Chapter-i.docx

1 Chapter I THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction Science begins for children when they realize that they can learn about the world and construct their own interpretations of events through their actions and experience. “A child best learns to swim by getting into water; likewise, a child best learns science by doing science” (Rillero, 2004, p.1). As different to just simply hearing or reading the lessons, it engages students and allows them to test their own ideas and build their own understanding (Ewers, 2001). Therefore, it is difficult to imagine a science-teaching program without doing any hands-on experiences. Hands-on experience is defined mainly as any instructional approach involving activity and direct experience of the students with any educational experience that actively involve students in manipulating objects for better understanding. According to Jodl and Eckert (2003), some of the hands-on activities are based on the use of everyday gadgets, simple set-ups or low-cost items that can be found and assembled very easily. It also states that “some hands-on activities can be done for cheaper cost. Thus, there will be no disaster if a piece breaks or disappears” (p. 238). Several studies in the literature show that hands-on activities help students to outperform students who follow traditional, text-based programs (Turpin, 2000), to enhance their understanding and replace their misconceptions with the scientific ones (Coştu, Ünal & Ayas 2007; Ünal, 2008), to develop

2 attitudes toward science positively (Bilgin, 2006), and to encourage their creativity in problem solving, promote student independence, improves skills such as specifically reading, arithmetic computation, and communication (Haury & Rillero, 2004). It also emphasizes that students learn better when they can touch, feel, measure, manipulate, draw, make charts, record data and when they find answers for themselves rather than being given the answer in a textbook or lecture. For students to truly learn science concepts, they both need practical opportunities to apply knowledge and also need help in integrating or exchanging the knowledge they gain. Students should also have minds-on and/or heads-on experiences to better understand the lessons during hands-on activities. While doing hands-on activity, the learner is learning by doing but while minds-on learning, the learner is thinking about what she or he is learning and doing. Hofstein and Lunetta (2003), state that a minds-on science activity includes the use of higher order thinking, such as problem solving compared to the hands-on activity. Therefore, students should be both physically and mentally engaged in activities that encourage learners to question and devise temporarily satisfactory answers to their questions. This study claims that hands-on activities have the effect on students understanding about the chemistry lessons. Therefore, the main purpose of this study is to determine how effective the hands-on activities on the understanding of the students that were given to them. The results of this study are very important because the researchers will be able to identify the effect of the hands-

3 on activities on the understanding of students in terms of the given activities based on its level and frequency.

Background of the Study The ability to design and interpret controlled experiments is an important scientific process skill and a common curricular objective of science. Many utilize hands-on tasks to train students’ experimentation skills because it has been assumed that students should benefit from hands-on experiences, particularly in the world of virtual laboratories and online learning. This may be especially true for the initial stages of learning and in areas of science education that lend themselves to physical experiences. “In many situations, when we allow our bodies to become part of the learning process, we understand better. We need to rethink how we are teaching math and science because our actions matter for how and what we learn.” (Prof. Beilock,2015). Reading about a concept in a textbook or even seeing a demonstration in class is not the same as physically experiencing what students are learning about. This study seeks to examine whether the students can easily understand the lessons and if students can catch up in hard topics when they were given hands-on activities in Chemistry lessons. It will be conducted at Marinduque National High School. As educational institutions aim to have higher-level learning outcomes such as critical thinking and problem-solving, engaging students in hands-on activities becomes progressively more important. Most

4 students like learning this way and learn more. It has repeatedly demonstrated that establishing the relevance of class and outside work increases interest and persistence of effort to achieve goals. Other investigation supports this by showing that if students value assigned work and understand its relevance to classroom instruction and its application to real-life situations, students do not only invest time and effort in their activities. Different strategies are used by the teachers for their students to learn and be active in a discussion. However, this study aims to identify the relationship between perceptions of the students on hands-on activities and STEM student's understanding in chemistry lessons.

Theoretical Framework of the Study Constructivism theory is based on observation and scientific study about how people learn. It states that people construct their own understanding and knowledge through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences. In every case, people are active creators of their own knowledge. To do this, one must ask questions, explore and assess what they know. The constructivist view of learning can point towards a number of different teaching practices. In the most general sense, it usually means encouraging students to use active techniques such as experiments and real-world problem solving to create more knowledge and then to reflect on and talk about what they are doing and how their understanding is changing.

