Production and Utilization of Resources in Biology Education. A Case Study Of South West Nigerian Secondary Schools

Transcription

1 Production and Utilization of Resources in Biology Education. A Case Study Of South West Nigerian Secondary Schools A. M. Olagunju Department of Teacher Education University of Ibadan, Ibadan. & O. F. Abiona Department of Teacher Education University of Ibadan, Ibadan. Abstract This study investigated the production and utilization of materials resources in biology education in South West Nigerian Secondary Schools. In this survey, 450 teachers from 150 randomly selected secondary schools in Oyo, Ogun, Osun, Lagos and Ondo States were used. Two instruments were prepared, validated and used for collecting data.chi-square, percentages and t-test statistics were used in data analysis. Three research questions and two hypotheses were addressed and tested The findings revealed: (i) Less than average number of teachers produce material resources, (ii) Few teachers use microscope, magnifying glasses, preserved specimen, models, quadrat and aquarium, (iii) Male teachers perception of utilization of resources is significantly higher than their female counterparts. Appropriate recommendations were made for effective teachinglearning process. Introduction School environment has been described as an organization where resources are produced, managed and organized in such a way that enables the students to acquire desirable learning competencies. The process of managing and organizing resources is called resource utilization. The utilization of resources in teaching brings about fruitful learning since it stimulates students sense as well as motivating them. Denyer (1998), in his study on science games in National Curriculum in the United Kingdom reported that games when used as a resource enable less able children to stay on task and remain motivated for longer period. There are varieties of resources, which the science teacher can readily use to enrich learning. These resources are windvane, raingauge, metre rule, models, charts, preserved specimens of plants and animals, culturing equipment, herbarium, terrarium, vivarium and microscope (Olagunju, 2000). The resources should be provided in quality and quantity in STM classroom for effective teaching-learning process (Umeoduagu, 2000). Nwoji, (1999) in an empirical study, revealed that essential facilities such as equipment like radio, television, computers, chemicals, specimens, video tape, stove, burners, models and charts are not

2 50 available in schools. This inadequacy of teaching material resources, laboratory equipment / reagents / chemical, and laboratory space, has been of serious concern to educators. The decline in performance in STM may not be unconnected with poor learning environment created by this state of infrastructure facilities (Fabayo, 1998 and Farombi, 1998). Mapaderun (2002) and Oni (1995) also emphasized that the availability and adequacy of these facilities promote effective teaching and learning activities in schools while their inadequacy affects the academic performance negatively. Several efforts have been extended by Science Teachers Association of Nigeria (STAN) to train secondary school teachers on improvisation techniques in various science subjects including Biology, hence there is need to evaluate how far teachers have been able to improvise instructional materials for effective teaching. Moreover, a careful consideration of the statistics of contribution of gender in STM in Nigeria reveals that participation of women is significantly low. Evidences abound in every science and technology-based organization to this effect. Sobulo (1998) lamented that this problem has been and is still in existence. Some studies have found gender disparity in STME achievement in favour of male, (Awoniyi, 1999). Others have found none (Madu, 2004; Ibe, 2004 and Anaekwe, 1997). Hence gender differences in science are inconclusive. In this study therefore, an attempt shall be made to investigate biology resources a production and utilization, teacher s attitude and gender in secondary schools. This study will address three research questions and two hypotheses, as follows: Research question 1. How do teachers perceive production of material resources in schools? 2. What are the teachers perceived levels of utilization of these resources? 3. What is the teacher s attitude towards improvisation of material resources? Hypotheses 1. There is significant difference between the male and female teachers in their perceptions of production of biology resources. 2. There is no significant difference between the male and female teachers perceptions of utilization of biology resources. Methodology For this survey, four hundred and fifty (450) biology teachers were randomly selected from one hundred (150) senior secondary schools which were randomly selected from Oyo, Osun, Ogun, Lagos and Ondo States (30 schools per state). Two instruments were used, basically (i) (ii) Teachers Questionnaire on Biology Material Resources Utilization (TQBMRU) Teachers Questionnaire on Biology Material Resources Production (TQBMRP) The two questionnaires were given to eight biology experts and four measurement and evaluation experts from faculty of Education, University of Ibadan for face and content validity. The questionnaires consisted of sections A and B. Section A contained items on personal data of the teachers while section B consisted of items on utilization in TQBMRU and its production in TQBMRP. The data was collected through research assistants for 3 months. Chi-square, percentages and t-test statistics were used in data analysis. Results and Discussions. Research Question 1: How do Teachers perceive Production of Materials resources in Schools?

