching methods on students’ mean academic achievement in English language comprehension at post-test?

1.6 HYPOTHESES

The following hypotheses were formulated and tested at 0.05 level of significance to guide the study:

HO1 There is no significant difference in the academic mean achievement scores of students in English language comprehension when taught using Scaffolding and Lecture methods at post-test.

HO2Scaffolding teaching strategy has no significant differential effect on male and female students’ academic achievement in English language comprehension at post-test.

HO3 There is no significant difference between the academic mean achievement scores of students taught English language comprehension using Think-Pair-Share strategy and Lecture method at post-test.

HO4Think-Pair-Share teaching strategy has no significant differential effect on male and female students’ academic achievement in English language comprehension at post-test.

HO5 There is no significant difference between the academic mean achievement of students taught English language comprehension using Scaffolding strategy and those taught using Think-Pair-Share strategy at post-test.

HO6 There is no significant differential effect on the Locus of Control of students taught English language comprehension using Scaffolding strategy and Lecture method.

 

HO7 There is no significant differential effect on the Locus of Control of students taught English language comprehension using Think-Pair-Share strategy and Lecture method.

HO8 There is no significant interaction effect of gender and teaching methods on students’ mean achievement in English language comprehension at post-test.

 

1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study was delimited to Senior Secondary School two English language students in Abia state, Nigeria. The study concentrated on comprehension in the English language third term scheme of work for Senior Secondary School two. Comprehension passages that were covered are ‘classes of learners, the ascent of Everest, marriage, the river crossing, my school principal, the dark continent, reading and writing, the age of computer, my memorable experience, road traffic accident, the verdict, and language speaking and writing (see appendix A, pp.119-133).

 

Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects

FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!

+(234) 0814 780 1594

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.

Ratings & Reviews

0.0

No Review Found.


To Review


To Comment