Effectiveness of Smart Technologies in Chemistry Teaching and Learning of Grade Eleventh Students in the Gambia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17501/26307413.2022.5101Keywords:
smart technologies, Chemistry teaching and learning, secondary schoolAbstract
Chemistry education in The Gambia is challenged by a lack of laboratory and human resources. The consequences have been unsatisfactory learning outcomes in the Gambian secondary school system. Smartboards, Smart notebook software, and touch-screen laptops were considered to influence learning outcomes. Therefore, a comparison was made between this method and the traditional method. The study used the randomized pre-test-post-test group design to select 284 students by convenient sampling and place them in each experimental and control group. While the experimental group was taught using multifunctional approaches, the social constructivism paradigm, and smart learning objects, the control group was taught using traditional methods, laboratory equipment, and worksheet problem-solving. The effectiveness of the teaching methods was determined by the mean scores on pre-tests and post-tests. Pre-test mean ranks on academic achievement computed using the Mann-Whitney U test indicated no significant difference between the experimental and the control group. However, in the post-test, there was a significant difference (p = 0.003) between the groups, favouring the experimental group. In addition, a higher mean rank was found in the experimental group than in the control group on concept knowledge and application. The results support the current use of modern technology in science teaching and imply that smart technologies can lead to better learning outcomes in the Gambian context if they were to be used extensively in the secondary school system. However, a further study that will determine the level of effectiveness of each of the methods of teaching by comparing the difference between pre-test and post-test scores for each group may be needed in the future, as this will indicate a better measure of the effectiveness of the methods in enhancing students’ academic performances.
Downloads
References
Akar, H. (2020). The effect of SMART Board Uses on Academic Achievement: A meta- Analytical and Thematic Study. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology (IJEMST), 8(3), 261–273. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.v8i3.908.
Aktas, S., & Aydin, A. (2016). The effect of the SmartBoard usage in Science and Technology Lessons. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 64(3), 125-138. http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.64.7.
Akyol, S., & Fer, S. (2010). Effects of Social Constructivist Learning Environment Design on 5th Grade Learners’ Learning. Social and Behavioural Sciences. 3(9), 948-953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.265.
Aldalalah, O. M. A. (2021). The Effectiveness of Infographic via Interactive Smart Board on Enhancing Creative Thinking: A Cognitive Load Perspective. International Journal of Instruction, 14(1), 345-364. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14120a
Aldosari, S. S., Ghita, B., & Marocco, D. (2022). A gestured-based educational system that integrates simulation and molecular visualization to teach chemistry. International Journal of Emerging Technology, 17(4), 192-211. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v17i)4.26503
Bayram-Jacobs, D., Wieske, G., & Henze.I. (2019). A chemistry lesson for citizenship: Students use different perspectives in decision-making about using and selling laughing gas. Education Science 9(2), 2-16. https://doi:10.3390/educsci9020100
Blonder, R., & Mamlok-Naama, R. (2019). Factors affecting the study of chemistry in different countries around the world: Findings from an international survey. Israel Journal of Chemistry 59(6-7), 625-634. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijch.201800100
Bojinova, E., & Oigara, J. (2013). Teaching and learning with clickers in Higher Education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education,25(2),154-165. http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/
Chief Examiner’s Report, (2017-2019, December 2019) “West African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) for School Candidates- ((2017 & 2019 WASSCE-SC). The Gambia. West African Examinations Council- Banjul, The on the General Resume. http://www.waec.gm or WAEC Gambia > Home Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Science [2nd Edition]. Hillsdale Lawrence Erlbaum Ample. 8 – 407. http://ravanhami.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Cohen-1988-Statistical-Power.pdf
Edith, M., I., Osnat, D., Tal, B., T.,& Rachel, Z. (2011). Using Interactive White Board in Teaching and Learning- An Evaluation of the SMART CLASSROOM. Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Skills and Lifelong Learning 7(3), 249-273. https://doi.org/10.28945/1523.
Education Policy, (2016-2030). Ministry of Basic and Secondary Education, The Gambia, West Africa. www.edugambia.edu.gm
Egelandsdal, K., & Krumsvik, R. J. (2017). Clickers and formative feedback at university lectures. Education Information Technology,22(6),55–74. https://doi.10.1007/s10639-015-9437-x
Elizabeth, B. & Paul, K. (2012). Integrating Technology and Pedagogy for Inquiry-Based Learning: The Stanford Mobile Inquiry-Based Learning Environment (SMILE). Stanford University, Graduate School of Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-013-9269-7
Fagerland, M., W. (2012). T-test, non-parametric tests, and Large Studies-a Paradox of Statistical practice? BMC Med. Research Methods.12(78),12-78. http://doi.org/10.1186/147/1-2288-12-78
Goodman, R., Satterfield, R., & Waldech, R. (2013, December 2019). Report on the April 13th New Jersey Centre for Teaching and Learning training mission to the Gambia. USA: New Jersey Centre for Teaching and Learning. https://njc.tl/13w
Government Report. (2015, 2019). The Gambia education country status report. Banjul: World Bank. http://www.edugambia.gm/
Graham, R. D. (2013). Smart clickers in the classroom: Technolust or the potential to engage students? Canadian Journal of Action Research, 14(1), 3-20.
Higgins, S. E. (2010). The Impact of Interactive White Board on Classrooms Interaction and Learning in Primary Schools in the United Kingdom. Interactive Whiteboards for Education: Theory, Research and Practice (PP. 86-101). IGI Global. Durham University Online Resources. ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279640424.