3 51 Table 1a: Teachers Perceptions of Production of Teaching Resources Item Statement Mode Yes No 1 Do you produce biology material resources by yourself? F% Do you produce material resources commercially? F% a Do you produce material resources in collaboration with Local or state government? F% b Do you produce material resources in collaboration with Other nearby institutions? F% c Do you produce material resources in collaboration with Federal or national agency? F% Do you produce resources from source centres? F% Table 1b: How Teachers Produce Material Resources Method Frequency Percentage 1 Using collecting equipment to collect materials e.g insect nets, quadrat, hook, transect, cage etc 2 Making charts Making models Using plants and animals By culturing e.g aquarium, vivarium, terrarium, herbarium, snailery, pigry, goatry, rabbitry, poultry 6 By preserving/dissecting/staining on slides in bottles with formalin, alcohol etc. 7 Using waste materials e.g empty tins, bottles, cans 8 Using students collections Tables 1a and 2b show the perceptions of the teachers on the production of teaching resources. 44.7% indicated that they produce resources by themselves. 51.3% produce commercially, 54.7% produce through collaboration with local government, 29.3% produce with nearby institution, 18.7% produce with federal or national agencies and 9.3% produce for resources centres. This shows that generally, less than average number of teachers does produce material resources. Table 1b reveals how the few teachers produce materials. 51% of the teachers use collecting equipment to collect materials, 71% use charts, 10.2% make models, 89.8% use plants and animals, and 50.7% use cultured materials 93.8% of the teachers use preservation/dissection/staining on slides, 45.3% used waste materials e.g cans, empty tins, bottles etc and 69.3% collect their own materials through their students. Research Question 2: What are the Teachers perceived level of Utilization of these resources?

4 52 Table 2: Teachers Perceptions of Utilization of Material Resources S/ N STATEMENTS Always Sometimes Not Used 1 How frequent do you use the microscope? (0.0) (97.7) (4.3) 2 How frequent do you use the magnifying glasses? (3.7) (60.7) (30.7) 3 How often do you use the hand lens? (43.3) (56.7) (0.0) 4 How frequent do you use the preserved specimens? (14.7) (69.3) (16.0) 5 How often do use the food test reagents and chemicals in (34.0) (51.3) (14.7) the laboratory? 6 How frequent do you use the measuring cylinders? (29.3) (54.7) (16.0) 7 How frequent do you make use of the wall charts? (50.7) (46.0) (0.0) 8 How often do you use the models? (9.3) (58.7) (28.0) 9 How frequent do you use quadrats? (0.0) (46.7) (46.7) 10 How frequent do you visit aquarium with your students? 11 How frequently does the use of material resources help you to communicate with your students? (0.0) 267 (59.3) (35.3) 141 (31.3) (64.7) 24 (5.3) Mean Weighted Average 1.99 (66.2%) Table 2 reveals that microscope, magnifying glasses, handlens, preserved specimen, chemicals, measuring cylinders, wall charts and models are sometimes used. (x = 2.08) but quadrats and aquarium are not used. (x = 1.38). The weighted average mean score is 1.99 which gives the proportion to be 66.2%. This implies that the teachers perceived that these materials are sometimes used and their perception can be rated up to 66.2%. This implies that biology materials resources are available and used in schools. Research Question 3: What is the Teachers Attitude towards Improvisation of Material Resources? Table 3: Teachers Attitude towards Improvisation Statement Yes No Do you improvise material resources with available materials from your local environment? Do you believe that things around can be used for improvisation? (74.7) 384 (85.3) (20.0) 66 (14.7) Std. D

