Synopsis
Synopsis
Synopsis
1.0. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Study
It is now being recognized that there are better ways to learn than through the
traditional methods (Wood and Gentile, 2003). Educators are beginning to show an increased
awareness of the importance of the way students learn. Many of the conventional methods of
conveying knowledge have been shown to be relatively ineffective on the students’ ability to
master and then retain important concepts. Learning through some methods of teaching is
passive rather than active. Some methods of teaching such as lecture, play-away and
recitation do not tend to foster critical thinking, creative thinking and collaborative
participation. It is now a truism that schools are becoming diverse in terms of students’
backgrounds and abilities and teachers have become more challenged to find effective ways
to meet diverse needs of their students in all the subjects including agricultural science. In
Nigeria, agricultural science is a compulsory subject in the first nine years of basic education
so that every school child will acquire appropriate knowledge and manipulative skills to be a
job creator rather than a job seeker (Osinem, 2008).
Agricultural science is the art and science of cultivating the soil and rearing of
animals for the production of food for man, feeds for animals and raw materials for
industries. It is also the study and application of scientific principles into the production of
crops and animals for man’s use (Iwena, 2008). The author stated that agricultural science is
the deliberate effort made by man to till the soil and cultivate crops, rear animals, process and
sales of produce from agriculture for food and other purposes. Agricultural science is the
application of arts and science in the manipulation of environment for the production of
plants and animals for man’s use.
In Nigeria, the philosophy of agricultural science education is to provide students with
sufficient knowledge and skills to explore their talents and rich agricultural resources of
Nigerian environment. Specifically, the objectives of agricultural science at the senior
secondary school level as recommended by the Nigerian Educational Research and
Development Council (NERDC, 2008) include to:
1. stimulate and sustain students interest in Agriculture
2. enable students acquire basic knowledge and practical skills in agriculture
3. enable students integrate knowledge with skills in agriculture
4. prepare students for further studies in agriculture
5. prepare and expose students to occupations and opportunities in the field of
agricultures
The above objectives of agricultural science are achieved in secondary schools with
the help of teachers through effective teaching. Molagun and Taiwo (2004) defined teaching
as a systematic process of transmitting knowledge, attitudes and skills in accordance with
professional principles. It is a process of change in the behaviour of the learner by the teacher
using appropriate methods of teaching and evaluation of students’ abilities. The teachers of
agriculture, on recruitment are given the responsibilities of teaching agricultural science to
2
students and evaluating the extent of their academic achievement against the stated objectives
in the curriculum of agricultural science in senior secondary.
Achievement describes the students’ actual record or level of accomplishment (Hornby,
2006). Abakpa (2011) postulated that achievement is the measure of accomplishment in a specific
field of study. In the statement of Bacon (2011), academic achievement refers to standardized test
scores, grades and overall academic ability and performance outcomes. In support, Santrock in
Nurulafizan (2012) viewed academic achievement as what students have learned which is usually
measured through assessments like standardized tests, performance assessments and portfolio
assessments. In context of this study, academic achievement means the measure of the extent to
which students reached the stated objectives of Agricultural science in secondary schools in
Benue State. Meanwhile, the researcher observed that the academic achievement of students in
agricultural science in both internal and external examinations is dwindling rapidly. This might be
why Emaikwu (2012) earlier noted that the achievement of senior secondary school students in
science subjects at both the internal and external examinations have been awfully reported and
acknowledged by all and sundry in Nigeria. According to the author, the low achievement of
students in the senior secondary schools is controvertibly attributed to the use of ineffective
methods of teaching adopted by teachers in the senior secondary schools. Also, a clear analysis of
the WAEC, 2011-2012 and NECO, 2009-2010 results on students’ academic achievement in
agricultural science showed a serious decline. Besides, an interaction by the researcher with
teachers of agricultural science in two marking centers of WAEC about the poor academic
achievement of students in agriculture revealed that teachers and stake holders are worried of this
present situation of the students’ low academic achievement in agricultural science. It is very clear
that the poor academic achievement of students in agricultural science is not caused by one factor
but ranges from students’ factors, parental factor, environmental factor, school administration to
teachers’ factor like competence and method of teaching. Considering the importance of method
of teaching in education, it is suffice to say that method of teaching is the first to be rated in
discussing poor academic achievement of students.
Methods of teaching, according to Ada (2006), are modes of organization of the
instructional content, materials, the manner of presentation of the learning experiences to the
learner and the activities that learners and teachers carry out. The author stated that methods of
teaching are very important in the impartation of knowledge and skills in teaching and learning
situation and the type used determines to a great extent what the students learn, and when the
appropriate method is used, knowledge acquired could be accelerated. What constitutes a good
teaching and learning of a subject is the use of effective methods of teaching because they help to
inculcate knowledge and skills in students by reinforcing how successful completion of the course
will lead to, for example, a chosen career area. In the curriculum of secondary schools, there are
many methods of teaching recommended by NERDC for teachers in teaching of agricultural
science to the students. Such methods include lecture, land laboratory, field trip, discussion,
discovery, demonstration and individual and play away. Lane (2007) observed that learning
through some methods of teaching are passive rather than active. Most teachers of agricultural
science adopt a method that is easy for them to use irrespective of the objectives of the topic being
taught to students. The commonest among the conventional methods of teaching is lecture
method, which does not favour the acquisition of practical skills that parents and stake holders
advocate for. Halpern (2000) posited that lecture method has long since failed educators as an
3
effective way to present their information. Auwal (2013) explained that lectures can be
informative, boring and overwhelming depending on the compelling nature of the message and
the presenter’s style and clarity of message. The lecture method usually is one-way
communication and allows for little or none audience participation. The result is audience mis-
understanding, loss of information and poor retention. Evidences from a number of disciplines,
according to Veselinovska (2011), suggested that oral presentation to a large group of passive
students contributes very little to real learning. The observations of the authors apply to all
subjects in secondary schools including agricultural science. This implies that the use of other
methods of teaching such as land laboratory and field trip ought to be preferred in teaching
agricultural science.
