BINDURA UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE EDUCATION

FACULTY OF SCIENCE EDUCATION

DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS AND PHYSICS

AN INVESTIGATION ON WHETHER TEACHERS ARE USING IMPROVISED

INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS IN THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF SCIENCE
AT ZIMBABWE JUNIOR CERTIFICATE (ZJC) LEVEL IN MUTOKO DISTRICT IN
MASHONALAND EAST

KUFA SOLOMON
B1337600

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS OF THE BACHELOR SCIENCE EDUCATION HONORS DEGREE
IN PHYSICS

30 MAY 2017
 ABSTRACT

This research sought to find out whether teachers in Mutoko district are employing the
improvisation technique in teaching and learning of science when standardized materials are
not available or are inadequate as a way of averting the problem of lack of resources in most
of these schools. Questionnaires and interviews were used as research instruments. All
questionnaires which were issued were completed and returned. Tables, chats and
percentages were used to analyse data. Major findings were that the majority of science
teachers are not using improvised materials during lessons. The research showed that while
some teachers improvise, they need to be more equipped on improvisation techniques to
increase the effectiveness of their classroom practice. The study recommends that teachers,
especially those just joining service be staff developed on how to improvise when the school
does not have enough resources for practical work. This can be done through staff
development workshops from as near as the school up to provincial levels.

i
DEDICATION

This research project is dedicated to my wife Maxine, my children Lisa and Leeroy and my
brothers.

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMETS

The author of this project would like to thank all the people who contributed to its success.

My deepest thanks go to Ms Shonhiwa my project supervisor for the scholarly supervision

and unwavering support till the end. I really appreciate her effort and patience.

I also need to use this opportunity to thank school heads, head of departments, teachers and
learners in Mutoko district and my classmates for all their contributions, cooperation and
assistance towards the success of this project.

I would like to extend my heartfelt appreciation to my family members for the moral and
financial support and encouragement they offered during my studies. May our dear Load
bless you all.

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ i

DEDICATION ...........................................................................................................................ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMETS ........................................................................................................ iii

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................vii

LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................vii

LIST OF APPENDICES ..........................................................................................................vii

CHAPTER 1: ............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Background to the study.............................................................................................. 1

1.2 Statement of the problem ............................................................................................ 2

1.3 Aim .............................................................................................................................. 3

1.4 Research questions ...................................................................................................... 3

1.5 Objectives .................................................................................................................... 4

1.6 Justification of study ................................................................................................... 4

1.7 Limitations of study .................................................................................................... 5

1.8 Delimitations of study ................................................................................................. 5

1.9 Assumptions ................................................................................................................ 5

1.10 Definition of terms................................................................................................... 6

1.11 Summary.................................................................................................................. 7

CHAPTER 2: ............................................................................................................................. 8

LITERTURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................. 8

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 8

2.2 Background of conventional methods of classroom based instruction ....................... 8

2.3 Improvised instructional materials (IIMs), what are they? ....................................... 10

2.4 Factors affecting improvisation of instructional materials ........................................ 12

2.5 Teacher’s role on improvisation................................................................................ 14

2.6 Effects of improvisation ............................................................................................ 14

iv
 2.7 Limitations of teaching Science in rural areas .......................................................... 15

2.8 Summary ................................................................................................................... 16

CHAPTER 3: ........................................................................................................................... 17

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY............................................................................................. 17

3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 17

3.2 Research Design ........................................................................................................ 17

3.3 Research Instruments ................................................................................................ 18

3.3.1 Questionnaires.................................................................................................... 18

3.3.2 Interviews ........................................................................................................... 19

3.4 Population.................................................................................................................. 19

3.5 Sample ....................................................................................................................... 20

3.6 Sampling technique ................................................................................................... 20

3.7 Data collection procedures ........................................................................................ 21

3.8 Data presentation and analysis procedures................................................................ 22

3.9 Summary ................................................................................................................... 22

CHAPTER 4: ........................................................................................................................... 23

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION ..................................... 23

4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 23

4.2 Background of the respondents ................................................................................. 23

4.3 Teachers’ views on instructional media and improvisation ...................................... 26

4.3.1 Relevance of instructional media in teaching and learning of science .............. 27

4.3.2 Frequency of use of media during lessons. ........................................................ 27

4.3.3 Availability of enough materials for practical lessons ....................................... 28

4.3.4 Use of improvised instructional materials during teaching and learning .......... 29

4.3.5 Do teachers have capacity to prepare improvised instructional materials? ....... 30

4.3.6 Does improvisation have any benefits in teaching and learning of science? ..... 31

4.3.7 Challenges faced when using improvised instructional materials. .................... 32

v
 4.3.8 Drawbacks of using improvised instructional materials .................................... 33

4.3.9 General suggestions and comments concerning use of improvised media ........ 34

4.4 Teacher interviews .................................................................................................... 35

4.4.1 Qualification, experience and improvisation ..................................................... 35

4.4.2 School policies, availability of laboratories and materials and improvisation .. 36

4.5 Learners’ views on improvised instructional media ................................................. 38

4.5.1 Frequency of doing practicals in science ........................................................... 38

4.5.2 Types of materials used in practicals ................................................................. 39

4.5.3 Learners’ view on impact of improvised materials compared to original ones . 39

4.5.4 Learners’ views on benefits of using improvised materials............................... 40

4.6 Summary ................................................................................................................... 41

CHAPTER 5: ........................................................................................................................... 42

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. 42

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 42

5.2 Summary of findings ................................................................................................. 42

5.2.1 Objective 1: To find out teachers’ perceptions on use of improvised

instructional materials ...................................................................................................... 44

5.2.2 Objective 2: To find out views of learners on use of improvised instructional

materials ........................................................................................................................... 44

5.2.3 Objective 3: To determine how often teachers use improvised instructional

materials ........................................................................................................................... 44

5.2.4 Objective 4: To find out if teachers have the necessary skills needed to
construct improvised instructional materials ................................................................... 44

5.2.5 Objective 5: To find out if school policies support the purchase and use of
instructional materials ...................................................................................................... 45

5.2.6 Objective 6: To determine whether improvised instructional materials have the

same effect as standardised materials .............................................................................. 45

5.3 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 45

vi
 5.4 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 46

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 47

APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................... 49

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1: Distribution of age ranges of science teachers ...................................................... 25
Figure 4.2: Frequency of use of media by teachers ................................................................. 27
Figure 4.3: Use of improvised instructional media .................................................................. 29
Figure 4.4: Teachers’ capacity to prepare improvised materials ............................................. 30
Figure 4.5: Frequency of doing practicals ............................................................................... 38

LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.4: Academic and professional qualifications of science teachers ............................... 25
Table 4.5: Teaching Experience .............................................................................................. 26
Table 4.6: challenges of using improvised instructional materials .......................................... 32
Table 4.7: Availability of standard science laboratories .......................................................... 36
Table 4.8: Types of materials used during lessons .................................................................. 39
Table 4.9: Learners’ views on impact of improvised materials ............................................... 39
Table 4.10 Learners’ views on benefits of use of improvised materials ................................. 40

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Questionnaire for teachers .................................................................................. 49
Appendix 2: Interview questions for teachers ......................................................................... 52

vii
 CHAPTER 1:

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the study

The ever-increasing cost of living due to economic changes in Zimbabwe has not spared the
cost of basic education. Most affected are the subjects like sciences and other practical based
ones which require a lot of learning material other than the traditional text book and
chalkboard. Mberekpe, (2013) highlights that objectives of Science education in most
countries is to prepare students to observe and explore the world, explain simple natural
phenomena, develop scientific attitudes including curiosity, critical reflection and,
objectivity, apply the skills gained through Science to solve daily problems, develop self-
confidence and self-reliance through problem solving activities in science. The attainment of
these objectives requires deliberate, routine hands on approach (including experimentation
and observation) to teaching and learning of science. However, most schools are poorly
funded such that they find it difficult to avail these to teachers for effective teaching of
Science (Yitbarek, 2012).

The world is developing technologically due to scientific investigations. This coupled with
the changing methodologies in education system have triggered many researchers to shift
towards improvisation as the most realistic and quick remedy to the problem of lack of
resources.

The national policy as spelt out in the Zimbabwe School Examinations Council (ZIMSEC)
Science syllabus advocates a highly practical methodology of teaching. A more child
centered approach is encouraged by the current ZIMSEC syllabus. This involves the
participation of the learners in the teaching and learning process hence need for improvisation
in the case of shortage of instructional materials in order to allow every learner a chance to
interact with the learning materials for a more realistic output.

There are three domains which must be achieved in education for sufficient learning to take
place. These include the cognitive, affective and psychomotor domains. These are achievable
1
through an effective teacher and a sufficient supply and use of instructional media during the
learning process (Mensah, 2015)

Onasanya & Omosewo, (2011) assert that objectives of any educational process determine
the content, methods and materials for achieving those objectives. They describe the
materials used for enhancing instructional effectiveness as aspects of media employed to
achieve the instructional objectives. What it implies is that without these materials the
instruction process will be more unbearable for both the learners and the teacher yielding
very poor results at the end of the course.

This study needs to then observe how teachers are copying in schools which have very little
or no resources at all, that is, are they improvising with local materials to at least achieve the
stated objectives in their schemes of work as derived from the national syllabus.

1.2 Statement of the problem

There is an adverse shortage of standard instructional materials for teaching and learning
physics in many schools (Mberekpe, 2013). In addition Utibe-Abasi, (2015) states that
although there is emphasis on the use of instructional materials in the teaching of Physics, it
has been noted that most Physics teachers teach the subject without the instructional materials
because they are not available in schools. In cases where there are any, the materials are
insufficient compared with the number of learners.

