Content uploaded by Ataur Rahman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ataur Rahman on Sep 17, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Effect of Concept Mapping Strategy on Students’
Achievement in Science at Secondary Level
Talat Aziz1 & Ataur Rahman2
1Professor, IASE, Faculty of Education, Jamia Millia
Islamia, New Delhi
2T.G.T (Science), Jamia Sr. Sec. School, Jamia Millia
Islamia, New Delhi
Abstract
The efforts in assisting the learner to learn have led
to the development of metacognitive strategies to
enhance meaningful learning. Concept mapping- a
kind of metacognitive strategy- assists learners to
organize their cognitive frameworks into more
powerful integrated patterns. This study sought to
find out if the metacognitive strategy of concept
mapping enhanced achievement in science at
secondary level. A total of 120 students of class IX
from two senior secondary schools of Delhi
participated in this experimental study. The study
was of quasi-experimental in nature where in pre
and posttest design was used to determine the effect
of concept mapping strategy on students’
achievement in science. Concept maps in the
selected units of science were developed and
science achievement test was prepared. Mean,
standard deviation and t- test were used to analyze
the data. Results of the study showed that the use of
concept mapping strategy was more effective than
the lecture cum discussion method in enhancing
students’ achievement in science.
Keywords: Science achievement, concept maps,
concept mapping strategy
Introduction
The desire to improve science achievement through more
effective instructional strategies and increasing awareness
in recent years of the importance of learner- centeredness in
the teaching learning situation has directed a lot of attention
to understand how learners learn and how to help them
learn concepts.
Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and
understanding of the natural and social world following a
systematic methodology based on evidence (Science
Council, 2009). Concept mapping has been suggested to be
an effective learning tool through both the process of map
construction (Fraser & Edwards, 1985; Jegede, Alaiyemola
& Okebukola, 1990; Mason, 1992; Pankratius, 1990;
Schmid & Tellaro, 1990) and the product, that is, the
completed map (Malone & Dekkers, 1984; Roth &
Rodchoudhury, 1993; Willerman & Mac Harg, 1991).
Concept Map as a Learning Tool in Science Education
Concept mapping has been used at all levels of learning and
instruction in many contexts. The use of concept maps is
becoming more widespread in areas of science education.
In science education, concept mapping has been widely
recommended and used in a variety of ways. It has been
used to help pupils build and organize their knowledge base
in a given discipline or on a given topic.
Concept mapping has not only been found useful in
promoting pupils’ understanding of science concepts, it
also facilitates pupils’ abilities to solve problems
(Zimmerman et. al, 2011) and to answer questions that
require application and synthesis of concepts (Vanides
et.al, 2005). It has been used to observe change in pupils’
understanding of concepts over time.
Various studies have shown that pupils bring varying
degree of quality and quality to learning tasks (Novak,
1987). Concept mapping has helped pupils elaborate the
conceptual understanding theory they already possess, and
especially to recognize and modify those knowledge
structures that contains misconceptions, alternative
conceptions or framework (Feldsine, 1983; Novak &
Gowin, 1984).
Pankratius (1990) in his study found concept mapping a
key to organize an effective knowledge base. The study
revealed that those students who used concept mapping
prior to, during and subsequent to instruction led to greater
achievement than groups that received standard instruction.
Thus the acquisition of powerful super ordinate concepts
should be a primary goal of effective science teaching.
Therefore, the issue of the possible use of concept mapping
strategy in enhancing achievement in science at secondary
level was addressed in the present study.
Objectives of the Study
1. To develop instructional material based on concept
mapping strategy, in the selected few units of science
for students studying in class IX.
2. To study the effect of concept mapping on students’
achievement in science.
Hypotheses
There is no significant difference between the achievement
in science of students taught through the concept mapping
strategy and the students taught through commonly used
lecture cum discussion method.
Method
Sample
Purposive sampling technique was used for the present
investigation. Jamia Senior Secondary School, Jamia Millia
Islamia, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi and Delhi Govt.
Sarvodaya Vidyalaya, Batla House, Jamia Nagar, were
selected for this purpose. Two sections of class IX of both
the schools were taken. They were divided into one
experimental and one control group having 30 students in
each group. Thus, the experimental group finally comprised
60 students (30 students from Jamia Sr. Sec. School and 30
students from Sarvodaya Vidyalaya). Similarly, the control
group comprised 60 students (30 students from Jamia Sr.
Sec. School and 30 students from Sarvodaya Vidyalaya).
Instrumentation
There are number of concept maps available in science but
the investigator felt the need to develop new concept maps
for the purpose of teaching some chemistry and physics
related concepts i.e. ‘Atoms & Molecules’ and ‘Forces and
Laws of motion’ respectively for students of class IX.
Group Test of General Mental Ability (GTGMA)
developed by S.Jalota (1972) was used to measure general
mental ability of students selected for the present sample.
Test of Achievement in Science (TAS)was developed by
the investigator himself to measure the achievement in
science at secondary level.
Design and procedure
In the present study, the control group was taught through
lecture cum discussion method of teaching and
experimental group was taught through concept mapping
method. Both the groups were taught by researcher himself.
The various concepts of science like “Motion” “Force”,
Atom, and “Molecules” and Mole were identified for the
experiment. Nineteen sub concepts in relation to above
concept were identified for the purpose.