A land laboratory as described by Agbulu (2004) is a selected plot of land on the
school premises where students are taught the act and science of farming such as production
of crops and husbandry of animals. The author emphasized that land laboratory is an
instructional material used to impact in students the need to value what they could do or
produce by themselves and for themselves. For instance, how to prevent farm predators,
control pest and diseases, human invaders, store produce, prepare farm produce for sale and
to manage the food and fiber they produce or those produced by others. Osinem (2008) said
that it is a sizable farm owned by the school and established by students of agricultural
science for the acquisition of knowledge and practical skills in agriculture. It is a place where
students of agricultural science put theoretical knowledge into practice under the guidance of
the agricultural science teacher. The author further stated that the importance of a land
laboratory in agricultural science include developing skills in students, stimulating students’
interest in farming and directing agricultural extension services. It also serves as a laboratory
for research work, source of money to the school, store of value to the students, source of
transfer of knowledge and aesthetic values, recreational purposes and improving background
knowledge of students. In the same vein, Ogwo (2005) buttressed that land laboratory method
of teaching inculcates in student the knowledge and skills needed to learn how to do things
with their hands. It equips students with knowledge and manipulative skills to work
cooperatively in groups so that they can learn from each other in ways that are mutually
beneficial to solve real life problems. For instance, how to husband animals, culture fish,
grow crops, use and maintain machines, test soil, market produce, store and process
agricultural products. The author further stated that the method equips students with salable
skills that would enable them to fit in properly in the world of work to be job creators rather
than job seekers. It stimulates students’ interest in agricultural science in order to help them
solve their individual problems. For example, a student may be interested in eating cow meat
or eggs but fears going near the cow because of its size and horns, or going near poultry
house because of the offensive odour. Some may like eating okro, but fear the sting of the
bees that visit the flowers. Land laboratory method of teaching helps the students overcome
these fears (Ochu, 2006). The above importance of land laboratory indicates its effectiveness
for imparting practical skills to students in areas of agriculture such as soil. However, some
teachers of agriculture, especially those in private schools, have been using field trip in place
of land laboratory method of teaching with the belief that both could be used interchangeably.
This could probably be due to scarcity of school farm to establish land laboratory, but can the
effect of land laboratory and field trip on students’ academic achievement in soil be equal?
4
Field trip, which is also known as excursion, is explained by Maduewesi, Ezeani and
Maduewesi (1999) as the learning activities that are carried outside the classroom into the
environment for the purpose of enhancing and fostering knowledge. It is the first hand
experience which are viewed as providing beneficial learning for students of all ages with the
fundamental objectives of enhancing and fostering better comprehension of uncertain
nebulous terms and lending realism to the topics under study. Agbulu and Wever (2011)
stated that field trip is a short time venture of the school into the community by the students
with their teacher for a specific educational purpose. The authors noted that it gives first hand
information as the students see and observe things and processes in their natural life settings.
In addition, Akuto, Aduloju and Odeh (2012) stated that field trip involves taking students
out to study the environment in its natural setting. It involves taking students to places of
interest study where they can have an on-the-spat opportunity of seeing what they wish to
know about. Asogwa (2014) asserted that field trip as a method of teaching is an academic
venture where by a teacher takes students out of the school to a workplace such as farm,
company or laboratory to expose them to first hand information and experience about the
topic or subject of study. The author stressed that field trip is valuable because it provides
students with the first hand experience and knowledge as they see, observe and feel objects,
organisms or phenomena functioning in their natural setting. As a result, field trip has no
substitute in the teaching profession and should not be substituted with any method of
teaching by teachers at all levels of education. The suggestion of Asogwa contradicts the
belief of the most teachers of agricultural science in secondary schools that the effect of land
laboratory and field trip on students’ academic achievement and gender is equal and could be
used interchangeably, although both assertions had no empirical evidence.
Gender is biological classification of an individual into male and female. It is determined
biologically as a result of sexual characteristics of an individual. Bent (2005) observed that gender
is the socially constructed relationships between men and women in the society. It is the role
ascribed to males and females by the society. FAO (1997) noted that gender issues focus on sex
and the relationship between men and women, their roles, access to and control over resources,
division of labour, interests and needs. Bravo Baumann (2000) mentioned that gender relations
affect household security, family well-being, planning, production and many other aspects of life.
Its relations depend on the ways the culture or society defined rights, responsibilities, and the
identities of men and women in relation to one another. Food and Agricultural Organization
(FAO, 1997) remarked that certain subjects and certain cultures restrict particular gender to
certain professions like farming, engineering and the influence of gender varies according to
school subjects. Richardson (2001) asserted that one’s psychology, which may include one’s
model of leadership, locus of control and emotional intelligence, could be predicted by one’s
gender. On the contrary, Olatoye (2008) reported that there is no significant difference between
male and female student’s achievement in agricultural science, biology, chemistry but reported a
significant difference in physics. Besides, Eze (2013) pointed out that men and women flourish
educationally when given the same supportive environment. The author was of the view that
biological differences of gender are equal in their intellectual abilities but that any difference may
be due to social pressure and discrimination. According to the author, it means that gender cannot
be used to predict the effect and extent to which a teaching method would affect gender on their
academic achievement. There is no doubt about the relevance of gender on education but the
researcher holds the belief that a teaching method would only have a significant effect on the
5
academic achievement of male and female students in agricultural science if the method is
sensitive to gender retention ability of the student.
Retention is the ability of an individual to keep certain ideas or information in the memory
for a period of time. Agbama (2009) wrote that retention is the amount of learned materials that is
retained with some time lapse after a course is completed. Utubaku (2014) believed that retention
measures achievement at some late date, after the course is completed, in order to get a retention
score. Retention of students varies according different abilities, and skill. The author expressed
that teachers’ instructional strategies can create a gap between the male and female academic
achievement and retention in schools. In the report of National Association of School
Psychologists (2003), factors that affect students’ retention include age, attention, behaviour,
emotional problems, reading ability, changing of schools often, families’ incomes and family
status such as single-parent. It also includes school environment, school administration, teachers’
competence and methods of teaching among others. The above authors’ observations of the
factors affecting students’ retention in education is general for all the subjects including
agricultural science in secondary schools, but the question is which of the methods of teaching
such as land laboratory and field trip favours students’ academic, gender and retention ability
more in agricultural science in Benue State? The entire attempts made by the researcher to
provide answers to this question failed as there was no empirical evidence existing in literature
available to her at present. Therefore, it was this premise that this study was geared towards
ascertaining the comparative effects of land laboratory and field trip methods of teaching on
students’ achievement and retention in Agricultural Science in Makurdi Local Government Area
of Benue State, believing that good results would be obtain to guide the teachers effectively for
enhancing students’ academic achievement and retention in agricultural science in Benue State.
1.2. Statement of the Problem
The researcher observed that the academic achievement of students in both internal and
external examinations has been declining especially in science subjects like agricultural science.
The Statistics of result released by the West African Examinations Council for the May/June
WASSE 2014 showed that the scores for Benue, Ogun, Kano, Kwara and the FCT fell within 26-
45% (Eze, 2014). This confirmed the researcher’s result analysis of WAEC 2011 – 2012 and
NECO 2009 – 2010 in agriculture in Benue State which revealed that the students’ academic
achievement was low to 37.9%. Many of the students’ parents and stakeholders have attributed
this ugly situation to teachers’ competence and method of teaching especially lecture. Halpern
(2000) maintained that the lecture method which is common among teachers has long since failed
the educators as an effective way to present their information. Williams and McClure (2010)
cautioned that in order to ameliorate the declining poor performance of students in examinations,
teachers must find the most suitable methods to teach the students in order to determine best
practices for classroom delivery and minimize achievement loss, using the resources available to
them. Meanwhile, Uloko (2006) had earlier suggested that the poor performance of students at
home and in examination has necessitated the fact that teachers should evolve strategies that will
ensure active participation of learners and be practical and project oriented. Based on the
importance of land laboratory, the researchers believed that land laboratory method of teaching
ensures active participation of learners in lesson through practical to enhance their academic
achievement and retention in agricultural science in secondary school. However, there has been a
6
school of taught by some teachers of agricultural science, especially those in private schools, that
field trip method of teaching is better and could be taken in place of land laboratory method of
teaching. It is highly doubtful if field trip method of teaching would have better or equal effect on
the students’ academic achievement and retention in agricultural science in secondary schools
than land laboratory method of teaching as some teachers claimed. It was on this background that
the researcher was motivated in this study to compare the two methods of teaching in order to
prove which one is more efficacious than the other on the students’ academic achievement and
retention in agricultural science in secondary school.
1.3. Purpose of the Study
The major purpose of the study is to compare the effects of land laboratory and field
trip methods on students’ achievement in senior secondary school Agricultural Science in
Makurdi Local Government Area of Benue State. The specific purposes of the study are to:
1. determine the mean academic achievement scores of students taught agricultural
science using land laboratory and field trip methods.
2. determine the mean academic achievement scores of male and female students taught
agricultural science using land laboratory method.
3. examine the mean academic achievement of male and female students taught
agricultural science using field trip method.
4. determine the mean retention scores of students taught agricultural science using land
laboratory and field trip methods.
5. determine the mean retention scores of male and female students taught agricultural
science using land laboratory method.
6. examine the mean retention scores of male and female students taught agricultural
science using field trip method.
1.4. Research Questions
The following research questions were asked to guide the study:
1. What are the mean academic achievement scores of students taught agricultural
science using land laboratory and field trip methods?
2. What are the mean academic achievements of male and female students taught
agricultural science using land laboratory method?
3. What are the mean academic achievements of male and female students taught
agricultural science using field trip method?
4. What are the mean retention scores of students taught agricultural science using land
laboratory and field trip methods?
5. What are the mean retention scores of male and female students taught agricultural
science using land laboratory method?
6. What are the mean retention scores of male and female students taught agricultural
science using field trip method?
1.5. Research Hypotheses
7
pH: Power of Hydrogen – the decimal logarithm of the reciprocal of hydrogen ion
activity aH+ in a solution. Equation: pH = −log10 (aH+) = log10 (1/aH+).
3.0. METHODOLOGY
3.1. Introduction
10
This chapter presented the procedures that were used in carrying out the study. The
procedures focused on design of the study, area of study, population of study, sample and
sampling techniques, instruments for data collection, validation of the Instruments, reliability
of the instruments, procedure of the study, method of data collection and method of data
analysis.
3.2. Design of the Study
The study adopted quasi-comparative-experimental research design. Precisely, a non-
randomized pretest-posttest non-equivalent control group design of non-equivalent group was
employed. Quasi experimental research design is not true experimental but looks like
experimental whereby the two groups were randomized into experimental and control
(comparative). Intact classes were used so as to avoid disruption of the normal class
organization of the school. In this study, the relative effects of two experimental groups are
compared on the basis of two methods of teaching.
3.3. Area of the Study
The research was carried out in Makurdi metropolis. Makurdi is the capital of Benue
State and at the same time the Headquarter of Makurdi Local Government Area of Benue
State. It is situated along the bank of River Benue. Makurdi is located in the North Central
geo-political zone of Nigeria. It is a centre of learning with many primary, secondary and
tertiary institutions. The area was chosen for the study so that the researcher was able to
monitor the both experimental groups and for effective training of the research assistants.
3.4. Population for the Study
The population for the study is 3, 300 senior secondary school one agricultural
science students in the 63 government grant aided and missionary secondary schools in
Makurdi Metropolis (Department of Inspectorate Services, Ministry of Education and
Enrollment, Makurdi 2011/2012 Local Government). The study was carried out in
Government Model Secondary School, ECWA Secondary School, Anglican Secondary
School and Lady Victoria Academy, Makurdi. Senior secondary one students were used for
the study because it is at this level that the basic knowledge and rudimentary experiences of
senior secondary school agricultural science are taught.
3.5. Sample and Sampling Techniques
The sample size for this study was 300 SSI agricultural science students drawn from
four senior secondary schools- Government Model with 100 students, Anglican with 70
students, ECWA with 74 students and Lady Victoria Academy with 56 students which
comprised of 129 males and 171 females. The multi-stage sampling techniques were used to
obtain the above sample since it is a technique that occurs when different sampling
techniques are applied at several stages of a research study (Emaikwu, 2013). The four
schools were purposively selected to get equivalent schools and have a sizable manageable
number of schools for the study. Two schools were randomly selected from the four schools
for experimental while the remaining two were used for control (comparative) group. From
each school that was selected, a class with two or more streams was further selected for the
11
study. Since intact classes were used, the entire students of any selected stream within the
school were used for the study.
In a school where there are exactly two streams of SS1 classes, the two streams were
all selected. But where there are more than two streams, simple random sampling was used
to select only two streams out of the whole classes by balloting method. This method
involves writing ‘Yes’ on two pieces of papers and ‘No’ on the other papers, folding these
papers and putting in a container for the students to pick. The students representing the
identified classes who picked ‘Yes’ were finally selected into experimental and control
groups respectively.
3.6. Instruments for Data Collection
The instrument used for data collection was a three parallel forms of 30 items
achievement tests adopted from WAEC and NECO SSCE examinations in agricultural
science. The Agricultural Science Achievement (ASAT) is a teacher-made test constructed by
the researcher. The items covered the Soil topics that were taught during the three weeks
period of the study. The development of the items was based on the instructional objectives
contained in SS1 Agricultural Science Curriculum (FME, 2008). The blueprint of the items
was based on the six levels of cognitive educational objectives by Bloom (1968). The six
levels were classified into two broad categories in accordance with the classification of
students’ cognitive abilities. They were therefore questions that tested students’ ability at
both high and low levels of cognitive domain. At the low-level, the questions tested students’
ability in knowledge, comprehension and application. Their ability to analyze, synthesize
and evaluate soil concepts was tested at the high level. The test items covered the following
topics: Types and properties of the soil, Soil Composition, Soil profile, Soil pH, and Soil
classification.
The first form of the instrument was used as pre-test while the second and third forms
tagged post-test one and post-test two on the other side would measure the student’s
achievement and retention in soil concepts that were taught during the study. However, the
post-ASAT was re-organized and restructured Pre-ASAT and so retained the same content.
The re-organization was to change its structural view from the Pre-ASAT. Post test one is
achievement test, while post test two is retention test (delayed achievement test) which was
administered three weeks after the first post-test. The development of the instrument was
based on Bloom’s Taxanomy of Cognitive Educational Objectives (Bloom, 1968) and this is
reflected in the table of specification (Table 2). On the basis of this, 4, 6, 6, 6 and 8 items
were generated from Types and properties of soil, Composition of soil, Profile, Soil pH and
Soil classification. Similarly, 2, 3, 3, 3 and 4 number of instructional periods was allocated to
them respectively based on the volume of the contents of each topic that was taught in the
class.
On table 2, 2 items on LOQ and 2 items on HOQ were generated from types of soil, 2
items on LOQ and 4 items on HOQ generated from composition of the soil, 2 items on LOQ
and 4 items on HOQ were generated from soil profile, 2 items on LOQ and 4 items on HOQ
were generated from soil pH and 3 items on LOQ and 5 items on HOQ were generated from
soil classification.
12
The topics listed to be taught during the study were broken into the following units:
Types and properties of the soil, Soil composition, Soil profile, Soil pH, and Soil
classification. A lesson note was planned and written for each unit and was used by the
research assistants (Agricultural Science Teachers). The difference between the two methods
of teaching was in the use of soil science language in the course of the teaching. For
consistency and objectivity in scoring the students’ work, marking schemes were developed
for both Pre and Post-Agricultural Science Achievement Tests (ASAT).
3.7. Validation of Instruments
The instrument for this study was subjected to face and content validation. This was
carried out by three experts who were seasoned agricultural science teachers, teaching
currently in three different senior secondary schools in Makurdi Local Government Area of
Benue State. Each validate was requested to critically examine and advise the researcher on
the scope of coverage, content relevance, ability level being tested by the items, suitability
and appropriateness of the instrument in accomplishing the research objectives. At the end,
the inputs from the validates were used to produce the final copy of the instrument.
3.7.1. Trial testing
This exercise was conducted to gather information on the appropriateness of the test
items for the intended level of students that participated in the study. The research instrument
was administered on twenty (20) students in SS1 in Secondary (Co-educational) Schools
outside the four sampled schools for the main study. The trial testing helped the researcher to
adjust the testing time. This was obtained by computing the average of the time taken by
first, tenth and twentieth students to finish the test (Iji, 2002). Thus, the average time for the
test computed was one and half hour. The data obtained from the trial testing instrument was
subjected to reliability analysis using Kuder-Richardson formula (K-R 21) which was suitable
since the items give rooms for options which resulted to the response being wrong or right
and also estimate the consistency of responses to all the items in a test (dichotomously
scored).
3.8. Reliability of the Instrument
The validated ASAT was trial tested using Kuder-Richardson K R-21 = K/k-1(1-pq/s2)
to determine the reliability coefficient of the internal consistency of the test items. The
reliability gave ‘R’ value of 0.88 which was positive (Appendix G). Thus, Eric (2009) stated
that any co-relation co-efficient of 0.80 and more is considered very high for reliability
measurement.
teaching (FTMT). They were equipped to give detailed explanation of the soil concept,
language, terms and formulae so as to avoid ambiguity in the process of teaching. The
researcher and the research assistants administered the pre-test (ASAT) to all SS1 agricultural
science students in the four schools before treatment to determine the homogeneity of the
students in terms of their achievement and retention in agricultural science. The research
assistants were then taught the soil concepts prepared for the study. The study started a day
after the pre-test and lasted for three weeks after which a post-test Achievement was
administered. Two weeks after, the post achievement test was re-administered to determine
the students retention of the achievement recorded after the use of LLMT and FTMT. The
marking scheme prepared by the researcher was used to mark the tests after which the scores
were collected.
3.9.1. Control of Extraneous Variables
There are certain extraneous factors that were controlled so as to eliminate biases in
the experiment which include:
1. Initial difference among Groups: Pre-testing the respondents was carried out to ensure
the same level of equivalence amongst the students before the commencement of
experiment. The initial differences that might be present were controlled with the use
of analysis of covariance to stabilize the internal validity of the experiment. This was
corrected through the use of analysis of covariance.
2. Teacher-Factor: Lesson plans were prepared by the researcher for the research
assistants in order to minimize their differences. The use of the regular teachers as
research assistants reduced possible bias factors. The differences that might have
arisen in scoring of the items by the research assistants were controlled by the
marking scheme prepared by the researcher for the two methods.
3. Students Interaction Effect: The researcher is very much aware that students in the
same school interacted during the study in terms of exchanging ideas. This effect was
reduced by giving the same test items used in LLM group for diagnostic purpose to
the FTM group as class work. The research assistants in charge of experimental
group retained the students’ workbooks during the study.
4. Hawthorne effect: This occurs when students become aware that they are being used
for experimental purpose. To minimize this effect, regular professional Agricultural
Science Teachers that are already familiar with the students were trained as research
assistants for the experimental and control groups.
5. Testing Effect: This effect may occur when the Pre-test sensitizes the students of the
line purpose of the experiment. The use of the regular professional teachers for the
study reduced the unnecessary consciousness of the experimental treatment.
6. Equivalent of subjects: A critical survey of the schools in Makurdi metropolis was
carried out to make sure that selected subjects have fairly equal educational
opportunities viz-a-viz standard school facilities and qualified teachers.
3.10. Method of Data Analysis
The data collected from the students were analyzed using descriptive statistics (mean
and standard deviation) to answer the research questions while inferential statistics
14
(ANCOVA) was used to test the hypotheses at P≤.05 level of significance. Analysis of
covariance was used because it is a powerful tool used to compare the means of two or more
groups investigated through experimental design procedures (Uzoagulu, 2011). According to
Emaikwu (2010), analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) can be used statistically to test data
obtained from an experimental study involving intact groups especially if the researcher is
not sure that the intact groups are homogenous.
The degree of freedom was calculated to determine the significance level comparing
the F-critical value with the F-calculated value at .05 level of significance. Where the F-
calculated was less than the F-critical value, the hypothesis was rejected but where the F-
calculated value was greater than the F-critical value, the hypothesis was not rejected. All the
hypotheses were tested at .05 level of significance.
score of 2.42. This result implied that land laboratory method of teaching brings about better
achievement than field trip method of teaching soil to students in senior secondary school.
Data in Table 2 showed that the male students had higher post-test mean achievement score
of 18.15 and standard deviation of 3.91 with a mean gain achievement score of 4.52 above
the female students who had mean achievement score of 14.12 and standard deviation of 2.22
with a mean gain achievement score of 2.86. This result indicates that male students have
better academic achievement than female students taught soil using land laboratory method of
teaching in senior secondary school.
4.4. Research Question 3
What are the mean academic achievements of male and female students taught
agricultural science using field trip method? The result of the data analyzed is presented in
Table 3.
TABLE 3: MEAN ACHIEVEMENT SCORES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF
STUDENTS TAUGHT SOIL USING FIELD TRIP METHOD OF TEACHING
Data in Table 3 showed that the male students had higher post-test mean achievement score
of 17.88 and standard deviation of 2.92 with a mean gain achievement score of 4.55 above
the female students who had mean achievement score of 16.69 and standard deviation of 2.02
with a mean gain achievement score of 4.53. This result showed that male students have
better academic achievement than female students taught soil using field trip method of
teaching in senior secondary school.
Data in Table 4 showed that the land laboratory method of teaching had higher post-test mean
retention score of 16.51 and standard deviation of 3.10 with a mean loss retention score of -
1.03 below the field trip method of teaching which had mean retention score of 12.67 and
standard deviation of 2.83 with a mean loss retention score of -1.39. The implication of this
result is that land laboratory method of teaching brings better retention among students than
field trip method of teaching soil in senior secondary school.
4.6. Research Question 5
What are the mean retention scores of male and female students taught agricultural
science using land laboratory method? The result of the data analyzed is presented in Table 5.
TABLE 5: MEAN RETENTION SCORES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF MALE AND
FEMALE STUDENTS TAUGHT SOIL USING LAND LABORATORY METHOD OF
TEACHING
Data in Table 5 showed that the male students had higher post-test mean achievement score
of 17.55 and standard deviation of 3.00 with a mean loss achievement score of -0.60 above
the female students who had mean loss achievement score of 13.33 and standard deviation of
2.96 with a mean loss achievement score of -0.79 This result indicated that male students
have better academic retention than female students taught soil using land laboratory method
of teaching in senior secondary school.
Data in Table 6 showed that the male students had higher post-test mean retention score of
15.87 and standard deviation of 2.21 with a mean loss achievement score of -2.01 below the
female students who had mean achievement score of 13.60 and standard deviation of 2.21
with a mean loss achievement score of -1.09. This result showed that female students have
better academic retention than male students taught soil using field trip method of teaching in
senior secondary school.
Research Hypotheses
The following six null hypotheses were tested for the study.
4.8. Hypothesis 1
There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of students
taught Agricultural Science using land laboratory and field trip methods of teaching.
TABLE 7: ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE (ANCOVA) OF ACHIEVEMENT SCORES OF
STUDENTS TAUGHT SOIL USING LAND LABORATORY AND FIELD TRIP METHODS
18
Mean
Source Type III Sum of Squares df Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 2735.403a 2 1367.702 42.902 .000
Intercept 3.953 1 3.953 .124 .727
Pretest land lab 2309.001 1 2309.001 72.429 .000
Gender 55.347 1 55.347 1.736 .197
Error 1020.140 171 31.879
Total 60076.000 174
Corrected Total 3755.543 173
Significant at p≤ .05 level of significance
Table 8 shows that F (1, 173) = 1.174, P = 0.197>0.05. This indicates that the
calculated F-ratio of 1.174 with a p-value of 0.197 was greater than 0.05 at 1 and 173 degree
of freedom. This means that there was no significant difference in the mean achievement
scores of male and female students taught Agricultural Science using land laboratory method
19
of teaching. Thus, the hypothesis of no significant difference was not rejected. However,
male students achieved higher than female students taught soil using land laboratory during
the period of this study.
4.10. Hypothesis 3
There is no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of male and
female students taught Agricultural Science using field trip method of teaching.
TABLE 9: ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE (ANCOVA) OF ACHIEVEMENT SCORES OF
MALE AND FEMALE STUDENTS TAUGHT SOIL USING FIELD TRIP METHOD
Mean
Source Type III Sum of Squares df Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 2130.060a 2 1065.030 40.004 .000
Intercept 464.873 1 464.873 17.461 .000
fieldtrip 1928.295 1 1928.295 72.429 .000
Gender1 2.024 1 2.024 .076 .785
Error 851.940 134 26.623
Total 77042.000 137
Corrected Total 2982.000 136
Table 10 shows that F (1, 310) = 2.141, P = 0.001<0.05. This indicates that the
calculated F-ratio of 2.141 with a p-value of 0.001 was less than 0.05 at 1 and 310 degree of
freedom. Thus, the hypothesis of no significant difference was rejected. This implies that
there was a statistical significant difference in the mean retention scores of students taught
Agricultural Science using land laboratory and field trip methods of teaching. The use of land
laboratory resulted in higher mean retention scores of students in soil during the period of this
study.
4.12. Hypotheses 5
There is no significant difference between the mean retention scores of male and
female students taught Agricultural Science using land laboratory method of teaching.
TABLE 11: ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE (ANCOVA) OF RETENTION SCORES OF
MALE AND FEMALE STUDENTS TAUGHT SOIL USING LAND LABORATORY
METHOD
Mean academic achievements of male and female students taught agricultural science
using field trip method
The result of the study on Table 3 shows that male students have better academic
achievement than female students taught soil using field trip method of teaching in senior
secondary school. However, there was no significant difference in the mean achievement
scores of male and female students taught Agricultural Science using field trip method of
teaching. The result is in contrary to the findings of Agbo-egwu (2014) who found in a study
that the female students improved more than the male students over their pre-SAT scores as
indicated in their post-SAT scores during the study.
Mean retention scores of students taught agricultural science using land laboratory and
field trip methods
The result of the study on Table 4 revealed that land laboratory method of teaching
brings better academic retention among students than field trip method of teaching soil in
senior secondary schools. In addition, the study indicated that there was a statistical
significant difference in the mean achievement scores of students taught Agricultural Science
using land laboratory and field trip methods of teaching. The result of the study on Table 4 in
agreement with the findings of Utubaku (2014) in a study on effects of problem-based
learning on senior secondary school students’ achievement, interest, and retention in
trigonometry in Northern Education Zone of Cross River State, where it was found that the
use of problem-based learning (PBL) method enhanced significantly students’ achievement in
SS2 trigonometry than conventional teaching method (CTM).
Mean retention scores of male and female students taught agricultural science using
land laboratory method.
It was found out in Table 5 that male students have better academic retention than
female students taught soil using land laboratory method of teaching in senior secondary
school. Meanwhile, there was no significant difference in the mean retention scores of male
and female students taught Agricultural Science using land laboratory method of teaching.
This result is contradiction with the findings of Utubaku (2014), who found that the
difference between the mean retention score in trigonometry achievement test TRT of male
and female students was statistically significant.
Mean retention scores of male and female students taught agricultural science using
field trip method
The result of the study on Table 6 indicated that female students have better academic
retention than male students taught soil using field trip method of teaching in senior
secondary school. Although, there was no significant difference in the mean retention scores
of male and female students taught Agricultural Science using field trip method of teaching.
On the contrary, Utubaku (2014) found that there was a significant difference between the
mean gain retention scores of the higher and low ability students taught trigonometry using
problem-based learning in trigonometry achievement test.
This chapter presented the summary of the statement of the problem, purpose of the
study, procedure used as well as the major findings of the study. The conclusion,
recommendations and suggestions for further study were also presented.
5.2. Summary of the Study
The present day teaching methods employed by teachers for teaching students
agricultural science in Nigeria at all levels of the educational system and at the senior
secondary school level in particular are ineffective to the content knowledge taught. Thus,
the situation results in poor achievement of students in the subject in both internal and
external examinations. In the study, there are two schools of thought about the better method
to use in the teaching of agricultural science in senior secondary schools to enhance students’
academic achievement and retention in agricultural science in secondary school. One school
of thought stated that land laboratory method is better in enhancing students’ achievement in
agricultural science while the other believe that field trip method is better for enhancing
student’s achievement in agricultural science. The poor achievement of students in
agricultural science has brought much growing concern among parents, teachers, government
and the society at large. The fear is, if nothing positive is done, our scientific and
technological development towards food production and security will dwindled thereby
affecting the hope and vision of the nation’s desire to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
before the year 2020. This indicated that there is need to identify the method of teaching that
will enhance student’s achievement and retention in agricultural science. To proffer solution
to this situation, it became necessary to compare the effects of land laboratory and field trip
methods on students’ achievement in senior secondary school Agricultural Science in
Makurdi Local Government Area of Benue State. Specific the study sought to:
1. determine the mean academic achievement scores of students taught agricultural
science using land laboratory and field trip methods.
2. determine the mean academic achievement scores of male and female students taught
agricultural science using land laboratory method.
3. examine the mean academic achievement of male and female students taught
agricultural science using field trip method.
4. determine the mean retention scores of students taught agricultural science using land
laboratory and field trip methods.
5. determine the mean retention scores of male and female students taught agricultural
science using land laboratory method.
6. examine the mean retention scores of male and female students taught agricultural
science using field trip method.
In carrying out the study, relevant literature was reviewed to guide the study. Six
research questions were developed and answered by the study while 6 null hypotheses were
formulated and tested at P ≤ .05 level of significance. The study used quasi-experimental
research design. The study was carried out in Makurdi metropolis. Makurdi is the capital of
Benue State and at the same time the Headquarter of Makurdi Local Government Area of
Benue State. The population of the study was 3, 300 co-educational SS1 agricultural science
students in the 63 government grant aided secondary schools in Makurdi Metropolis
(Department of Inspectorate Services, Ministry of Education and Enrollment, Makurdi
25
2011/2012 Local Government). The schools are made of boy’s schools only, girl’s schools
only and co-educational schools. The SS1 students would be used for the study. The sample
for the study was 300 consisting SSI agricultural science students comprising of 129 males
and 171 females drawn from four out of the sixty-three secondary schools with a total
population of 3,300 SS1 students offering agricultural science in Makurdi Local Government
Area of Benue State. Four schools were selected using purposive sampling technique to
obtain the total number of males and females in each school and to have a sizable manageable
number of schools for the study. One instrument was developed from review of literature and
was used to obtain information from the respondents. The instrument was validated by two
experts, one from Agricultural Education Department and one Educational Measurement and
Evaluation with science education background all from the University of Agriculture
Makurdi, Nigeria. Kuder-Richardson KR-21 formula was used to test the reliability coefficient
of the internal consistency of the instrument (Pre-test), co-relation co-efficient of 0.80 and
more is considered very high for reliability measurement. Two hired research assistants
helped the researcher to administer 300 copies the pre-test to respondents made up of 129
males and 171 females drawn from four out of the sixty-three secondary schools and all were
retrieved. The data collected were analyzed using mean and standard deviation to answer
research questions I-6 while the hypotheses were tested at P< 0.05 level of significance using
analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).
5.3. Conclusion
Currently, the lecture method of teaching mostly employed by teachers for teaching
agricultural science to students in Nigeria is ineffective to achieve the objective of
agricultural science as stated by the NERDC. The situation resulted in poor achievement of
students in the subject both internal and external examinations. The poor achievement of
students in agricultural science has brought much growing concern among parents, teachers,
government and the society on what could be the possible causes of students’ poor
achievement of students in agricultural science in Benue State. The method of teaching,
precisely lecture method, has been spotted as one of the possible causes of the ugly situation
in education. It was on this note that teachers have suggested that land laboratory and field
trip could solve the problem, although there is no empirical evidence to that effect. It was to
ascertain the efficacy of the two methods that this study was carried out to compare the
effects of land laboratory and field trip methods on students’ achievement in senior secondary
school Agricultural Science in Makurdi Local Government Area of Benue State. Based on
the analysis of the data collected, the following conclusions were reached.
1. Land laboratory brings about better students’ academic achievement than field trip
method of teaching soil in senior secondary school.
2. Male students have better academic achievement than female students taught soil
using land laboratory method of teaching in senior secondary school, which means
that laboratory method is not gender friendly.
3. Male students have better academic achievement than female students taught soil
using field trip method of teaching in senior secondary school, which means that
laboratory method is not gender friendly but favours male.
26
4. Land laboratory method of teaching brings better academic retention among students
than field trip method of teaching soil in senior secondary school.
5. Male students have better academic retention than female students taught soil using
land laboratory method of teaching in senior secondary school.
6. Female students have better academic retention than male students taught soil using
field trip method of teaching in senior secondary school, which means that laboratory
method is not gender friendly but favours female.
5.4. Implication of the study
The findings of the study had implication for teachers of agricultural science,
students of agricultural science, ministry of education officials, curriculum planners and
future researchers.
1. If the result of the two methods compared by the study were made available to
teachers of agricultural science, they will be encouraged to adopt land laboratory
method of teaching; irrespective of the pain it will cost them to enhance students’
academic achievement and retention in agricultural science in secondary schools.
2. If the finding of this study is made available to students, they will understand the
efficacy of the two methods of teaching to embrace it with good mind any time their
teachers adopt it to expose them to the content of agricultural science. This will
enhance the interest of the students in the methods to acquire the appropriate
knowledge and skills that will improve their academic achievement and retention in
agricultural science.
3. If the information from this study is made available to the officials of ministry of
education, the officials will use the information during school supervision to advice
teachers of agricultural science on the better method of teaching to adopt while
teaching soil to students to enhance students’ academic achievement and retention in
schools. They could also use the information to organize seminar or workshop to
improve the competence of teachers of agricultural science on the use of the two
methods of teaching.
4. If the result of the study is made available to the curriculum planners about the better
method of teaching between land laboratory and field trip, they will use it increase
emphasis on the better method of teaching agricultural science to students in schools
while planning the curriculum.
5. If the information provided by this study is made available to future researchers on the
better method of teaching between land laboratory and field trip, it will likely serve as
a pointer to them from where they can base their future research works. It could also
serve as reference material for future research on the methods of teaching agricultural
science in secondary schools.
5.5. Limitations of the Study
1 The study did not investigate the attitudes of students towards using land laboratory
and field trip methods during teaching and learning process, whether they will be
ready to learn the two different methods teaching.
2 The study also did not identify relevant teaching competencies on the two methods of
teaching that the teacher should possess for effective utilization of the methods.
27
REFERENCES
Acharya, N., and Joshi, S. (2009). Influence of Parents’ Education on Achievement Motivation of
Adolescents. Indian Journal Social Science Researches, 72–79.
Adekoya, Y. M., and Olatoye, R. A. (2011). Effects of Demonstration, Peer-Tutoring, and Lecture
Teaching Strategies on Senior Secondary School Students’ Achievement in an Aspect of
Agricultural Science. The Pacific Journal of Science and Technology. 12(1): 320-332.
Agbulu, O. N., and Ekele, G. E. (2004). Functional Curriculum in Agricultural Education for Nigeria.
Welfson Press 1 Owerri Street High Level, Makurdi, Benue State.
Agbulu, O. N., and Idu E. E. (2008). The impact of Participatory Approaches on Learning of
Agricultural Science in Senior Secondary Schools in Benue State, Aboki Publishers.
Akuto, G. W., Aduloju, M. O., and Odeh, R. C. (2012). General Teaching Methods and Strategies in
Education. Makurdi: Cubanet Publishers Nigeria Limited.