5 According to Dada (2006), improvised instructional materials involve the act of producing and using alternative resources aimed at facilitating instruction. Again, Ikwuas and Onwiodiket (2006) state that improvise materials involve selection and deployment of relevant instructional elements of the teaching and learning process in absence or shortage of standard teaching and learning materials for meaningful realization of specified educational goals and objectives. Abimbade (2004) had earlier noted that the approach of using materials in teaching assist in proper introduction of new skills, develop understanding as well as show the appropriate way of doing things. It was on this ground that Kurumeh (2006) observed that the utilization of instructional materials take adequate care of the three domains, the cognitive, affective and Psychomotor, this helps in reducing the abstractness of the lesson concepts. Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development suggests that children move through four different stages of mental development. This theory focuses not only on understanding how children acquire knowledge but also on understanding the nature of intelligence. Piaget believed that students took an active role in the learning process, as they perform experiments, make observations and learn about the concepts of the things that they do in hands-on activities. As students interact with the world around them, it continually add new knowledge, build upon existing knowledge and adapt on previously held ideas to accommodate new information. It allows students to work in groups or pairs and research topics which they present to the class.

6 Cognitive Learning Theory explains why the brain is the most incredible network of information processing and interpretation in the body as we learn things. Developmental psychologists who adopt the information-processing perspective account for mental development in terms of maturational changes in basic components of a child's mind. This theory is based on the idea that humans process the information they receive, rather than merely responding to stimuli According to John Dewey's Theory Pragmatism, it explains that through a 'Hands-on' approach human beings learn and it believe that the reality must be experienced to be able to learn. Conceptual Framework of the Study Kumar (2011) said that conceptual framework serves us the basis of the research problem. It is connected to theoretical framework and relates to the specific research problem. Inquiry-based Approach

EVALUATION

Perceptions on Chemistry Hands-on Activities

Descriptive Survey Approach

Significant relation between perceptions on hand-on activities and understanding of students in Chemistry lessons

IMPLICATIONS

Understan ding of students in Chemistry lessons

ASSESSMENT

7 Figure 1. Research Paradigm The conceptual framework of the study is an Input-Process-OutputFeedback model. Independent Variable is presented on the left side of the venn diagram which is the perceptions of the students on hands-on activities while the dependent variable is on the right side which is the level of understanding of students in Chemistry lesson. The process for the study is to evaluate and assess. Venn diagram was used to present the relationship of the two variables. The circular shape represents the continuous process. The two arrows beside the venn diagram represent the direction where the process will be applied. Statement of the Problem Chemistry is a branch of science that deals with the composition, properties and structure of matter.

Students find this difficult to understand

because it requires a lot of effort, it is very complicated, and supplementary activities are needed to comprehend the lesson well. In relation to this, this project aims to identify the relationship between perception on hands-on activities and STEM student’s understanding in Chemistry lessons. Moreover, this research sought to answer the following questions: 1. What are the perceptions on hands-on activities in chemistry lessons of students? 2. What is the level of understanding of students in chemistry lessons? 3. Is there a significant relationship between perceptions on hands-on activities and level of understanding of students in Chemistry lessons?

8 Research Objectives The general objective of the research is to identify the relationship of perceptions on hands-on activities with the understanding of STEM Senior High School students in Chemistry Lessons. The specific objectives are as follows: 1. To determine the perceptions of students on hands-on activities in Chemistry 2. Identify the effect of the student’s perceptions on hands-on activities on the understanding of students 3. To determine if there is a significant relation on the understanding of students in Chemistry and their perceptions on hands-on activities. Significance of the Study The findings of this study will benefit the Marinduque National High School community in considering the perceptions of the students about hands-on activities to understand the lessons on Chemistry. Engagement to hands on activities increase learning experience and enables to retain more information. This study will aid science teachers to a new learning approach wherein it will be effective to students learning. This study will be applied on STEM students and will be guided by teachers to improve students understanding. Scope and Delimitations The study seeks to assess the relationship between perceptions on hands-on activities and the understanding of STEM students in Chemistry lessons in the academic year 2017-2018. It will be conducted at Marinduque

9 National High School. The said school is selected based on the proximity of its location to the researchers and on the kind of teaching strategies used by the chemistry teachers. The researchers considered the Grade 12 STEM students as the respondents since they are the only track which has chemistry lessons.