Godding, Dave, Patterson, & Perry, (2013) highlighted that practical science is one of the
most engaging and rewarding aspects of science teaching and its importance in developing
learning should not be underestimated. However, (Bhukuvhani, Kusure, Munodawafa, Sana,
& Gwizangwe, 2010) noted that most of the instructional materials are expensive to buy
posing challenges for many schools particularly in Zimbabwe and other developing countries.

The Herald reporter (Share, 2012) quoted the then minister of primary and secondary
education Dr David Coltart saying that government through BEAM with the aid of UNICEF
is supporting at least 400 000 pupils in schools in form of fees. He further said government
does not have resources to fully support with all the required materials.

2
This shortage of materials contributes greatly to the high failure rate in Science at Ordinary
level. Onasanya & Omosewo, (2011) also observed that the performance of many students is
generally poor. This was attributed to many factors including teaching strategy itself
especially when faced with the problem of shortage or unavailability of conventional
experimental materials. This problem persists in spite of efforts by UNICEF and
Zimbabwean government to provide instructional materials to schools (The Herald, Share
2012).

Adu & Adu, (2014) identified improvisation as one of the best way out when faced with such
challenges. They noted that improvisation can result in discovery of new patterns, practices,
new structures and symbols. Therefore teachers should use their initiative and resourcefulness
to produce low cost equipment and laboratory activities (Reyes, 2010). However, it is not
clear whether teachers in Zimbabwean schools are using improvisation method to solve the
shortage of equipment in their labs. Now, the research aims at finding out whether teachers
are using improvisation technique to enhance teaching and learning of Science in general.

1.3 Aim
The researcher aims at establishing whether teachers are using improvised instructional
media in teaching and learning of science since it has been discovered that most schools do
not have enough conventional materials.

1.4 Research questions

To achieve the research aim, the following questions had to be answered.
1. What are teachers’ perceptions on the use of improvised instructional materials?
2. What are learners’ views on improvised instructional materials?
3. How often do teachers use improvised instructional materials?
4. Do teachers have the necessary skills needed in creating the improvised instructional
materials?
5. Do the school policies and procedures support the purchasing and use of instructional
materials?

3
 6. Do improvised instructional materials have the same learning effect as standardised
instructional materials?

1.5 Objectives
To answer the research questions, the following objectives had to be achieved:
1. To find out teachers’ perceptions on the use of improvised instructional materials.
2. To find out views of learners on improvised instructional materials.
3. To determine how often teachers use improvised instructional materials.
4. To find out if teachers have the necessary skills needed to construct improvised
materials.
5. To find out if school policies support the purchasing and use of instructional
materials.
6. To determine whether improvised instructional materials have the same effect as
standardised materials.

1.6 Justification of study

The purpose of this study was to find out whether teachers are employing the improvisation
strategy in the teaching and learning of Science at Zimbabwe Junior Certificate level to
enhance teaching and learning and thereby improving the learning outcomes when
standardized materials are not available. The research also wanted to remind teachers that a
more child centered approach can be achieved even when there are insufficient teaching
materials. The research tried to fill the gap between a textbook based teaching approach and a
practical based teaching approach in spite of shortage or absence of conventional
instructional materials.

The study also provided evidence based findings from renowned educationists for reference
to other schools at the same time revealing the perceptions of teachers and students on the use
of improvised instructional materials. The findings of this research may be taken up by
provincial offices to gather teachers and hold staff development workshops in line with
improvisation technique. Teachers will therefore be taught how and when to prepare and use
improvised media.

4
The results also provided an insight to curriculum developers and teachers which can
influence structuring of new textbooks with guide to practicals and proper usage of
experimental materials.

1.7 Limitations of study

To obtain valid and reliable findings on the improvisation technique in science there was
need to visit many schools in the district but due to financial constraints the movements were
limited. Due to these financial constraints the population was reduced to a small sample
which may end up not giving a proper basis for generalization. A few schools were selected
and a few learners were chosen to minimize printing costs.

The quality of the research product could be lowered due to lack of time available for
research work considering that the researcher had other daily routines. Internet connectivity
and facilities are poor in Mutoko such that the communication with the project supervisor
was sometimes slow or very difficult.

1.8 Delimitations of study

To make amends for the limitations stated above, only five schools in the district were used
in the data collection. The researcher made use of district gatherings to distribute
questionnaires to schools that are not easy to reach. Some of the questionnaires were also sent
to subjects through district office and returned through the same office again. The scope of
the research was also limited to teachers’ and learners’ perceptions on improvisation to make
effective use of the limited time and resources, that is, options like actual comparison of the
teaching methods could not be carried out.

1.9 Assumptions
The study was based on the following assumptions:
The researcher will access the required information and cooperation from the greater number
of the relevant stakeholders including district officers, school heads and teachers in order to
make a meaningful conclusion from the whole process.

5
The time for data collection will be adequate allowing the project to be finished in the given
time frame.

Financial support available will be adequate to carry out the research.

Respondents will give take the data collection process seriously and therefore give reliable,
accurate and valuable information.
The results obtained in the study shall be applicable to all Zimbabwean schools since the
teachers involved went through the same teachers’ colleges and universities while the
learners across the divide have the same cultural and ethical backgrounds.

1.10 Definition of terms

The main terms which were used in this research include improvisation, teaching strategy and
teacher. The terms are briefly defined below to give the research a more focused direction.

Improvisation Formulation and provision of substitute media designed by

teacher to suit specific situation in lesson delivery (Mberekpe,
2013).

Teaching strategy A way of delivering knowledge to the learners (Bizimana &

Orodho, 2014)

Teacher A trained classroom practitioner discharged with the

responsibility of implementing government policies by
imparting relevant skills, knowledge, values and attitudes to
students (Mensah, 2015).

Standardized Industrially made materials produced for a specific function

(Jacob, 2013).

Instructional materials Are the pieces of media used in during lessons to enhance the
teaching and learning process (Utibe-Abasi, 2015).

6
1.11 Summary
In this chapter the background of the whole study was provided together with the justification
of the study. The problem was precisely stated as to find out whether teachers in secondary
schools are improvising when there are insufficient teaching and learning materials for
conducting science lessons. Chapter 1 also gave a detailed analysis of limitations of this study
and outlined the corresponding delimitations. The following chapter will look at what other
educationists say or have found out on use of improvised teaching and learning materials.

7
 CHAPTER 2:

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction
This chapter makes a review of related literature in order to have a deeper scope of the
problem. The chapter reviews literature on improvised instructional media usage; factors
affecting improvisation, its advantages, disadvantages, limitations and effects on the teaching
and learning of Science in Secondary Schools. By presenting various viewpoints from
different academic scholars the chapter seeks to establish an academic platform on which the
full research of this project will be based. This chapter will also explain the rationale and
situations which force use of improvisation in the teaching and learning process.

2.2 Background of conventional methods of classroom based instruction

Science is a subject that students often find very difficult and this is why students always
have poor grades in the subject. According to (Jacob, 2013) students usually perform very
poorly in Science at all levels of education. This has been closely related to the abstract
nature of the course which therefore directly requires use of instructional materials to
facilitate students’ learning of Science. Olibie et al., (2013) stressed that mastery and
achievement of scientific concepts cannot be fully achieved without the use of instructional
materials. The problem confronting teachers now is unavailability of these instructional
materials in schools; therefore the need to improvise.

According to (Orji, 2000) improvisation means the act of creating something or using
something in the absence of the ideal tools. Improvisation can also be defined as the
substitution of the real thing that is not available. It therefore may mean the use of alternative
equipment in place of the traditional ones which would not be available using locally and
readily available materials (Reyes, 2010). This material or piece of equipment is either
available in the environment or is designed and constructed by the teacher on his or her own
or teacher and learners together to improve the instruction process.

8
Mberekpe, (2013) cited a number of importance aspects of improvisation. They materials are
not expensive meaning that they reduce the money used by the cash strapped schools in
purchasing the standardized equipment for their laboratories. This is made possible since they
are usually made from scrap and waste. Improvisation helps to solve problems of lack of
equipment in schools. This will ensure the effective teaching and learning of practical
oriented concepts thus ensuring that lesson objectives are achieved. It gives room for a
teacher to demonstrate his or her creative skills.

Bizimana & Orodho, (2014) also add that improvisation encourages students to develop
creative skills and abilities. This also enables the teacher to think of cheaper, better and faster
methods of making the teaching and learning process easier for students. It makes students
aware and familiar with the important resources in their environment. In addition to the above
importance, improvised materials are easy to use in the context of the learner making it easy
to explain and understand the specific concepts. The teacher and learners can also make
alterations to the materials to suit their needs.

Onasanya & Omosewo, (2011) further argue that learners learn more if they are physically
involved in manipulating the models rather than being told about how the concepts work.
Improvised materials are usually simple and easy to use, making it also easy for learners to
understand the concepts. Most of such materials can be repaired and maintained by the
teacher and learners at local level. They minimize the problem of market survey and
procurement of the items.

Instructional materials are categorized into audio visual, audio and visual which when used in
the Science lesson will appeal to both sight and hearing senses of the learner. They are wide
varieties of equipment and materials used by teachers to stimulate self activity on the part of
the learner. These include electronically operated materials like Television, Radio, Film, slide
motion and computers and non electronic ones such as chalkboard, charts, burners and
models among others. In the absence of these the lesson becomes very uninteresting to
students and discourages learning, ultimately leading to poor performance in the subject
(Yitbarek, 2012).

Kira & Nchunga, (2016) carried out a research on teachers’ experiences and perceptions on
improvised materials. They observed that some learners think that the importance of
9
traditional laboratory teaching involving practical experimentation and hands on work has in
no way decreased as a result of computerized simulation experiments though considerable
pedagogical advantage may also be gained in the integration of Information and Computer
Technology (ICT) tools used in teaching science and technology particularly by integrating
virtual laboratories. There are many very experiments difficult to carry out in the laboratory
due to their nature, such experiment could be simulated. Chain reaction and radioactive decay
in nuclear physics cannot be easily carried out in classroom situation; students can still learn
these topics by simulation and it will be real to them.

Instructional materials play a crucial role because what students hear is easily forgotten but
what they see cannot be easily forgotten and lasts longer in their memory. Jacob, (2013)
further added that the primary purpose of instructional materials is to make the lesson more
effective and also facilitate it. He then noted that teachers will not do much in the absence of
these materials hence need to improvise. This helps overcome noise factors like
misconception, referent confusion and day dreaming among learners. The purpose of this
study is to make a survey of whether teachers are using improvisation in the teaching of
Science when the conventional materials are not available.

2.3 Improvised instructional materials (IIMs), what are they?

Improvised instructional materials are teaching materials designed and produced from the
available local materials in order to promote effective teaching and learning in schools. They
are materials that are used in the absence of the original or the ideal objects to bring about the
same learning effect that the standard materials would have brought (Ahmed 2008) in
(Mensah, 2015). She cited that Ndiragu et al (2003) investigated the effective use of
improvised materials designed by science teachers during their teaching practice. This study
presented evidence that improvised teaching aids designed by teachers during teaching
practice had a great influence in the teaching of science in schools. These materials were
found to be durable and could last for a longer time to enhance the effective teaching and
learning of science in schools that are unable to afford expensive standardized instructional
materials. Science teachers should be encouraged to make their own teaching resources from
the locally available materials to teach science.

10
Improvised materials have been used across a number of scientific disciplines. For example,
Ahmed (2008) presented in his study some biological instructional materials that biology
teachers can improvise to replace the standardized ones. Biology teachers should find out
materials from their local environment that they could improvise without losing the
originality of the concept which is taught. Such materials can include D.N.A. models with
stripped cardboard for illustration in teaching genetics, using clothes hangers (pegs) in place
of test tube holders, replacing measuring cylinders with graduated feeding bottles for
measuring liquids and so on.

Onasanya & Omosewo, (2011) discovered in their study that the use of improvised
instructional materials have the same importance in the teaching and learning of physics. The
study’s results showed that both improvised materials and standardized materials were
successful in teaching the students. Science teachers should teach with improvised materials
if the standard ones are not readily available to enhance effective teaching and learning.

Iji, Ogbole, & Uka, (2014) and Aina (2013) also investigated the necessity of using
improvised materials to replace scarce standardized instructional material in teaching physics
in schools. Their study showed the difficulty in teaching physics in schools where there is
unavailability of standardized instructional materials. Adu & Adu, (2014) cited a number of
goals of improvisation arguing that learners generally remember 20% of what they hear, 30%
of what they see, 50% of what they see and hear and 90% of what they see and do. They
mentioned that improvisation has a strong visual experience that makes education very
successful. They added that improvisation enhances the teaching and learning process as it
utilizes all the five senses during the learning process.

Improvisation is a method used in line with other methods like interactive Cds, online
tutoring, laboratory session and virtual laboratories as stated by (Bhukuvhani, Mupa, Mhishi,
& Dziva, 2012). They classified improvisation under home experiments of self-built
experimental projects. Their research, based on instructional technologies by teachers in
Zimbabwe observed that whilst real experimentation with conventional laboratory apparatus
and equipment is desired, schools in Zimbabwe like many others in developing countries face
challenges of limited resources particularly financial resources for acquiring apparatus and
materials for imparting effective and efficient science education.

11
In introductory courses like Zimbabwe Junior Certificate (ZJC) experiments using common
household materials and equipment are a suitable alternative. This improvised laboratory
experimentation (ILE) as cited by (Bhukuvhani et al., 2012) has been a panacea to the
situation at hand, particularly the Zimbabwean experience. Improvisation is a pedagogical
intervention strategy that teachers may use to address similar situations by being resourceful
in the making and use of locally available materials where conventional equipment and
materials may be inadequate or not available at all.

Low cost materials produced through improvisation are not an attempt to provide a watered
down science education, but low cost in the mentioned sense is highly creative and highly
productive, provides opportunities for creativity and development of manipulative abilities
and concepts are learnt and internalized by concrete and unspectacular work than proceeding
with chalk and teacher talk in teaching science (Pimpro, 2005).

Bhukuvhani et al., (2010) note that this can be implemented using simple basic experiments
and or low cost commercial experimental kits. These projects need not be complicated;
rather, they should provide students with the opportunity of learning science through
experiment. Such projects will be more challenging, interesting and train students to be
resourceful.

2.4 Factors affecting improvisation of instructional materials

Maruff, Amos, & Gbolagade, (2011) identified two main constraints militating against the
successful improvisation of science equipment. These include technical and human factors.
Technical factors refer to the degree of accuracy and precision that is possible with
improvised equipment and human factor relates to the teachers’ skill in developing the
resources which provide appropriate learning experiences to the learners. They also added
that lack of adequate professional training as another major factor hampering the effective
use of local resources for Science teaching. As a remedy, regular meaningful workshops on
improvisation techniques for Science teachers are required to improve and update their
competencies.

Involvement of the learners in the improvisation process is more beneficial as it introduces

them to creativity innovation and curiosity, which form the backbone of concept formulation.

12
Kira & Nchunga, (2016) added that one would expect the teacher, who is the facilitator in the
teaching- learning process, to improvise for materials where they are not available or are
insufficient. But the attitudes of the teachers towards improvisation of teaching materials are
negative. Many of the teachers are not aware of the improvisation method in teaching. Those
that are aware of the use of local equipment and materials in teaching are hindered by a
number of factors such as laziness on their part, lack of funds, time constraints and many
others. Adu & Adu, (2014) also concur that to teach learners according to standards, teachers
need to understand improvisation and strategies deeply and flexibly so they can help learners
create useful cognitive maps, relate one idea to another and address misconceptions. This
therefore shows that if the teacher is not well versed with improvisation then its
implementation becomes a non event.

The constraints against successful improvisation of science equipment can be categorized

into two main forms (Balogun 2002) in (Kira & Nchunga, 2016). These are technical and
human factors. They argue that while the technical factors relate to question of degree of
accuracy and precision that is possible with the improvised equipment, the human refer to
teacher’s skill and professional ability and experience. The issue of efficiency as viewed by
other teachers is also a hindering factor.

If improvisation aims at enhancing student centered approach rather than teacher centered
one, there is a challenge that despite the fact that the value of the student centered approach is
widely acknowledged among educators in several parts of the world still majority of teachers
and institutions are nevertheless not adhering to it. Teacher centered approach is sometimes
viewed as relatively efficient since it allows educators to teach many students within a rather
short period of time.

Unfortunately, in most situations such conditions may promote a ‘surface’ rather than ‘deep’
level of understanding and orient students towards performing only at the minimal level
required to obtain a good grade in the course (Biggs, 1999). This implies that, for teachers to
be able to buy the concept of improvisation in education they first need to change their role as
professionals, to develop competence programs, to adapt their lectures to include interactions
with the class. To consider learners’ prior knowledge and background (impact of cultures) as
well as orient and guide learners in the learning process (Gardener, 2012).
13
2.5 Teacher’s role on improvisation
Utibe-Abasi, (2017) suggest that the teacher has a crucial role during lesson. They explain
that one important task of teaching- central to the vision of recent reforms in science and
mathematics education is attending to and interacting with the substance of learners’
scientific and mathematical ideas. Though there is a rich history of research that describes
common ideas in different Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
domains, the nature and substance of student ideas as they emerge in the flow of classroom
activity is always somewhat unexpected, such that teachers must draw on their knowledge in
the moment in improvisational ways (Utibe-Abasi, 2017).

On realization that learners have wide range of ideas about any given topic, the teacher
should therefore carefully design materials which allow interaction of these abstract ideas and
the reality. This was elaborated by (Jacob, 2013) supporting many other researchers’ ideas
that the teaching of science in schools has not been encouraging due to its abstract nature,
adding that this is why the use of instructional materials is needed to facilitate students’
learning of science. He quickly points out that these instructional materials are usually not
available in school, but gave a solution that the teacher’s role is to endeavor to utilize the use
of the discarded resources around them to improvised teaching aids for science.

The teacher can also involve learners in the preparation of the improvised materials. Their
participation in improvisation of learning materials makes them more creative, enjoy the
learning more and ultimately bringing better grades in science.

2.6 Effects of improvisation

Experience over the years has shown that teachers have been depending on excessive use of
words to express, to convey ideas or facts in the teaching learning process (Onasanya &
Omosewo, 2011). This practice is termed the ‘chalk-talk’ method. Today advances in
technology have made it possible to produce materials and devices that could be used to
minimize the teacher’s talking and at the same time, make the message clearer, more
interesting and easier for learners to assimilate (Onasanya & Omosewo, 2008). Graphics are
also another latest innovation to classroom practice. They help to visualize the whole
concepts learned and their relationships with one another.

14
(Onasanya & Omosewo, 2011) and (Mberekpe, 2013) carried out researches to actually
determine the comparative effect of use of standardized instructional materials and
improvised instructional materials. The former researched basing on performance of
secondary school students in physics. Onasanya & Omosewo, (2011) used the hypotheses:
There is no significant difference in performance of students taught with standard
instructional materials, there is no significant difference in performance of the students taught
with improvised instructional materials and that there is no significant difference in the post
test scores in the two experimental and control groups. Their findings showed that the mean
scores in the pre test and post test for the two groups were very different. They noted that
improvised materials were good for both experimental groups since they produced a positive
result in the post test analysis.

Jacob, (2013) added that instructional materials help teacher to meet individual differences of
the learners by using materials that appeal to different senses. Instructional materials are used
to supplement verbal explanations or description so that the lesson can be more realistic to
learners through capturing learners’ attention, evoking responses, clarifying the abstract
concepts and providing variety in the learning process.