Hinton, P. R., Brownlow, C., Mcmurray, I. & Cozens, B. (2004). SPSS explained (1st ed., pp, 400). Behavioural Science, Research Methodology Routledge Inc. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203642597.
Igharo, K., & Adjivon, A. (2011). Adapting chemistry study in senior secondary schools in the Gambia to cost-reducing strategies. African Journal for Chemical Education, 1(2), 13-18. https://www.faschem.org
Inaltekin T., (2020). Examine Secondary Students’ Perceptions of the Technology-Based Learning and Teaching in Science Courses. 12(2), 071-083.https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.v12i2.4628
Joof, B. (2014). The adoption and implementation of the ASEI-PDSI approach to enhance science teaching and learning in UBS in The Gambia [Unpublished Master Thesis]. University of Huddersfield, UK.
Kafyulilo, A., Fisser, P., & Voogt, J. (2016). Factors Affecting Teachers’ Continuation of Technology Use in Teaching. Education Information Technology 21(3), 1535-1554. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9398-0
Kirbas, A. (2018). The Effects of IWB Application Supported by Visual Materials on Middle School Students’ Listening Comprehension and Persistence of Learning. University Journal of Educational Research 6(11), 2552–256. https://doi:10.13189/ujer.2018.
Koyunluunlu, Z. & Dokme, I. (2020). The effect of technology-supported inquiry-based learning in science education: Action research. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health (JESEH), 6(2), 120-133. http://DOI:10.21891/jeseh.632375
Krajcik, J. S., & Mun, K. (2014). Promises and challenges of using learning technologies to promote student learning of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. 337 – 361. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203097267.ch18
Laxman, K. (2011). A study on the adoption of clickers in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(8), 1291–1303.
Mihindo, W. J. Wachang, S. W & Anditiz O, (2017). Effects of Computer-Based Simulation Teaching Approaches on Students’ Achievement in the Learning of Chemistry among Secondary School Students in Nakuru, Sub-County, Kenya. Journal of Education and Practice 8(5), 65-75. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1133108.pdf
Moussa, P. B., Ousman, G., Solomon, O., Ryoko T. Y. X. (2020, December 2020). Technology in the Classroom and Learning in Secondary Schools. [PRWP No. 9288]. Policy Research Working Paper, Africa Region, Office of the Chief Economist & Education Global Practice. https://njctl.org/gambia-2020-report/.
Muralidharan, K. (2015, 2021 6). Sample size determination in six sigma for organizational excellence (81-97). Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2325- 2_6
Musengimana, J., Kampire, E., & Ntawiha, P. (2020). Factors affecting secondary school students' attitude towards chemistry: A literature review. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education, 2021, 17(1), 2- 12. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/9379.
Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates’ bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 207–730. https://doi.10.1080/09500690010025012
Nitza D., & Roman Y, (2017). The Effect of Smart Boards on the Cognition and Motivation of Students. Higher Education Studies; 7(1), 1925-4741 [E- ISSN1925-475X]. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v7n1p60.
Obumneke, E. (2012, February 2021). How to analyze and interpret the LIKERT scale questionnaire using SPSSS. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k1jxs2xaUXI&t=1267s
Phoong, S. Y., Phoong, S. W., Moghavvemi, S., & Sulaiman, A. (2019). Effect of Smart Classroom on Student Achievement in Higher Education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 48(2), 291–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239519870721
Research., H. I. (2014, December 2019). Progressive Science and Mathematics Initiative in The Gambia. Programme Evaluation. USA: World Bank. http://njc.tl/142
Rosmansyah, Y., Putro, B. L., Putri, A., Utomo, N. B., & Suhardi (2022). A simple model of a smart learning environment, Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.2020295
Ryoko T., & Tanya S., (n.d.). Improving Education Performance in Math and Science in The Gambia. (PSI-PMI_V13_KhvJEnH). International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. The World Bank, 1818H Street NW. http://njc.tl/1bm or https://www.worldbank.org.
Shapiro, A. M., Sims-knight, J., O,Rielly, G. V., Capaldo, P., Pedlow, T., Gordon, L., & Monteiro, K. (2017). Clickers can promote fact retention but impede conceptual understanding: The effect of the interaction between clicker use and pedagogy on learning. Computers & Education, 44-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.017
SMART Tech. (2014). Quick facts and stats. Retrieved from https://smarttech.com/About+SMART/About+SMART/Newsroom/Quick+facts+and+stats
Spiteri, M., Chang, R.(2020). Literature review on the factors affecting primary teachers' use of digital technology. Technology Knowledge and Learning 23(3),115-128 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9376-x
Teemu, V., Ulla, L., Mareena, H., Erkko, S., Anneke, S., & Jo, T. (2020). Fresh perspectives on TPACK: pre-service teachers appraise their challenging and confident TPACK areas. Education and Information Technologies 25, 2823–2842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10092-4
Tsayang, G., Batane, T., & Majuta, A. (2020). The Impact of Interactive Smart Board on Student Learning in Secondary Schools in Botswana. A Students Perspective. International Journal of Education and Development using information and Communication Technology. 16(2), 22-39. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1268872.pdf
Zhu, Z., Sun, Y., & Riezebos, P. (2016). Introducing the smart education framework: core elements for successful learning in a digital world. International Journal of Smart Technology and Learning, 1(1), 53-78. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijsmarttl.2016.078159
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Jammeh,LJA, Claude, K., Savita, L.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