5 53 Table 3 reveals that majority of the teachers do improvise materials from available materials from local environment (74.7%) and they did believe that things around can be used (85.3%). This shows that the teachers have positive attitude towards improvisation of materials. This implies that they are highly interested in production and improvisation of biology material resources. This is related to Olagunju and (2000), Ezeudu (1997) on similar research. Testing the Hypotheses Research Hypothesis 1 (RHO 1 ): There is significant difference between the male and female teachers in their perceptions of production of biology resources. Table 4: Summary of T-test Table on Teachers Perceptions of Material Production by Gender. Variables/Gender N Mean Std. D t df P Remark Male Teachers Not Sig. Female Teachers t-critical = Since t-calculated (1.460) is less than t-critical (1.976), then the difference between male and female teachers in their perceptions of material production is not significant. Therefore, RHO 2 is not rejected. Research Hypothesis 2 (RHO 2 ): There is no significant difference between the male and female teachers perceptions of utilization of biology resources. Table 5: Summary of T-test table on Teachers Perceptions of Material Utilization by Gender. Variables/Gender N Mean Std. D t df P Remark Male Teachers Sig. Female Teachers t-critical = Since t-calculated (2.329) is greater than t-critical (1.976), then, the difference between male and female teachers in their perceptions of utilization of biology resources is significant. Therefore, RHO 3 is rejected. Teachers Perception of Production of Material Resources by Gender From the perceptions of the teachers on the production of teaching resources, 44.7% indicated that they produce resources by themselves This shows that generally, less than average number of teachers do produce material resources by themselves. Moreover, table 1b reveals that few teachers produce materials- 10.2% of the teachers make models and 45.3% use waste materials e.g cans, empty tins, bottles etc. In essence, about 50% of the teachers had positive perceptions of production of material resources and few of them (less than 50%) do produce material resources like models and waste materials. From the findings on tables 6-9 the male and female teachers do not differ significantly in their perceptions of materials production. That is, both sexes produce the resources equitably.

6 54 This is relatively the same with previous studies of Olagunju (2000); Olagunju (2003); Egbegbedia (1997) and Sobulo (1998). Teachers Perception of Utilization and Management of Material Resources by Gender The findings reveal that microscope, magnifying glasses, handlens, preserved specimen, chemicals, measuring cylinders, wall charts and models are sometimes used. (x = 2.08) but quadrats and aquarium are not used. (x = 1.38). This implies that the teachers perceived that these materials are sometimes used and their perception can be rated up to 66.2%. That is, biology materials resources are available and used in schools. This finding is similar to that of Akano (2005) and Eze (2002) that rightly pointed out that resources can only be utilized when they are available and that there should be investment in this wise in educational institutions for proper utilization of materials resources and skills for effective teaching of STM. However, male teachers perception of utilization of resources is significantly higher than their female counterparts ( x = and x = respectively). This finding implies that the females perceived low utilization of material resources. This finding is similar to previous studies of Olagunju,(2003) and Awoniyi (1999). Therefore, the need to train and retrain all biology teachers (especially the females) on improvisation and utilization of material resources cannot be overemphasized. Recommendations On the bases of the above findings the following recommendations are made: 1. A biology teacher should always use his immediate environment to teach as it contains a lot of material-resources for effective teaching of the concepts in the subject. 2. The Federal and State Ministries of Education should make appropriate plans to expose biology teachers to training workshops on improvisation in order to update their techniques for improvising specific equipments. 3. Government should make funds available and sponsor the teachers attendance at conferences, seminars and workshops on biology material resource production utilization and management. 4. Creative and resourceful teachers who improvise equipments and materials should be rewarded and motivated adequately. 5. There is need for organizations, government, parent Teacher Association Voluntary Organisations and philanthropists to join hands in procuring necessary biology materials resources in schools. 6. Biology teachers should select the cheapest available equipment for demonstration or illustration of principles and concepts in science teaching. The functionality and duration of equipment should be taken into consideration. Conclusion In this paper utilization and production of biology material resources are presented as indispensable tasks in the scientific enterprise to enrich the teaching and learning of biology as a subject. The biology teacher must improvise, produce and use both materials and ideas to aid instruction at all times. Some issues which could aid adequate training of teachers in production and utilization of available biology material resources should be highlighted in the teacher education curriculum and instructions.