2.7 Limitations of teaching Science in rural areas

Mensah, (2015) points out that Science is a difficult subject to teach, especially in rural areas
where lack of access to resources and equipment to teach Science is the major obstacle to
effective learning in (Laidlaw et al 2009). The unavailability of resources in rural schools
restricts teachers’ ability to be effective in facilitating teaching and learning process. Mensah,
(2015) goes on to argue that the provision of an enriching educational experience relies on
adequate resources in schools, such as science materials and equipment.

Shadreck (2012) in (Mensah, 2015) states that teachers have a crucial role in any educational
system, and learners’ learning in the classroom, but the quality of delivery has been adversely
affected in rural schools due to challenges they faced such as adequate resources. There is a
need for teachers to use indigenous materials in place of standardized instructional materials
to enhance teaching and learning especially in rural areas where resources are scarce.

15
2.8 Summary
This chapter focused on views of other scholars on improvisation. The scholars considered in
this chapter conducted different researches o improvisation. These range from effects of
improvisation.

16
 CHAPTER 3:

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction
In this chapter, the researcher outlined the methodology used in the research. Methodology
encompassed the general criterion of the whole research process. The chapter focused on
issues including research design, instruments used in data collection, population, sample,
sampling techniques and data collection procedures.

3.2 Research Design

Research design include how data was collected, what instruments were employed, how the
instruments were used and the intended means of analyzing data collected. Richardson,
(2001) explains that the research design is the plan of the study which provides the
framework for data collection.

In this research a descriptive design was employed. This aimed at providing an accurate
description of observed phenomena. It is conclusive in nature as opposed to exploratory or
experimental approach. A descriptive approach tries to gather quantifiable information that
can be used for statistical inference on target population through data analysis. Researches
like this one in particular it helps educational institutions to better define and measure the
significance of something about a group of respondents and the population they represent.

It took the form of observational, case study or survey. This research took the form of a
descriptive survey mainly using questionnaires and interviews. The researcher chose these
techniques after closely analyzing their advantages and disadvantages. Their main advantage
is that they provide a multifaceted approach to data collection though on the other hand they
have general weaknesses including issue of confidentiality, possibility of errors and
subjectivity.

17
3.3 Research Instruments
The main research instruments which were used are questionnaires and interviews. They
were explained separately below.

3.3.1 Questionnaires
Questionnaire technique of data collection was used as the main method. A questionnaire was
designed and a pilot study taken at the nearest school to gauge its effectiveness and to
improve its validity. Thereafter, corrections and improvements were made in line with
observed shortcomings.

The questionnaire covers broad areas including availability of instructional materials in

schools, teacher’s knowledge of using the available materials, frequency of use of
experiments during teaching and learning process, knowledge of improvisation techniques in
absence of conventional instructional materials, frequency of use improvisation and
perceived benefits and drawbacks of improvising in teaching and learning of science. The
questionnaires will also include space for any relevant additional comments on improvisation
and its improvement.

At least four questionnaires (one for each Science teacher) containing open ended and close
ended questions were distributed to each of the selected participating schools in Mutoko
District. These were physically handed to the respondents by the researcher to try and
minimize number of unreturned responses. A total of thirty learner questionnaires were
distributed to the schools as well. These were handed over to learners with the help of
Science teachers in the respective schools.

The reason for inclusion of open ended questions was to get a variety of views from both the
teachers and learners. Being a descriptive based mode of research this would help researcher
to make a well informed and well balanced analysis of the usage of improvisation in different
schools. Open ended questions allowed the respondents to easily express themselves other
than the predetermined and prescriptive answers provided by closed ended questions.
However, some closed ended questions were used in order to have an easier task of analyzing
data.

18
Respondents were assured of confidentiality in treatment and usage of their responses after
giving them a brief background of the research as a whole. On the learner questionnaires, the
researcher first clearly explained the purpose of the questionnaires and agreed on the ground
rules. A copy of each of the questionnaires is attached in the appendix.

3.3.2 Interviews
The researcher held one on one interviews with science teachers in the selected schools at
their workplaces. This will be done using a list of questions based on chosen areas in the
syllabus and teachers will be asked to respond. Questions were formulated on measuring,
recording, forces and solubility. The questions mainly focused on the availability of
instructional materials needed for the particular topics, teaching strategies for those particular
topics with or without the conventional instructional materials and perceived benefits and
drawbacks of the teaching strategies they employ on these particular topics.

In some cases some questions were omitted depending on the situation and flow of the
conversation. During the interview, the researcher always tried to relax the environment in
order to get free responses for a well informed data analysis as well as getting full attention
from the respondents. The questions were open ended and at the end the interviewees would
be allowed to ask a few questions or raise any relevant comments not discussed by the
interview questions.

The interview technique gave a quick way of getting the needed information. This facilitated
coming up with the research piece within the limited timeframe. The researcher started off by
explaining the purpose of the interview and reassured the teachers of the confidentiality in the
treatment of the research findings to be included in the final report.

3.4 Population
The population in the research comprised of mainly two groups of people:-
1. Science teachers
2. Learners

19
These were drawn from five schools in the district. It is assumed that all the schools offer the
ZIMSEC Integrated Science course from form 1 level up to form 4. The schools selected
include rural day schools, government school, boarding schools (council and church
administered) and peri urban day schools. The selected population was deemed to represent
all the methods of running the schools in terms of administration of funds. The schools have
an average of 4 Science teachers each and an average of 450 learners.

3.5 Sample
The sample was drawn from the mentioned population comprises of 4 Science teachers in the
selected schools or all teachers in cases where there are less than 4 Science teachers in the
school. 6 learners were selected from each school to respond to questionnaires.
15 teacher questionnaires were distributed for the teachers in the respective schools
30 learner questionnaires were distributed to the schools making a total of 45 printed
questionnaires that were used.

3.6 Sampling technique

The researcher would be introduced to members in the science department in the different
schools followed by a brief background of the purpose of visit. Thereafter, the teachers would
then voluntarily take part in the research.

Random sampling approach was used on learner questionnaires. The selection was done at
random among form 1 and form 2 learners from any class in the schools. A total of 6 learners
will be selected at random from the class teacher’s registers taking into consideration the
gender balance issue. For schools with less than 100 learners in form 1 and 2, less than 6
learners were selected then more than 6 were selected in schools with more than 300 learners
in form 1 and 2.

20
3.7 Data collection procedures
A pilot study was run at Mutoko Central High school where the researcher is stationed. This
was meant to try and improve the questionnaires and questioning techniques during
interviews.
The researcher sought permission from the district office to run the research in the district,
particularly permission to visit school. The letter for this was included in the appendices as
appendix 4.

The questionnaires were amended and a number corresponding to the sample was then
printed for distribution.
The researcher made arrangements with the respective school heads to be granted permission
to visit the schools. This was done over the telephone for other schools and by physical visits
to nearby schools.

The researcher was given dates and came up with a schedule which was then used to make
appointments with the respective heads of departments.
Special arrangements were made such that schools along one road with close proximity were
visited in one day to minimize travelling costs.
The researcher would be introduced to the head of sciences department by the school head.
The head of department would then take the researcher to the department, make introductions
which were followed by administration of questionnaires and interviews to willing science
teachers.

Questionnaires were distributed by hand in some schools and the respondents completed
them while researcher was holding interviews with other teachers or was explaining some
points to learners. In some schools where appointments were scheduled after 1400hours the
researcher left the questionnaires which were later collected by the head of department and
forwarded to the researcher through the district office or through other plausible
arrangements.

Interviews were held in the laboratories or in offices in schools without laboratories.

Members of the administration and science teachers helped the researcher conduct
questionnaire administration on learners to minimize mischievous acts from some learners

21
and make sure all questionnaires are returned. However, caution was made that the presence
of these members would not influence the learners’ responses.

3.8 Data presentation and analysis procedures

Data collected was presented in different ways. In some cases tables, graphs, charts and
percentages were used to analyze data in order to make interpretation easier. Tables, graphs
and charts were used because they clearly give summaries and relationships between
variables apart from ease of analysis.

Information obtained from these data analysis instruments was further described qualitatively
to explain the meaning and interpretation of the data. Discussions of the data were made to
outline relationships between different schools of thought. This information was detailed in
chapter four.

3.9 Summary
This chapter concentrated on the research design which employed a more descriptive
approach. Research instruments outlined in this chapter were questionnaires and interviews.
The researcher explained the choice of each of the instruments used by outlining their merits.
On the other hand demerits of each instrument were discussed followed by how these were
dealt with in the research. The main instruments were questionnaires

In the chapter, the population which was targeted by the research and samples which were
used were spelt out. Sampling techniques were also discussed in the chapter as well as
explaining why those sampling methods were selected. The main method used was the
random sampling technique which is deemed to be less biased by many schools of thought.

A brief description of how data was collected, presented and analysed was also made. This
included an outline of data collection procedures, administration and collection of
questionnaires and their collection.

22
 CHAPTER 4:

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Introduction
The focus of this chapter was on presentation of the data collected, analyzing it and its
interpretation. This was done by presenting the questionnaire response rate and background
of respondents among others. This is important to indicate the size of the sample and its
composition by gender, age, qualifications and teaching experience. Furthermore, this chapter
goes on to give an analysis of responses question by question presenting the data in form of
pie charts, tables and graphs where applicable as well as giving the interpretation of the
presented data.

Total number of questionnaires issued to teachers was 15. All of them were completed and
returned making a 100% response rate. For learners, all the 30 questionnaires were also
completed and returned. A total of 10 science teachers were successfully interviewed. The
high response rate was attributed to the cooperation by school heads and heads of science
departments and the science teachers. The other main advantage was that the researcher is the
secretary of the district sciences association who is in constant contact with almost all science
teachers in the district.

4.2 Background of the respondents

Table 4.1: Sample by gender: Teachers
Gender Frequency Percentage
Male 10 66.7%
Female 5 33.3%
Total 15 100%

Demographic information was collected through the questionnaires. The trend as shown in
Table 4.1 indicates that the science subject is male dominated in terms of teachers. The table
reveals that 66.7% of the sample was males and only 33.3% were females. There are more

23
science teachers than female teachers. This can be attributed to a number of factors among
them the nature and demand of the subject.

Table 4.2: Sample by gender: Learners

Gender Frequency Percentage
Male 15 50%
Female 15 50%
Total 30 100%

The table indicates that the sample was balanced comprising of equal number of males and
females. The researcher deliberately selected such a sample to deal with gender bias in the
responses obtained from learners.

Table 4.3 Age ranges of teachers

Age Range Frequency Percentage
20 – 30 3 20%
31 – 40 6 40%
41 – 50 4 26.6%
51+ 2 13.3%
Total 15 100%

The researcher felt that the age of the teacher may have an impact on their approach and
exposition to the teaching of science. The researcher therefore included age ranges in the
questionnaires. The sample data is shown in the pie chart below.

24
 Age ranges

20-30
31-40
41-50
51+

Figure 4.1: Distribution of age ranges of science teachers

The results on the chart reveal that the majority of science teachers in the survey are between
31 – 40 years, representing 40% of the sample. Very few science teachers are above 51years.
It was also observed that 60% of the sample is in the age range (20-40) years which is the
most productive age group which the researcher found to probably have sound and
progressive professional ideas to support the authenticity of the results of this research. It is
important to identify the age groups of respondents because different age groups have
different approaches to work which is generally governed by maturity. Their views regarding
improvisation can then be generalized.

Table 4.1: Academic and professional qualifications of science teachers

Qualification Number Percentage

Ordinary level + Diploma in education 3 20%
Advanced level + Diploma in Education 4 26.6%
Bachelor of Science (BScEd) 3 20%
Other 5 33.3%

Table 4.4 indicates that the majority of science teachers have an educational qualification
rather than general ones. The pattern suggests that most of the teachers are qualified to teach

25
science up to the level in question. By having the qualification these teachers were trained to
use instructional media during lessons and even to improvise. It is critical to know the
academic and professional qualifications of the teachers because the level of education of a
classroom practitioner has a bearing on how they implement the different teaching strategies
and how they solve problems particularly of shortage of instructional materials, hence for the
purpose of this research improvisation. This was found however to be different depending on
the institutions attended by different teachers.

Table 4.2: Teaching Experience

Year Range Number Percentage

1–5 5 33.3%
6 – 10 3 20%
11 – 15 4 26.6%
16+ 3 20%
Total 15 100%

Information in table 4.5 shows that 33.3% of the respondents have experience below 5 years.
This could be attributed to the fact that most recently qualifying teachers are not willing to
join the government or work for a few years and leave. There are 3 teachers (20%) in the
range of 6 to 10 years, 4 in the range 11 to15 years making 26.6% and again 20% with
experience above 16 years. The experience differences again did not show any particular
trend in relation to views on improvisation.

4.3 Teachers’ views on instructional media and improvisation

Their views were collected by way of 9 different questions which will be explained below. In
this section these views were analysed on their own. The views will be analysed in relation to
teachers’ educational qualifications, experience and institutions of training to determine
whether these relationships affect their approach to improvisation.

26
4.3.1 Relevance of instructional media in teaching and learning of science
The question was close ended just requiring teachers to either agree or disagree. All the 15
respondents agreed that instructional media is relevant in teaching and learning of Science.
This is a 100% score indicating that all science teachers in the sample know the importance
of using instructional materials during lessons. This is full agreement with literature for
example by (Mensah, 2015) who suggested that instructional materials are needed in teaching
science since they to enrich learning while lack of these materials in the classroom make
teaching and learning les interactive and more difficult to understand.

4.3.2 Frequency of use of media during lessons.

Figure 4.2 shows frequency of use of media by teachers during lessons.

0
Every lesson Weekly When need arises Never

Figure 4.2: Frequency of use of media by teachers

Information in the bar chart above shows that all teachers use media during lessons though
their frequencies differ. This close ended question suggested the general frequency for
teachers to find where they fit in.

Only 1 teacher out of the 15 in the sample constituting 6.6% said that he uses instructional
media in every lesson. This ability to use of media in every lesson may be attributed to the
nature of the materials this teacher actually uses and how they are used in the lessons. While

27
it is equally important to use media during teaching and learning, it may not b manageable
though to find time to prepare it for every lesson given the load distributions currently in
schools.

Figure 4.2 shows that 5 teachers out of 15, that is, 33.3% indicated that they use media
weekly during lessons. This implies that in every week one of the lessons was reserved for a
practical lesson covering the concepts studied in that particular week. This idea is adopted by
science departments as it is mandatory to have a practical lesson every week according to the
current ZIMSEC science syllabi.

Use of media in such lessons by teachers is therefore easier since the teacher gathers the
instructional materials during the whole week. This practice however is not very effective
given the concepts covered in different lessons. The experiments or demonstrations for
particular concepts need to be done as they are covered in each lesson to make it more
realistic for learners whether the original materials are available or improvised materials are
used.

It is seen in figure 4.2 that 9 of the 15 science teachers in the sample (60%) use media
whenever need arises. This shows that the majority of teachers use instructional materials as
and when they are required to emphasise points during lessons. This approach is the best
since it allows concepts to be explained in a more realistic manner. The teacher who uses this
approach therefore prepares the materials and media for particular lessons in advance prior to
the lesson as well as preparing the proper rooms in cases where there are no laboratories.

Generally the use of media had similar patterns in schools. It was observed that teachers in
one school either all used media weekly or whenever need arises. This tendency was related
as well to school policies on practical approach and availability of working rooms in different
schools.

4.3.3 Availability of enough materials for practical lessons

Researcher asked this question to drive towards link between availability of materials and
how the experiment requiring concepts are approached by teachers. This was followed by

28
other related questions to be analysed afterwards. The question required teachers to say
whether materials for practical lessons are always adequate or not.

All teachers indicated that materials are not always available in schools. This situation may
be a result of lack of resources in most schools. This idea was also cited by (Bhukuvhani et
al., 2010) in their research on the use of laboratory and virtual approach in science. They
stated that while real experimentation with conventional laboratory apparatus and equipment
is desired, schools in Zimbabwe and others in developing countries face challenges of limited
resources particularly financial resources for acquiring these apparatus for imparting effective
and efficient science education. Richardson, (2001) and Yitbarek, (2012) explain that of
cause this problem is widespread but the teacher needs to be resourceful and find locally
available substitutes in order to make the teaching and learning process more realistic and
more beneficial to learners.

4.3.4 Use of improvised instructional materials during teaching and learning

Figure 4.3 below illustrates the use of improvised instructional materials by the science
teachers.

14

12

10

0
yes No

Figure 4.3: Use of improvised instructional media

The chart in figure 4.3 clearly shows that the majority of teachers in the sample use
improvised instructional materials. From the data, 86.6% of them use improvised

29
instructional materials while only 13.4 do not. Of the majority who improvise instructional
materials they said they do so weekly while others said they do so when need arises as
observed above. It demonstrates that even though they improvise, they do not necessarily do
it always. However, to achieve meaningful and long lasting learning in learners the materials
need to be improvised always. The minority that does not improvise has different opinions
concerning improvised materials which will be discussed under teacher interviews section
later in this chapter.

4.3.5 Do teachers have capacity to prepare improvised instructional materials?

Figure 4.4 shows teachers’ capacity to prepare improvised instructional materials

capacity to prepare improvised materials

Figure 4.4: Teachers’ capacity to prepare improvised materials

The pie chart in figure 4.4 shows that 60%, that is 9 out of 15 have the capacity to prepare the
improvised materials for learning. 40% of the teachers indicated that they have no capacity to
prepare improvised instructional materials. These statistics reveal that a sizeable number of
teachers are not confident enough to prepare improvised instructional materials. This can be
attributed to a number of factors like the teacher’s knowledge of the real material, teacher’s
experience with practical work and the teacher’s qualification.

30
It was noted in section 4.2 that some of the teachers who are taking learners for science are
not professionally trained to teach the subject. This is now having a bearing on their
preparation of materials needed for effective classroom practice. If the teachers do not have
the picture or the real apparatus for teaching specific concepts then it becomes very difficult
for him or her to prepare an improvised one.

In section 4.3.4 above there are some respondents who said they use improvised instructional
materials but here it is evident that what they use as improvised materials may be sub
standard or not quite suitable for the concepts. This deduction is being drawn from the fact
that if one does not have capacity to prepare the improvised materials then what exactly do
they use as improvised materials. There is a gap here between teachers’ knowledge of
preparation of improvised materials and the use of the materials during lessons.

The 60% who said they can prepare improvised materials were found to be mostly those with
proper professional qualifications to teach science. The researcher did so by matching the
responses in part A3 of the questionnaire to those in B5 to determine the relationship. These
teachers were found to be more comfortable with using experimental materials on every
concept in the syllabus.

4.3.6 Does improvisation have any benefits in teaching and learning of science?
100% of the respondents agreed that improvisation is beneficial in the teaching of Science.
The hypothesis was that it is beneficial and it concurred with the teachers’ responses. Other
educationists who researched on improvisation also came up with the same conclusion, for
example, (Mberekpe, 2013) carried out a study on improvisation and noted that the use of
teacher produced improvised instructional materials and exposure of students to resources
available in their immediate environment for instruction brings students to real world
activities and help them gain scientific skills. Jacob, (2013) also noted that improvised
materials had a positive influence on students’ learning as it was revealed that it improved
students’ learning.

31
4.3.7 Challenges faced when using improvised instructional materials.
The researcher left this item as an open ended question to tape all the different views of the
respondents without restrictions. Though it was a free response question a number of teachers
came up with relatively similar responses. These were grouped as shown in table 6 below.

Table 4.3: challenges of using improvised instructional materials

Challenge Frequency Percentage

Lack of clarity 7 46.6%
Inaccurate results 5 33.3%
Lack of materials to produce them 3 20%

The table above summarises the challenges mentioned by teachers. It was noted that although
in section B4 of the questionnaire some teachers indicated that they do not use improvised
instructional materials, here all of them had something on the challenges faced when using
improvised instructional materials.
From the table 46.6% of the teachers pointed that improvised materials lack clarity of what
they are actually meant to represent at times. This was attributed to the fact that the learners
make their own constructs from what they know to be the familiar purposes of any piece of
improvised material. This leaves a gap between the real usual function of a particular material
and the purported purpose in the improvised form.

Teachers who noted that some improvised materials lack clarity went on to explain that this
may even lead to misconceptions in learners hence teacher should clearly define the purpose
of each piece of media in the particular lesson to separate it from the usual purpose. This
means more work for the teacher and at times ending up losing the whole purpose of
improvising.

These respondents also explained that if not properly prepared, the improvised materials may
appear totally different from the real ones they are supposed to represent. This can even cause
confusion in learners especially if there is no real material that is being imitated. Such a
scenario becomes hard to manage if the same learner comes across the real piece of
equipment in later stages of learning when the teacher has to first remove the earlier
misconception then build in new information.
32
33.3% of the respondents pointed out that improvised materials usually give inaccurate
results. One of the teachers gave an example of preparation of reagents which require exact
concentrations and procedures. The improvised materials were said to be unfavorable to work
with since they do not give the accurate results for particular experiment which ends up
distorting the whole concept. The teachers argued that there is no precise protocol for
preparation of improvised materials that will lead to almost uniform results that can be
generalized for particular exam purpose.

The preparation of improvised materials largely depends on the teacher and the environment
hence there is no consistency of results from the same activity in different schools or from
different lessons. This was traced to be one of the major reasons why some teachers ended up
not using improvised instructional materials. The general observation here is that teachers are
mainly focusing on the examination not the skill output from the learner.

The third frequent response with 20% frequency was that there is lack of resources for
improvisation. The teachers noted that some materials for improvisation are not available in
the immediate environment so they need to be purchased or collected from say local shops or
industries. One teacher wrote “sometimes I do not get enough materials to start with”. This
teacher was referring to materials to use as improvised ones.

Now some schools were said not have the financial resources to purchase the substitutes for
improvisation. This trend was noted to be affecting individual schools differently. Some
schools have this problem due to their locations which are far from business centers where
for example learners can be asked to pick up bottle tops or discarded plastic containers. It was
also revealed that schools prefer buying the real learning materials rather than improvised
ones though it usually takes ages to purchase them. The general trend was that teachers do
not really feel they are the ones to take the leading role on improvisation. They rather thought
it was duty of school to find the materials.

4.3.8 Drawbacks of using improvised instructional materials

Most responses to this question were similar to the one in B7 though the researcher thought
these are different things. However, a few respondents gave some related ideas. Improvised

33
materials do not work in the same way as the teal ones no matter how good they are. Another
respondent again pointed out that performance of improvised materials does not match
original ones. The teacher actually pointed that you still have to improvise when using it.
Some said that the improvised materials affect different learners differently depending on
their backgrounds.

A striking drawback mentioned by one teacher was that some learners may actually pick
wrong concepts from the improvised materials. One respondent mentioned that improvised
materials may not give the intended results. If an improvised material gives false or negative
results, it will be difficult for the teacher to convince the learners until they come across the
standard media. It was also noted that improvised materials are time consuming (to prepare).

The responses given by teachers reveal that though they may need to improvise, there are
undesirable drawbacks encountered during the process such that most teachers end up not
using improvised materials during teaching and learning of science.

4.3.9 General suggestions and comments concerning use of improvised media

This open ended question allowed teachers to express their own feelings concerning
improvisation. The researcher used this to try and match what the respondents were saying
with their general input. It was noted that the majority supported the idea of improvisation as
a way of enhancing the teaching and learning process. The respondents noted that improvise
materials are important since they make the learning process easier. One teacher exclaimed
that “use of improvised instructional media is better than none”.

Other teachers said that the improvised media should only be used with at least one standard
material alongside so that learners will have the idea of the real item they are supposed to be
using. The improvised ones may be used for group work while the overall demonstration is
done using the standardized material. Another teacher added that in case the real material is
not available at the present moment, it is better to show it to the learners even at a later stage
when it becomes available.

34
Some teachers had no comments on improvised materials. This supports their view that
improvisation is not quite important in their teaching and learning process, hence no need to
use it.

4.4 Teacher interviews

Interviews with teachers soon after administration of questionnaires yielded quite interesting
opinions. The questions were sorted in a way that tried to check the relationship between
institution of training, qualification and teaching experience and views on improvisation. The
questions also related school policy to effect on improvisation.

4.4.1 Qualification, experience and improvisation

It was noted that there are teachers without the proper teaching qualification. Most of these
indicated that of cause they did some practical work during training but the practicals are a bit
different at times irrelevant to the ones they are supposes to teach in schools. They said that
the practicals they did are not sufficient to give them confidence to engage in practical
activities required at the level of the learners. This disparity directly impacts on their use of
improvised instructional materials since they will be supposed to improvise something they
were not trained to do at a standard level.

However, it was pleasing to note that some of these teachers could improvise some materials
for specific concepts basing on the practicals they did while still at school some years back.
On the other hand, there is a number of teachers (66.7%) of the sample have the basic
professional qualification for teaching science. These were obtained from various teachers’
colleges and universities. Among these it was observed that the practicals they did during
training were quite relevant to the teaching of science from ZJC up to Advanced level.

It was noted that those with the basic diploma in education were comfortable with the daily
activities needed to explain concepts at ZJC level. Furthermore improvising in the absence of
standard materials was said to be easy. The teachers explained that the practical work they
covered was spread to cover most basic scientific concepts for ZJC learners, making it easy
for them to quickly apply the improvisation strategy when the standard materials are not
available.

35
The teachers in the sample had varied teaching experiences. There was no real relationship
observed between teaching experience and views on improvisation. Teachers in all the
experience ranges had mixing ideas on improvisation.

4.4.2 School policies, availability of laboratories and materials and improvisation

Table 4.4: Availability of standard science laboratories

Standard Science Laboratory Number Percentage

Available 3 60%
Not available 2 40%

Table 7 above shows that 60% of schools in the survey have standard science laboratories
while 40% does not have the laboratories. This is a great cause for concern since teachers will
fail to carry out experiments with learners citing unavailability of the working rooms.
Yitbarek, (2012) opined that use of a laboratory is prerequisite in science education as
science is experimental, observational and laboratory oriented. He argued that the essence of
science is an involvement and understanding of the process of science.
The teachers in these schools pointed out that they may try to improvise and do practical
activities in the classes but it is difficult to control since the classes are congested and the
learning tables are too small to accommodate all the materials at times. This absence of
laboratories was found to be negatively impacting on improvisation since the teachers would
just resort to the chalk and talk method in most of the lessons.

It was observed that materials for teaching observations, solubility of materials and forces are
not always available in all the schools. The interview went on to ask how these topics where
being taught in the absence of some or all of the materials. Teachers had different answers to
this one. Some teachers said they only describe and explain n the practical procedure and
results. The group of these who said they use chalk and talk comprised of 86% of the
respondents. Some of them said that they use diagrammatic illustrations on chalk board while
other said they simply use theoretical explanations on practicals. This method leaves the
concepts too abstract for learners.

36
This question served a purpose of finding out whether teachers are improvising. The few
chosen topics in the interview are covered in form 1 and form 2. The teachers’ responses
showed that they rarely improvise, since these topics can be covered using locally available
materials. For instance, things like bricks, polished surfaces and hard surfaces foe
representing forces and friction. Under observations teachers can use learners’ 30cm rules to
measure lengths of tables and desks, lengths of books and many other available items
recording their lengths. Common granulated sugar, coarse salt and fine salt can be used as
improvised substitutes for copper sulphate and other chemicals in teaching concept of
solubility of substances at form 1 level.

Only one teacher (6.6%) of the sample said that he improvised on covering these particular
topics explaining how he uses common salt and sugar for solutions as well as bricks for
forces. The reality of what is transpiring can be generalized from the findings from these few
topics. Teachers are mainly using the chalk and talk method coupled with diagrams which are
both very abstract methods. These leave a wide gap between the real piece in the concept and
learners’ constructs. In the end these learners do not benefit much from the learning process
especially in terms of scientific skills.

Under school policies the researcher noted that only one school (20% of the sample) had a
timetable arranged in such a way that science lessons are conducted in laboratories. The
school which had this set up has laboratories specified for the different levels of learners.
This scenario provides a conducive environment for a practical approach to science as well as
improvisation ii times of need. It was sad to note that 4 schools (80%) did not have a standing
policy regarding science lessons and use of laboratories. In one of the schools one teacher
said that they could not come up with a policy since there is only one laboratory to cater for
all the 16 classes in the school.

In one of the schools the teachers revealed that they make arrangements with each other to
take turns to use the laboratory. One who would be running a practical lesson would be
allowed to use the laboratory while others conducted their lessons in classes. This system
though it is a good stop gap does not allow enough exposure of learners to practicals. In such

37
cases improvisation by teachers was found to be also limited since they would be doing more
of oral lessons in ordinary classrooms

4.5 Learners’ views on improvised instructional media

4.5.1 Frequency of doing practicals in science

16

14

12

10

0
In every lesson Once a week Rarely Never

Figure 4.5: Frequency of doing practicals

Information in figure 4.5 reveals that 6 out of 30 learners (20%) do practicals in every lesson.
The small percentage generally tells that in the observed schools practical activities are not
done in every lesson. However it is not possible to have practicals in every lesson given that
there should be others for exercises and revision tests. Probably some of the learner who
indicated that they do a practical in every lesson may not have understood the question.

7 out of 30 learners in the sample (23.3%) said they do practicals once a week. Again this is a
low frequency that shows that most lessons are done without practicals.

The majority of learners 50% noted that they rarely do practicals. This can be arguably true
and quite valid given that the school policies and availability of materials discussed above do
not really support practical work. It is lamentable that most of the learners are being taught
without any hands on experience with the real materials to explain the concepts. This

38
approach denies the learner a chance to explore the science world let alone a chance to
develop improvisation skills that should be obtained from these scientific experiences.

Only 2 out of 30 learners (6.7%) indicated that they never do practicals in science. They may
be students from schools that do not have laboratories at all or do not have materials for
practicals. This shows that the teachers in their schools are not improvising to at least allow
learners a chance for a single experiment.

4.5.2 Types of materials used in practicals

Table 4.5: Types of materials used during lessons

Type of material Number Percentage

Original(bought) 19 63.3%
Improvised 6 20%
Both are used 5 16.6%

The table shows that the majority of teachers use original materials when doing practicals
with their learners. From earlier discussions, most schools do not have most of these
materials. What it implies here is that most of the teachers (63.3%) do practicals when the
original materials for a particular practical are available. Only 6 out of 30 that is (20%) use
improvised materials during practicals. This small proportion goes a long to reveal that a lot
of teachers are not using improvisation technique. An almost equivalent number of learners
(16.6%) indicated that their teachers use both improvised and original materials for practicals.
This number is assumed to be part of those who were mentioned in the 20% portion above
who use improvised materials. The total number of teachers indicated to be using improvised
materials is very small.

4.5.3 Learners’ view on impact of improvised materials compared to original ones

Table 4.6: Learners’ views on impact of improvised materials

View Number Percentage

I learn more 12 40%
Little is gained 13 43.3%
There is no difference 5 16.7%

39
Table 4.9 shows that 40% of the learners who have experienced using improvised materials
feel that they learn more when these materials are used. An almost equal number (43.3%) on
the contrary feel that little is gained when they learn using improvised media. These learners
prefer use of original materials which they felt helped them tom grasp more concepts
compared to improvised ones. A small number (16.7%) were of the feeling that there is no
difference between use of original materials or using improvised materials. This question was
asked just to measure how much the learners were exposed to improvised materials. The high
number of responses mentioning that they learn more and also that very little is learnt did not
provide any useful clue as to whether their teachers are improvising or not.

4.5.4 Learners’ views on benefits of using improvised materials.

Table 4.10 below shows learners’ perceptions on benefits of using improvised instructional
materials for practical activities.
Table 4.7 Learners’ views on benefits of use of improvised materials

Benefit Number Percentage

Promotes effective learning 7 23.4%
Increase learner’s creativity 10 33.3%
Encourages teamwork 13 43.3%

The information above indicates that 23.4% of learners believe that improvised materials
promote effective learning. This is true as also observed by (Onasanya & Omosewo, 2011)
that these learning materials are effective in promoting learning adding that teachers should
use improvised materials as long they are relevant to their lesson content. 33.3% of the
learners noted that improvised materials increased their creativity. This concurs with the
notion by many educationists including (Olibie et al., 2013) and (Iji et al., 2014) that as the
learners interact with the learning materials or are involved in the preparation of the
improvised materials, their creative skills also improve. There was 43.3% of the sample who
suggested that improvised materials encourage teamwork. This observation is mainly
attributed to the fact that usually improvised materials are found in enough quantities for
group work by so doing learners will be used to using these materials in groups working as
teams collaborating to come up with the required results.

40
On independent comments most students had no comments. Possibly most learners just
answered the questionnaire without fully understanding what improvisation is all about. This
was noted in the distribution of their responses which in most cases did not bring out any
meaningful patterns. Only about 15% of the learners noted that it helps improve creativity or
encourage team work. Close inspection showed that these responses were just copied from
question 4 of their questionnaire not necessarily from their knowledge of improvisation.

4.6 Summary
This chapter focused on data presentation, analysis and interpretation. The data was collected
using teacher and pupil questionnaires as well as teacher interviews. Information from
interviews was used to supplement questionnaires as well as draw relationships between
certain variables and produce reasonable interpretations. Some information from literature by
earlier researchers was also used to support findings obtained. Information was analysed
using figures, tables, charts and percentages. The majority of teachers claimed that they use
improvisation technique. However, on analysis using different relationships and interviews
the researcher observed that there was a gap between their claim and what happens in real
classroom practice. Learners indicated that they prefer learning with improvised materials
rather than without practicals at all.

The next chapter looked at the summary of these findings and highlight conclusions and
recommendations from this study.

41
 CHAPTER 5:

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction
In this chapter the researcher gives a brief summary of how the whole dissertation was
structured, highlights of major findings of the study as well as the constraints experienced by
the researcher during the process. The researcher draws conclusions from data and facts
gathered in chapter four while making an effort to compare the research findings with the
theoretical background by various authors as in chapter two. The conclusions will also
include the researcher’s personal view point concerning the use of improvised media by
teachers in science at the present moment. Recommendations will also be given according to
the findings from data analysis and presentation in chapter four.

5.2 Summary of findings

The research sought to find out whether teachers are using improvised instructional media
during teaching and learning of science when the standardized materials are not available or
are inadequate. This came against the background that most schools cannot purchase
sufficient learning materials required in the study of science as a result of inadequate funds
and resources yet science being a practical based subject in which learners need to be
exposed to many practical activities to develop the scientific skills. The development of the
scientific skill using a practical approach is advocated as well by the current national Science
syllabus.

To collect the data from the respondents, a survey research design was used. A sample of five
schools in the district was used. Data was collected from all teachers offering science in the
selected schools making a total of fifteen teachers. Learners were randomly selected from
these schools making a total of 30 learners. Questionnaires and interviews were used to
collect data from respondents. All the questionnaires were completed and returned. The
results obtained were generalized on the basis of this sample. The research questions in
questionnaires were designed so that teachers and learners were able to air their views on
improvised instructional media in teaching science. The questionnaire method was effective

42
because it could be completed in the absence of the researcher allowing the respondent
enough time to consult his or her records where necessary.

Learner questionnaires were completed on the same day in the presence of teachers to avoid
inconveniences like non returned or spoiled questionnaires. This was done with the help of
teachers at the school at the same time making sure that their presence does not affect
learners’ responses. This was ensured by not allowing the teachers to handle the
questionnaires but just to maintain order. Although all questionnaires were returned, the
researcher faced problems of transport to travel to and from some schools. Financial
resources were also a major constraint in the research process. The production of hard copies
of questionnaires was costly. That is why the researcher ended up sampling only five schools
and thirty learners.

Teacher interviews were successful since they were interviewed in turns after completing the
questionnaires. In some instances the responses were recorded by cell phone for analysis
afterwards. The researcher agreed with the respondents prior to the recordings that these
would be deleted as soon as analysis was made. There were few problems when some
teachers did not have sufficient time to respond to interview questions. In such cases the
researcher would have a quick interview with the teacher on a few selected questions.
Interviews were quite helpful in the study though, since they allowed respondents to bring out
their views freely as compared to responding to close ender questions in questionnaires.

The information gathered was complied and analysed using tables, charts and percentages.
The analysis provided the following general findings:
 The sample comprised of 66.7% male teachers and 33.3% female teachers. Learners
were selected equally that is 50% boys and 50% girls.
 Most teachers (40%) were in the age range 31-40 years, 26% age range of 41-50years
and 20% in the range 20-30 years.
 Majority of the teachers had a professional teaching qualification, that is 20% with
Ordinary level and a Diploma in science education, 26.7% Advanced level and a
Diploma in education and 20% holding a Bachelor of Education making a total of
66.7%. Only 33.3% do not have a professional teaching qualification. These have
general degrees or masters not quite relevant to the teaching field.

43
  All schools do not always have enough materials for practicals.
 86.6% of the teachers said that they use improvised materials during lessons

5.2.1 Objective 1: To find out teachers’ perceptions on use of improvised instructional

materials
The findings indicated that most teachers do not use improvised instructional materials during
lessons. The greatest percentage of teachers (46%) felt that improvised instructional media
has problems ranging from leading to misconceptions and not being able to really give a true
picture of the original piece of material. About 33% were of the view that improvised
materials may give inaccurate or wrong results or even fail to give results at all. Suggestions
from teachers included that improvised materials be used together with the standard materials
wherever possible for them to be more useful and to minimise misconceptions. 100% of the
teachers admitted that improvisation is beneficial in the teaching and learning process.

5.2.2 Objective 2: To find out views of learners on use of improvised instructional

materials
Learners were of the opinion that improvised materials enhance their learning and encourage
team work as well as improve their scientific skills. Learners put forward the idea that it is
better to be taught using improvised materials than to use a wholly theoretical approach.

5.2.3 Objective 3: To determine how often teachers use improvised instructional

materials
Most of the teachers indicated that they use media during lessons when need arises. Only a
small percentage uses media weekly. No teacher indicated that they do not use media during
lessons.

5.2.4 Objective 4: To find out if teachers have the necessary skills needed to construct
improvised instructional materials
The research revealed that most of the teachers have the capacity to prepare improvised
materials while a few do not have the capacity to prepare improvised materials.

44
5.2.5 Objective 5: To find out if school policies support the purchase and use of
instructional materials
Most school systems endeavor to purchase instructional materials but cannot afford to
purchase them in adequate quantities required for effective learning. Internal policies are set
up in some schools to make do with inadequate resources. For example, some departmental
policies made sure that every class has a slot for using the laboratory at least once a week.

5.2.6 Objective 6: To determine whether improvised instructional materials have the

same effect as standardised materials
Improvised materials do not have the same effect as standard ones though they go a long way
in reducing the gap between learner imagination and the real materials.

5.3 Conclusions
From the research it is evident that improvisation is a very useful technique in teaching and
learning of science from the view point of both teachers and learners. The following
conclusions were drawn from the research findings.

Though most teachers indicated in writing that they are using improved instructional media, it
has been observed on the contrary that very few are improvising. The majority of teachers are
depending on teacher exposition method in which the chalk and talk method is dominant.
Most schools do not prioritise materials needed for practical work in science and some do not
even have the laboratories for carrying out experiments.

On the other hand teachers are not capacitated to prepare improvised materials or are not
willing to search for the locally available materials for improvisation. They think it is the duty
of the school to purchase these items. It can also be concluded that most teachers are not
comfortable to use improvised media. They would rather do practicals on concepts for which
standardized materials are available only. This was attributed to their lack of exposure to
improvisation techniques when they were trained in different tertiary institutions.

45
Learners enjoy doing practical activities during lessons as these increase their interaction and
enhance understanding of scientific concepts.

5.4 Recommendations
The following recommendations were made from the research findings:-
 Science teachers should always try to use improvised materials whenever standard
ones are not available in order to enhance the teaching and learning process
 Staff development workshops and refresher courses should be organised to keep
teachers updated with modern ways of approaching lessons and problem solving in
line with science teaching
 School administration should put in place policies that encourage purchase of
improvising materials which are relatively cheap if they cannot buy standard materials
 The time table committee should try to put in place a time table that ensures that every
class has a chance to have at least one science lesson in the laboratory per week.
 Learners need to be involved in searching for and preparing improvised instructional
materials to also inculcate in them resourcefulness and improve their improvising
abilities.
 If teachers without a basic teaching qualification are enrolled into the system, they
should be staff developed by other members of staff or at cluster or district level on
some teaching techniques in order to improve their efficiency in the system.
In line with the above conclusions and recommendations the researcher opines that routine
workshops be organized at cluster, district or provincial levels to equip teachers with the
necessary improvising skills. this will go a long way in alleviating the problem of shortage of
resources faced by the majority of schools in Zimbabwe and many other developing
countries.

46
REFERENCES
Adu, F. O., & Adu, E. I. M. (2014). Improvisation as A tool for Improving the Teachers
Knowledge In Basic Technology, 4(1), 14–18.
Bhukuvhani, C., Kusure, L., Munodawafa, V., Sana, A., & Gwizangwe, I. (2010). Pre-service
Teachers ’ use of improvised and virtual laboratory experimentation in Science teaching,
6(4), 27–38.
Bhukuvhani, C., Mupa, M., Mhishi, M., & Dziva, D. (2012). Science practical work
instructional technologies and open distance learning in science teacher training : A case
study in Zimbabwe. International Journal of Education and Development Using
Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT), 8(2), 17–27.
Bizimana, B., & Orodho, J. A. (2014). Teaching and Learning Resource Availability and
Teachers ’ Effective Classroom Management and Content Delivery in Secondary
Schools in Huye District , Rwanda, 5(9), 111–122.
Godding, P., Dave, S., Patterson, R., & Perry, E. (2013). Secondary Schools Kits Project
Instructional and Training Manual for Science Teachers.
Iji, O. C., Ogbole, O. P., & Uka, K. N. (2014). Effect of improvised instructional materials on
students’ achievement in Geometry at the Upper Basic Education Level in Makurdi
Metropolis, Benue State, Nigeria, 9(15), 504–509.
https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2014.1778
Jacob, K. (2013). Instructional Materials and Improvisation in Physics Class : Implications
for Teaching and Learning, 2(5), 38–42.
Kira, E., & Nchunga, A. (2016). Improvisation in teaching physics concepts : Teachers ’
experiences and perceptions. International Journal of Research Studies in Educational
Technology, 5(1), 49–61.
Maruff, A., Amos, O., & Gbolagade, R. (2011). Instructional Materials and Students ’
Academic Achievement in Physics : Some Policy Implications Instructional Materials
and Students ’ Academic Achievement in Physics : Some Policy Implications, 112–126.
Mberekpe, A. C. (2013). Effect of students improvised instructional materials on senior
secondary school students’ achievement in Biology. University of Nigeria.
Mensah, D. (2015). Using Improvised Instructional Materials to Teach Chemical Methods.
Olibie, E. I., State, A., Nwabunwanne, C., State, A., Ezenwanne, D. N., & State, A. (2013).
Teachers ’ Improvisation of Instructional Materials for Nigerian Home Economics
Curriculum Delivery :, 4(December). https://doi.org/10.4018/ijavet.2013100105
Onasanya, S. A., & Omosewo, E. O. (2011). Effect of Improvised and Standard Instructional
47
 Materials on Secondary School Students’ Academic performance in Physics in Ilorin,
Nigeria. Singapore Journal of Scientific Research, 1(1), 68–76.
Orji, A. B. (2000). Comparability of two problem solving models in facilitating students’
learning outcomes in Physics. Journal of Science Teachers of Nigeria.
Reyes, jocelyn. M. (2010). Improvised equipment for improving Physics teaching.
Richardson, V. (2001). Handbook of research on teaching. New York: Macmillan.
Share, F. (2012, July 5). The Herald. Beam Collapses, p. 1. Harare.
Utibe-Abasi, S. S. (2015). Problems of improvising instructional materaials for the teaching
and learning of Physics in Akwa Ibom State secondary schools, Nigeria. British Journal
of Education, 3(3), 27–34.
Utibe-Abasi, S. S. (2017). Identifying content knowledge for teaching energy : Examples
from high school physics, 10105, 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010105
Yitbarek, S. (2012). Low-cost apparatus from locally available materials for teaching-
learning science, 2(January), 32–47.

48
APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Questionnaire for teachers

INTRODUCTION
My name is Solomon Kufa, a student of Bindura University of Science Education (BUSE)
studying for a Bachelor of Science Education Honors Degree in Physics. I am carrying out a
research on whether teachers are using improvised instructional materials in science teaching
in absence of conventional instructional media. This is part of my studies to fulfill the
requirements to the award of the degree. The results from the questionnaire will be treated
with as much confidentiality as possible and no name shall be written on it. Furthermore, the
findings obtained will be used for this study and beneficial educational purpose only and they
will not be used for any publication.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
1. The questionnaire should be answered by Science Teachers in Zimbabwe.
2. Please attempt all questions by placing a tick in the appropriate box of filling in the given
spaces.
3. Do not write your name on the questionnaire.

PART A : DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

A1 Gender Male [ ] Female [ ]

A2 Age group 20 – 30 [ ] 31 – 40 [ ]
41 – 50 [ ] 51+ [ ]

A3 Academic and Professional Qualifications

Ordinary Level + Diploma in Education
Advanced Level + Diploma in Education
Bachelor of Science Education (BSc)
Others (specify)

A4 Teaching Experience

49
 1 – 4 years [ ] 5 – 10 years [ ]
10 – 15 years [ ] 16+ years [ ]

PART B : TEACHERS’ VIEWS ON INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA

B1 Do you think instructional media is relevant in teaching and learning of Science?

Yes [ ] No [ ]
B2 How often do you use media during lessons?
Every lesson [ ] Weekly [ ]
When need arise [ ] Never [ ]
B3 Does your school always have enough materials for practical lessons?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

B4 Do you have the capacity to prepare improvised instructional media in case of shortage or
unavailability of the conventional materials?
Yes [ ] No [ ]

B5 Do you use improvised instructional materials in teaching and learning process?

Yes [ ] No [ ]
B6 Do you find improvisation beneficial in teaching of Science at Secondary School Level?
Yes [ ] No [ ]
B7 which challenges do you face in trying to use improvised instructional media?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B7 What do you feel is a drawback of using improvised instructional media?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

50
B8 Can you record any other suggestions or comments concerning the use of improvised
instructional media in Science teaching?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your participation in this research.

51
Appendix 2: Interview questions for teachers
1. At which institution were you trained?
2. Did you do practicals during training?
3. Were these sufficient to equip you to teach your learners confidently in terms of
practical work?
4. How long have you been teaching Science?
5. How often do you use media during lessons?
6. Which challenges do you encounter in the use of media during teaching?
7. Do you have enough laboratories in the school?
8. Is your school time table set in a way that all Science lessons are carried out in
laboratories?
9. Do you have all the materials for teaching the following topics in the laboratory:
Observations (measuring and recording)
Solubility of materials
Forces?
10. If the answer to question 9 is no, then how did you teach these topics the last time you
taught them?
Thank you for sparing your time to answer the questions

52
Appendix 3: Questionnaire for learners

This is a questionnaire for you as a Science student intended to get your views on the use of

improvised instructional media during learning at this school. All your responses will be

treated confidentially and will only be used for the purpose of this research.

Improvised instructional media are those things used by teachers during lessons to explain

concepts or demonstrate or even for doing experiments when there are no standardized

materials.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. The questionnaire should be answered by any learner studying Science.

2. Please answer all questions.

3. Tick the appropriate box where applicable.

4. Do not write your name on the questionnaire.

PART A DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

A1 Gender Male [ ] Female [ ]

A2 Level O Level [ ] ZJC Level [ ]

PART B LEARNERS’ VIEWS ON IMPROVISED INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA

1. How often do you do practicals in Science?

In every lesson [ ] Once a week [ ]

Rarely [ ] Never [ ]

2. When you do some practicals what type of materials do you usually use?

Original (bought) material [ ] Improvised [ ]

Both are used for different practicals [ ]

53
 3. Do you feel you can learn more by using improvised materials compared to original

materials?

I learn more [ ] Little is gained [ ]

There is no difference [ ]

4. What do you feel is the biggest benefit of using improvised learning materials?

Promotes active learning [ ]

Increase learner’s creativity [ ]

Encourages team work [ ]

5. Do you have any suggestions and or comments on the use of improvised learning

materials?

Thank you for your participation in this research project

54