Rectifying analogy-based ınstruction to enhance ımmediate and postponed science achievement

Maymoona  Al-hınaı; Sulaiman  Al-balushı

doi:10.36681/

Authors

Maymoona Al-hınaı Ministry of Education, OMAN
Sulaiman Al-balushı Sultan Qaboos University, College of Education, Muscat-OMAN

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36681/

Keywords:

Analogy-Based Instruction, Application, Comprehension, Immediate Achievement, Postponed Achievement, Knowledge, Oman

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the impact of analogy-based instruction on immediate and postponed science achievement. More specifically, the focus of the current study was on the retention of students at three cognitive levels: knowledge, comprehension and application. Two classes of 63 ninth grade female students in Oman participated in the study. These classes were randomly assigned to an experimental group (N=32) which used analogy-based instruction and a control group (N=31) which used the traditional method. An achievement test was designed at the three cognitive levels and was administered to both groups immediately after the conclusion of the study which lasted for five weeks and once again two weeks later. In the immediate administration of the test, the findings indicated that the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group in terms of two cognitive levels, comprehension and application, and also in the overall score of the test. In the postponed test, the experimental group outperformed the control group in all three levels and in the overall score. Also, there was a substantial decline in control group students’ scores in the three cognitive levels and in the overall test score. This was not the case for the students in the experimental group. We have listed several justifications for these findings, recommendations for science teachers and textbook writers, limitations of the study and ideas for further research in the section headed “Conclusions and recommendations” below.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Al-Balushi, S. M. (2011). Students' evaluation of the credibility of scientific models that represent natural entities and phenomena. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 571-601. DOI:510.1007/s10763-10010-19209-10764.

Al-Balushi, S. M. (2012). The relationship between learners’ distrust of scientific models, their spatial ability, and the vividness of their mental images. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, DOI: 10.1007/s10763-10012-19360-10761.

Chiu, M.-H., & Chen, I.-J. (2005, August). Dynamic analogies promoting students’ learning of behavior of gas particles. Paper presented at the ESERA, Barcelona, Spain.

Chiu, M.-H., & Lin, J.-W. (2005). Promoting fourth graders’ conceptual change of their understanding of electric current via multiple analogies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(4), 429-464.

Clement, J. (1998). Expert novice similarities and instruction using analogies. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1271-1286.

Clement, J. (2003, March). Abduction and analogy in scientific model construction. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.

Dilber, R., & Duzgun, B. (2008). Effectiveness of analogy on students' success and elimination of misconceptions. Latin American Journal of Physics Education, 2(3), 147-183.

Gentner, D., Brem, S., Ferguson, R., Markman, A., Levidow, B., Wolff, P., & Forbus, K. (1997). Analogical reasoning and conceptual change: A case study of Johannes Kepler. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(1), 3-40.

Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2007). Definition of historical models of gene function and their relation to students’ understanding of genetics. Science and Education, 16, 849-881.

Glynn, S. M., & Takahashi, T. (1998). Learning from analogy-enhanced science text. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1129-1149.

Guerra-Ramos, M. (2011). Analogies as tools for meaning making in elementary science education: How do they work in classroom settings? Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 7(11), 29-39.

Hagans, C. (2003). An analysis of the effectiveness of teacher versus student-generated science analogies on comprehension in biology and chemistry. Unpublished Master Thesis, Defiance College, Defiance, OH.

Haglund, J., & Jeppsson, F. (2012). Using self-generated analogies in teaching of thermodynamics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 898-921.

Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1993). Teaching with analogies: A case study in grade-10 optics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1291-1307.

Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). A typology of school science models. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1011-1026.

Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Teaching and learning with analogies. In P. Aubusson, A. G. Harrison & S. Ritchie (Eds.), Metaphor and analogy in science education (pp.11-24). Netherlands: Springer.

Khourey-Bowers, C. (2011, April/May). Active learning strategies: The top 10. The Science Teacher, 78, 38-42.

Marcelos, M., & Nagem, R. (2010). Comparative structural models of similarities and differences between vehicle and target in order to teach Darwinian evolution. Science and Education, 19, 599-623.

Nashon, S. (2004). The nature of analogical explanations: High school physics teachers use in Kenya. Research in Science Education, 34, 475-502.

Nichols, K., Ranasinghe, M., & Hanan, J. (2012). Translating between representations in a social context: A study of undergraduate science students’ representational fluency. Instructional Science, DOI 10.1007/s11251-11012-19253-11252.

Paris, N., & Glynn, S. M. (2004). Elaborate analogies in science text: Tools for enhancing preservice teachers' knowledge and attitudes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 230-247.

Podolefsky, N., & Finkelstein, N. (2007). Analogical scaffolding and the learning of abstract ideas in physics: An example from electromagnetic waves. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 3(1), 010109.

Sarantopoulos, P., & Tsaparlis, G. (2004). Analogies in chemistry teaching as a means of attainment of cognitive and affective objectives: A longitudinal study in a naturalistic setting, using analogies with a strong social content. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(1), 33-50.

Şekercioğlu, A & Kocakülah, M (2008). Grade 10 students’ misconceptions about impulse and momentum. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 5(2), 47-59.

Thiele, R., & Treagust, D. F. (1994). An interpretive examination of high school chemistry teachers' analogical explanation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(3), 227- 242.

Trowbridge, J., & Wandersee, J. H. (1998). Theory-driven graphic organizers. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view (pp.95-131). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Yilmaz, S., & Eryilmaz, A. (2010). Integrating gender and group differences into bridging strategy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19, 341-355.