7 55 Reference Adole, I. A. (1998). Basic Instructional Technology. Unpublished Handbook, Teacher Education series pp Akano, B.U (2005). The use of the Local Materials in the Teaching and Learning of Science in the Primary School. A paper presented in 1 st Science Workshop, Science Teachers Association of INigeria on May 2005 at FCE Kontagora. Akinsola, M. K. (2000). Enriching Science, Technology and Mathematics Education: Effect of Resources Utilization on Students Achievement in Geometry. 41 st Annual Conference Proceedings of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, Anaekwe M.C (1997). Effects of Students Interaction Patterns in Cognitive. Achievement, Retention and Interest in Chemistry. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis University of Nigeria Nsuka. Ango, M (19990) Basic Science Laboratory, Jos: Ehindero Nigeria Limited. Awoniyi,M.A.(1999).Selection and Designing of Instructional Aids. Ibadan: University Press, Denyer, G (1998). Science Games in the National Curriculum. Science Education Newsletter, 140, 5 6. Egbegbedia E.A (1997) An Investigation into the Attitude of Primary School Teachers towards Improvisation in Primary Science Teaching in Niger State. Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 38 th Annual Conference Proceedings of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, Eze S.U (2002) Effect of Target Task Approach on Students Achievement and Interest in Senior Secondary School Physical Chemistry. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Ezeudu F.O (1997). Availability and Extent of Improvisation of Instructional Materials in Integrated Science at Junior Secondary School level in Enugu State of Nigeria., 38 th Annual Conference Proceedings of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, Fabayo O.R (1998). Evaluation of Some Aspects of Schools Quality in Secondary Schools in Kwara State. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of Ibadan. Farombi (1998) Resources Concentration Utilization and Management as Correlates of Students Learning Outcomes Study of Quality in Oyo State. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Ibadan.

8 56 Ibe, E. (2004). Effect of Gender and teaching Methods on Science Process Skills Acquisition among Senior Secondary School Students. Journal of Educational Foundation (IEF) 1, University of Nigeria Nsukka. Madu, B.C (2004). Effects of A Constructivist-Based Instructional Model on Students Conceptual change and Retention in Physics. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka Mapaderun O. (2002). Teaching Method for Business, Science Social Science and Technical Education, Ibadan: Holyem Communications Nwoji, Queen, J. R (1999). Evaluating the Use of Learning Resources for Primary Science Education. Implications for Learners: 40 th Annual Conference Proceedings of STAN., Olagunju, A. M. (2000). An Investigation into Teachers Attitude Towards and Extent of Improvisation of Resources for Effective Teaching of Biology. STAN 41 st Annual Conference Proceedings, Olagunju, A. M. (2003). Science Education Students Level of Awareness and Utilization of Information and Communication Technology: Implications for Tertiary Institutions. Proceedings of the 44 th Annual Conference of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, Oni J.O (1995) Education Resources: An Introduction. Abeokuta Gbemisodipo Press Limited, Onwuakpa and Apkan (1999). A Descriptive Survey of Resources Concentration in Imo State Secondary Schools. Journal of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 23(1). Sobulo E.A (1998). Need for Improvisation of Resources for Effective Teaching of Environmental Education Topics in Biology. An Unpublished B.Ed Project, University of Ibadan. Umeoduagu, J. N. (2000). Resources Utilization for Effective Teaching of Science Technology and Mathematics in the New Millennium 41 st Annual Conference Proceedings of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria,