Xavier University – Ateneo de Cagayan

School of Education

EDUCATION 4.1

“Active Learning Strategy in the Teaching of Grade 8 Science Concepts:

A Lesson Study”

By Paula Marie M. Llido, Brix O. Madelo, and Unycie A. Taborada

INTRODUCTION

For the past decades, teachers usually use the traditional education way of

teaching wherein students will just sit in their chairs, and almost automatically assume

a passive mindset as they settle into what Chickering and Gamson (1987) refer to as

their roles as “spectators” of learning. Learning is not a spectator sport. Students do

not learn much just by sitting in classes listening to teachers, memorizing prepackaged

assignments, and spitting out answers. Learning has to be active so that students can

make connections between what they already know and what they are about to learn

(Driscoll, 2002, 2004; Bransford, et al., 2000).

According to Brian Lockhart and Jaffar Khan, students receiving lectures that

utilize an active learning process would report better understanding of lecture material

and have better performance on final assessments than students taught in a

traditionally passive learning environment. Most especially in the Science subject

which utilizes concepts that may not have been encountered, the students must be

more engage in activities for them to have a meaningful experience and make the

lessons more relevant to their understanding.

But how will the students begin to engage in active learning? These concerns
made the researchers look into active learning as strategy that will let the students to

1
be actively engaged to various activities, participate in class individually or by group,
and think critically but will be expressed in a creative way. Through this, it will help
learners to increase their performance in the Grade 8 Science subject. The main
purpose of this research is to improve a lesson study through stimulating the presence
of active learning strategy.

FRAMEWORK

Active Learning Strategy is based in Jean Piaget’s theory of Constructivism.

Constructivism emphasizes understanding and meaning, and students construct
knowledge through their experiences with the concepts and their environment based
on their prior knowledge and experiences (Posner, 2004). The curricula involves an
in-depth focus on the concepts, which are taught in relation to students’ background
knowledge and experience in order to add meaning and pique interest, and includes
an emphasis on skills, including problem solving and critical thinking, with students
evaluated through activities, projects, interviews, observations, and assignments
(Posner, 2004).

Constructivism’s impact on instructional practice where learning occurs in a

social context like communities and builds on the experiences, background and
cultures of community members. Constructivism enables content to be much more the
means of knowledge than the end result.

This suggests that students discover and learn more when guided by
instruction, content and a community of learners. Students begin with a problem,
scenario or case, and must discover the content that will, in turn, explain, answer, or
resolve the problem, scenario or case. This group function is the premise for the
models of Active learning including that is vastly becoming a sustainable model in
higher education institutions.

An abundance of literature regarding the operationalization of the term “active

learning” defines the term as a process in which the learner assumes a dynamic,
energetic, and involved role in his or her own learning process (Brown, 2008; Candela
et al., 2006; Popkess & McDaniel, 2011; Salamonson et al., 2009). In contrast to the
traditional classroom style in which teachers do most of the work and students
passively sit, active learning provides the opportunities for students to talk and listen,
read, write, and reflect as they approach subject matter (Biology) through problem-
solving exercises, small groups discussion, simulations, case studies, role playing,
and other activities that required them to apply what they are learning in class.

“When students conduct their own learning, discover their own answers, and
create their own interpretations, their learning is deeper, more comprehensive, and
longer lasting; and the learning that occurs actively leads to an ability to think critically”
(Marlowe & Page, 2005, p. 9). Lessons are more meaningful if students try to discover
things on their own and it makes the lesson more relevant to their understanding.
Rather than spoon-feeding the lessons, a teacher should use active learning
approach. Beichner et al. (2007) studied 1,600 physics students at the university level
for 5 years and found that students in active learning physics classes had greater
learning experiences than students in traditional lecture-based physics classes.
Active learning makes available opportunities for students to engage through
participation, allowing them to develop skills and apply theories and concepts
(Johnson& Malinowski, 2001). Implementation of active learning techniques are highly
used by the teachers in order to create an active learning environment. Meyers and
Jones (1993) noted that active learning means that the instructor spends less time
center-stage as a presenter and more time offstage as a designer, choreographer,
and manager of the learning environment and teaching process. In their work, they
stated that there are four essential elements to create an active learning environment.
These are: (1) clarifying course objectives and content, (2) creating a positive
classroom tone, (3) coping with teaching space and (4) knowing more about the
students. This means that classroom environment plays a major role in the
implementation of active learning techniques.
Other ways to promote active learning are also described including: visual
learning, writing in class, problem solving, computer-based instruction, cooperative
learning, debates, drama, role playing, simulations, games, and peer teaching.

RESEARCH PROBLEM

1
 This study was conducted with the intention of determining the effectiveness of
Active Learning to Grade 8 students’ performance in Science class subject through
assessment and evaluation. Questions considered for this study included the
following: (1) What is the rate of score and interpretation of the given classroom
activities? (2) What is the rate of pre-test and post-test performance of students before
and after the lesson study? (3) What is the rate of students’ performance with applied
lesson study?

There has been other studies in other countries, but minimal in Philippines
particularly in Cagayan de Oro City. Learning would be best of the lessons are well-
crafted. This is the first study that attempts to determine the effectiveness of Active
Learning to Grade 8 students’ performance in Science class subject through
assessment and evaluation.

METHODOLGY

Research Design

Action Research is conducted doing lesson study in a certain research area.

Action research is qualitative in nature for its gathers in-depth understanding of
behavior through participant observation first and reasons that govern such behavior.
Hence small but focused samples are needed.

The study is utilizing qualitative method because it does not only require the
tabulation and collection of data but it also contains the description in this paper which
is content analysis in comparing academic performance as the dependent variable of
a class with Active Learning Strategy as the independent variable specifically using
activities (simulation, individual board mapping, role play and output-making) in
teaching.

Research Site

The research was conducted in Pedro “Oloy” N. Roa High School in Calaanan.
The implementation of lesson session occurred in their Second Period as of the school
year 2016-2017. In there, the school environment’s cleanliness was fairly maintained.
Some of the classrooms’ space were enough for the class, while other classes were
overcrowding and was not that conducive. The school was not that big and so if there
will be programs and game plays in the covered court, the noise could easily affect the
attention and focus of the students inside the classroom. But so far, the school has
well-established buildings and enough learning resources (library, DLP, computer,
etc.)

Respondents

The respondents of this study were the Grade 8 level students in Pedro “Oloy”
N. Roa High School. Three Grade 8 sections were part of the study which were the
Bonifacio, Aguinaldo and Del Pilar. The respondent age ranges from 13-19 years old.

Instrumentation

Before the proper implementation of the lesson study in the class, Parents’
consents were assuredly given to the respondents/students and were asked to answer
the Student Profile Questionnaire as well as the Learning Style Test. The pre-test
questionnaires were given before the proper lesson session. On the day of the lesson
session in each chosen class sections (Bonifacio, Del Pilar, and Aguinaldo) gathering
of data for the students’ level of participation was determined through Participation
Tally Sheet. The facilitation performance to the assigned pre-service
teacher/researcher in each class section was assessed by the expert teacher through
Facilitation rubric. One of the activities was Role playing, and so Role Playing Rubric
was used. For summative assessment, Post-test was given to the students. And to
evaluate the effectiveness of the activities given throughout the lesson, Evaluation
rating scales were answered by the students afterward. Lastly, Output Rubric was also
use to assess the assignment given to the students.

Data Collection

An announcement was initially given to the students before the implementation

of conducting the action research. For the legibility of the data that was collected, all
the respondents in the 3 sections were given with Parents’ Consents on the first
meeting of the respondents and the researchers to ask permission in order to let their
son/daughter to participate.

In the collection of data, primary data through observation where done to the
respondents and was guided through rubrics and tallies (Role play rubric, output

1
rubric, and participation tally sheets). Question and answer form was also given to the
students (Student profile questionnaires with learning style test, pre-test and post-test,
and evaluation rating scale).

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Problem 1. What is the rate of score and interpretation of the given classroom
activities?

Table 1 Distribution of Students Rate of Performance with Applied Lesson

Study

Grade 8 Sections
Behavior Indicator Del Mean Description
Bonifacio Aguinaldo
Pilar
1. Do the students
3 3 3 3.00 Most of the time
participate in the activity?
2. Do the students ask
1 1 2 1.33 Never
questions to the teacher?
3. Do the students follow
the given instructions by 3 3 3 3.00 Most of the time
the teacher?
4. Do the students answer
2 3 3 2.67 Sometimes
the teacher’s questions?
5. Do the students take
2 2 2 2.00 Sometimes
down notes?
6. Do the students
attentively listen to the 3 3 2 2.67 Sometimes
teacher?
Rating Description
3 Most of the time
2.00-2.99 Sometimes
1.00 -1.99 Never

Table 1.1. Frequency Distribution with Description of the Scores in the

Evaluation Rating Scale of the Bonifacio Class

Table 1.2. Frequency Distribution with Description of the Scores in the

Evaluation Rating Scale of the Bonifacio Class
Table 1.3. Frequency Distribution with Description of the Scores in the
Evaluation Rating Scale of the Bonifacio Class

Problem 2. What is the rate of pre-test and post-test performance of students before
and after the lesson study?

Three runs were made during the field test with three different sections (Bonifacio,
Aguinaldo, and Del Pilar). The rate of performance of the students in science concepts
were determined using their pre-test (before lesson study) and post-test scores (after
lesson study).

Table 2.1. Frequency distribution of the Scores in the Pre-test and Post-test of
the Bonifacio Class
Frequency
Class Interval
Pre-test Post-test
Scores Percentage Percentage
(n=39) (n=39)
9-10 0 0.00% 3 7.69%
7-8 0 0.00% 7 17.95%
5-6 5 12.82% 16 41.03%
3-4 17 43.59% 7 25.64%
1-2 17 43.59% 3 7.69%
TOTAL 39 100% 39 100%

Table 2.2. Frequency distribution of the Scores in the Pre-test and Post-test of
the Aguinaldo Class
Frequency
Class Interval
Pre-test Post-test
Scores Percentage Percentage
(n=28) (n=28)
9-10 0 0.00% 8 28.57%
7-8 1 3.57% 7 25%
5-6 1 3.57% 10 35.71%
3-4 18 64.29% 2 7.14%
1-2 8 28.57% 1 3.57%
TOTAL 28 100% 28 100%

Table 2.3. Frequency distribution of the Scores in the Pre-test and Post-test of
the Del Pilar Class
Frequency
Class Interval
Pre-test Post-test
Scores Percentage Percentage
(n=37) (n=37)
9-10 1 2.70% 7 18.92%
7-8 1 2.70% 11 29.73%

1
 5-6 7 18.92% 10 27.03%
3-4 15 40.54% 8 21.62%
1-2 13 35.14% 1 2.70%
TOTAL 37 100% 37 100%

Table 2.4. Difference of Mean Scores of the Bonifacio, Aguinaldo, and Del Pilar
Class

Pre-test Post-test
Class Section Difference Percentage
(n=10) (n=10)
Bonifacio 1.34 3.30 1.96 19.60%

Aguinaldo 1.59 4.82 3.23 32.30%

Del Pilar 3.15 6.46 3.31 33.10%

Problem 3. What is the level of students’ performance with applied lesson study?

Table 3.1

FINDINGS

Table 2.1 shows the frequency distribution of the scores in Pre-test and Posttest
during the first run. 40.91 % of the population got zero during the Pre-test but was
lessen to 25.00 % during the Posttest. No one got the perfect score (10) during the
Pre-test but 11.36 % of the population got the prefect score during the Posttest.

Table 2.2 shows the frequency distribution of the scores in Pre-test and Posttest
during the second run. 22.45 % of the population got zero during the Pre-test which
lessen to 2.04 % in the Posttest. None of the population got a perfect score in the Pre-
test while 14.29 % of the population got the prefect score during the Posttest.

Table 2.3 shows the frequency distribution of the scores in Pre-test and Posttest
during the third run. 3.85 % of the population got zero during the Pre-test and no one
got 0 in the Posttest. None of the population got a perfect score in the Pre-test yet the
scores increased up to 5.77 % in the Post test.
 Table 2.4 shows the difference of mean scores of the Bonifacio, Aguinaldo, and

Del Pilar Class. The mean Pre-test score is 3.15 which increased to 6.46 in the

Posttest.

RECOMMENDATION

FOR THE TEACHERS: Active Learning must be used as a teaching strategy to enable
students be engaged in the Teaching Learning Process rather than using the
Traditional way.

FOR THE INSTITUTION: Seminars/workshops about using of Active Learning

Strategy must be conducted so that teachers will be able to know the limitation in
utilizing this strategy.

FOR THE FUTURE RESEARCHER: Since this is an active learning (using different
activities), a small number of participants is best in utilizing this research.

REFERENCES

Boomer, G. (1988).Teachers learning: Improving Australian schools through inservice

teacher training and development. Canberra: AGPS.

Chester, M., & Fox, R. (1966).Role playing methods in the classroom. Chicago:
Science Research Association.

Ching-Huei Chen, & Bruce Howard. (2010). Effect of Live Simulation on Middle School
Students' Attitudes and Learning toward Science. Journal of Educational Technology
& Society, 13(1), 133-139. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.13.1.133

Cobern, W. W. (1993). Contextual constructivism: The impact of culture on the

learning and teaching of science. In K. Tobin (Ed.),The practice of constructivism in
science education. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of
Science.

1
Cole, A. (1989). Researcher and teacher: Partners in theory building.Journal of
Education for Teaching, 15, 225–237.

Erickson, G. (1991). Collaborative inquiry and the professional development of science

teachers.The Journal of Educational Thought, 25, 228–245.

Hiotis, H. (1993). Using creative writing and drama to learn science.Australian Science
Teachers Journal, 39, 37–40.

Hildebrand, G. M. (1989). Creating a gender inclusive science education.Australian

Science Teachers Journal, 35, 7–16.

Ladrousse, G. P. (1989).Role play. Oxford: Oxford University Press.