Alexander, Karl L., et al. On the Success of Failure: A Reassessment of the Effects of Retention in
the Primary School Grades. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Asogwa, V. C. (2013). Field Trip Method of Teaching. Unpublished lecture note for undergraduates
in the Department of agricultural Education, Federal University of Agriculture, Makurdi.
Bacon, L.S. (2011) Academic Self-Concept & Academic Achievement of African American
Translating from Urban-Rural schools. PhD thesis, University of Lowa Online @
http//ir.ulowa.edu/edd/1198.
Bruner, J. S. (1979). The Process of Education. London: Oxford University Press 98-100.
Cash, T., and Duttweiler, P. C. (2006). Planning, collaboration and implementation: Strategies for
truancy programs. National Dropout Prevention Center.
29
Dynarski, M., and Gleason, P. (1999). How Can We Help? Lessons from Federal Dropout
Prevention Programs. Princeton: Mathematical Policy Research Inc.
Emaikwu, S.O. (2012). Assessing the effect of prompt feedback as a motivational strategy on
students’ achievement in secondary school mathematics. Journal of Education Research,
3(4), 371-379.
Eric, C. Eboh (2009). Social and Economic Research, Principles and Methods. Published by African
Institute for Applied Economics Enugu, Nigeria.2nd Edition.
Eze, C. (2014) WASSCE: Statistics show states with highest percentage pass, possible cause of mass
failure. Retrieved from Daily Post Nigeria-files/comments.htm on 24/01/2015.
Hornby, A. S. (2006). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English New York,
University press.
IFAD (2007): International Fund for Agricultural Development Strategy in Nigeria, Strategic
Framework for 2007 – 2010. www.ifad,org/pubs/ads/200/pd (Accessed 2nd April, 2014)
Iji, C. O. (2002). Effects of Logo and Basic Programming on the Achievement and Retention in
Geometry of Junior Secondary School Students. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. University of
Nigeria. Nsukka.
Iwena, O. A. (2008). Essential agricultural science for senior secondary schools. Lagos. Tonad
publishers Ltd.
Kurumeh, M. S. (2012): Enhancing senior secondary students’ Achievement in Algebra using Inquiry
Method of Teaching in Onitsha Educational zone of Anambra State, Nigeria.
Lane, J. L. (2007): Inquiry-based Learning Lecture notes. Schreyer institute for teaching excellence,
penn state. Retrieved 2nd November, 2011 from www.schreyerinstitutepsu.edu
Maduewesi, B. U., Ezeani, L. U., and Maduewesi, C. P. (1999). Curriculum Implementation and
Instruction. Onitsha: West and Solomon Publishing Corporate Ideas Ltd.
McKay, E. (2001). Moving Beyond Retention and Social Promotion Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta
Kappa International.
Mick, Z. (2011). South Carolina School Environment Institute. South Carolina Department of
Education, Columbia. Retrieved on March 21, 2012, from
http://ed.sc.gov/agency/ac/Student-Intervention-Services/documents/SC-
SchoolEnvironmentRFP-/Nov2011.pdf
Mtsem, A. A. (2011). Effects of diagnostic and contextual instructional strategy on students’ interest
and achievement in secondary school Algebra. A PhD thesis of the Faculty of Education,
Benue State University, Makurdi.
Myers, B. E. (2005). Incorporating science, math and reading into the agriculture classroom. The
role of the laboratory. The Agricultural Education Magazine. 77(5), 14-15.
30
National Commission for Colleges of Education (NCCE, 2009). Minimum Standard for Nigeria
Certificate in Education: Vocational Technical Education (3 rd ed). Abuja NCCE.
Ochu, A.O. (2006). Education for National Growth and Stability. Nigeria. Makurdi. Peacemakers
Publishing Company.
Ogwo, B. A. (2005). Modern Instructional Techniques and their Applications in TVE Programmes of
Polytechnics. A commissioned paper presented at the Capacity Building Workshop for
Lecturers of Polytechnics in Nigeria organized by the Education Trust Fund (ETF) held at
Auchi Polytechnics on 2nd November, 2005.
Olatoye, R. A. (2008). Self Concept and Science Achievement in Co-educational and Single-sex
Junior Secondary School in Ogun State, Nigeria. Review of higher education and self-
learning. 1(1): 69-74. http://www.intellectbase.org
Olatoye, R. A. (2010). “Raising The Standard Of Science Teaching For Great And Dynamic
Economic Development In Nigeria”. Journal of qualitative education. 2(1), 39-46.
Olowa, O. W. (2008). Effects of Problem Solving and Subject Matter Approaches on the Problem
Solving Ability in Secondary School Agricultural Education. Akoka.
Osinem, C. E. (2007). Faces of Agricultural Education in Nigeria: Issues and Challenges. A seminar
paper presented to the Department of Education, College of Agriculture and Science
Education, University of Agriculture, Makurdi. November 6th 2007.
Osinem, E. C. (2008). Managing Agricultural Education and Training; Resources, Principles and
Methods. Enugu. Belong International Publishers.
Rausch, M. K., and Skiba, R. J. (2006). The Academic Cost of Discipline: The Relationship Between
Suspension/Expulsion and School Achievement. Bloomington: Indiana University Center
for Evaluation and Education Policy.
Richardson, T. (2001). The importance of emotional intelligence during transition to middle school:
What research says. Middle School Journal, 33, 55-58.
Robertson, Anne (2004). “Retention in School”. People with Attention and Developmental
Disabilities Association (PADDA) News. Retrieved from
http://www.padda.org/newsletter.shtml
Swanson, P. C. (2008). Special Education in America. The state of students with disabilities in the
nation’s high schools. Bethesda: Education Research Center.
Utubaku (2014) Effects of problem-based learning on senior secondary school students’ achievement,
interest, and retention in trigonometry in Northern Education Zone of Cross River State.
Unpublished thesis submitted to the Department of Science Education, Federal University of
Agriculture, Makurdi.
31
Von Stumm, S; Hell, B. & Chamorro-Premuzic, T (2011). The Hungry Mind: Intellectual Curiosity is
the Third Pillar of Academic Performance 6 (6): 574–588. doi.10.1177/1745691611421204.
Retrieved February 11, 2012.
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52