Journal of Advances in Education Research

Download PDF (339.5 KB) PP. 139 - 147 Pub. Date: November 1, 2019

DOI: 10.22606/jaer.2019.44001

• Kamal Prasad Koirala^*
  Lecturer, Tribhuvan University, Gorkha Campus, Gorkha, Nepal; Ph.D Scholar, Tribhuvan University, Graduate School of Education, Nepal

This paper explores the effect of practical work on students' achievement in science at secondary level in Gorkha district, Nepal. The research was carried out using Quasi-Experimental pretest/ posttest research design. For carrying out the research, two schools of Gorkha district were selected purposively. For the collection of data, the researcher developed test items as the main instrument. Items were selected by analyzing difficulty level and discrimination index through pilot study. Then prepared test items were pretested to both schools and responses were checked and scored the result of pretest. The experiment group was taught using practical approach for one term while the control group was taught using the traditional methods. At the end of instructional period, both groups were post-tested with the same set of the test items in each school. The result of pre-test and post-test of both groups were analyzed at 0.05 level of significance using SPSS version 20 for the score of achievement test to find out the significance difference between two mean score of control group and experimental group. This study showed that mean achievement score of students taught by using practical approach resulted higher students achievement score of students in science. This study also revealed that the practical approach is more effective in science teaching at secondary level. So science teachers should be encouraged to incorporate this method in teaching.

Quasi-experimental, student achievement, science teaching, practical work, quantitative research

[1] Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Practical work: Making it more effective. Getting Practical, 91(334).

[2] Abrahams, I. & Saglam, M.(2010). A study of teachers’ views towards practical work in secondary schools in England and Wales. International Journal of Science Education, 32 (06), 753-768. doi. 10.1080/ 09500690902777410

[3] Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Does practical work really work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30 (14), 1945-1969. doi org/10.1080/09500690701749305

[4] Ahmad, J. (2009).Teaching of biological sciences, New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited.

[5] Bhattarai, H. (2066 B.S). Philosophical and sociological foundation of education. Kalimati, Kathmandu Inclusive Publication and Private Limited.

[6] Chalmers, A. F. (1982). What is this thing called science? The Open University Press.

[7] Creswell, J. W.(2009). Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods approaches (third edition). New Delhi: Sage.

[8] Creswell, J. W.(2012). Educational research: Planning conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited.

[9] Davar, M. (2012): Teaching of science. New Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.

[10] Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 70 (256), 33-40.

[11] Hodson, D. (2005).Towards research-based practice in the teaching laboratory studies in Science Education. (41)1, 167-177, doi: 10.1080/03057260508560217

[12] Isozaki, I. (2017). Laboratory work as a teaching method: A historical case study of the institutionalization of laboratory science in Japan. Espacio, Tiempo y Educación, 4(2), 101-120. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14516/ ete.177

[13] Kalra, R. M.; & Gupta, B. (2012): Teaching of science. New Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd..

[14] Millar, R. (2004). The role of practical work in the teaching and learning of science. Paper presented at the High School Science Laboratories: Role and Vision. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences.

[15] Mitra, H. (2001). A study on teaching materials and subject wise classroom observation. Research Study, Kathmandu, HMG.

[16] Mohan, R. (2010).Innovative science teaching, New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited.

[17] Muijs, J.(2004). Doing quantitative research in education. London: Sage Publication.

[18] Okwoduba, E. N.,& Okigbo, E. C.(2018). Effect of teaching methods on students’ academic performance in chemistry in Nigeria: Meta-analytic review. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy, 12(2), 418-434.

[19] Sharma, R. C. (2010). Modern science teaching. New Delhi: Dhanpat Rai Publishing Company Private Limited.

[20] Shrestha, C. B., Tamang, R. L. & Basnet, S. (2066). Educational psychology. Kathmandu: Bhudipuran Publication.

[21] Sood, J. K. (1989). Teaching of science. Chandigrah: Kohli Publishers