The next step was the preparation of lesson plans in the
form of concept maps. Lesson planning guide for drawing a
concept map as suggested by J.D. Novak was followed.
The treatment was of four weeks duration for both the
groups in both schools. Similar schedule was followed for
both the groups. This was done to avoid carry over effects
of one teaching strategy into other. The time was of one
period (45 minutes) duration only so that schedule of the
school was not disturbed. The instructional treatment was
given during session 2011- 2012 of class IX.
Data Analysis and Findings
I Formation of Equivalent Groups
The two groups were tested for equivalence on the basis of
intelligence, scores of previous knowledge and pre science
achievement scores. t- test was carried out on the pre test
data for intelligence and science achievement as shown in
table I & II respectively.
Table I: Comparison of Control and Experimental
Group on I.Q
Table-I shows the obtained value of “t” is 0.65 for Degree
of freedom (df) 59. The obtained value of “t” has not been
found to be significant at both levels. This led to the
conclusion that the two groups were equivalent in terms of
intelligence level.
TABLE II: Comparison of Control and
Experimental group on pre- achievement test in Science
for class IX Students
The table-II shows that, obtained value of “t” on pre
achievement test scores in science was 0.24 for
Group N Mean S.D df
Obtained
value of
“t”
Tabulatd
value of
“t” at
0.05 level
Tabulated
value of “t”
at 0.01 level
Control
Group (C)
Experimenta
l Group (E)
60
60
47.43
46.32
9.21
9.76
59
0.65 2.0 2.66
Group N Mean S.D df
Obtaine
d value
of “t”
Tabulate
d value
of “t” at
0.05 level
Tabulate
d value
of “t” at
0.01 level
Control
Group (C)
Experimen
tal Group (
E)
60
60
9.82
10.02
4.75
4.37
59 0.24 2.0 2.66
corresponding degree of freedom (59). The obtained value
of “t” did not attain significance at both levels. Thus it was
inferred that the two groups were equivalent in terms of
previous knowledge of science.
II Comparison of the Two Groups on Overall
Achievement in Science
The effectiveness of concept mapping as an instructional
tool was explored with respect to mean difference of
performance on post achievement test in science of both the
groups. The significance of difference between means was
tested by using t-test as shown in table III.
TABLE III: Comparison of Control and Experimental
group on science achievement posttest scores
In table -III the value of “t” is 7.50 which was found to be
significant at both 0.05 and 0.01 levels for the degree of
freedom 59. The experimental group that was exposed to
concept mapping method, performed significantly better
than the control group on the dependent variable i.e.
achievement in science. Thus, it can be concluded that
concept mapping strategy enhanced students’ learning in
Group N Mean S.D df
Obtai
ned
value
of “t”
Tabulated
value of
“t” at 0.05
level
Tabulated
value of
“t” at 0.01
level
Control
Group (C)
Experiment
al Group (
E)
60
60
11.60
18.43
4.89
5.09
59 7.50 2.0 2.66
science more effectively than the traditional lecture cum
discussion method.
Discussion of Results
The study set out to investigate if the metacognitive
strategy of concept mapping increases the students’
achievement towards learning science.
The difference between means (Table III) of control group
and experimental group was found to be significant. The
hypothesis was not supported by the findings of this study.
Hence, the above hypothesis was rejected. Thus it can be
inferred that teaching through concept mapping is more
effective than lecture cum discussion method of teaching in
increasing student’s achievement in science.
The findings are supported by several other studies. Horton,
McConney, Galio, Wood, Senn, and Hathelin (1993)
carried out a meta-analysis of studies that employed
concept mapping as an instructional strategy. Results of the
study revealed that concept mapping had positive effects on
students' overall achievement.
A study by Spaulding (1989) addressed the effects of
concept mapping versus ‘concept defining’ on learning
achievement in biology and chemistry. The statistical
interactions indicated that lower ability (as defined by the
CTBS) students performed better with concept mapping,
and higher ability students performed better when just
defining the concepts. The results highlight the importance
of teaching through concept mapping as an instructional
strategy for especially lower ability students. It helps to
speculate that concept mapping helps low ability students
because it requires them to take an organized and
deliberative approach to learning, which higher ability
students do anyway.
According to Ausubel (1963), meaningful learning is
promoted by the understanding of hierarchical relationship
and linkages between concepts. This is the main goal of
concept mapping strategy, in which students are taught to
identify the network of relationships between concepts
rather than rote learning.
References
1. Ausubel, D.P. (1962).A subsumption theory of
meaningful verbal learning and retention. The
Journal of General Psychology, 66,213- 244.
2. Bello Ganiyu, (1997). Gender influence on biology
students concept-mapping ability and achievement
in evolution, Journal of Science Teaching and
Learning, 3 (1&2), pp. 8-17, 1997.
3. Hartman H. J. (2001). Metacognition in science
teaching and learning. Metacognition in learning
and instruction. Kluwer academic Publisher,
Netherlands. 173-201.
4. Hurton, B. P., McConney, A. A., Gallio, M., Wood,
L.A.Senn,J.G.,
&
Hathelin,D(1993).An investigation
of the effectiveness of concept mapping as an
instructional tool. Science Education. 77(1), 95-111.
5. Iuli R. J. and Helden G. (2004). Using concept
maps as a research tool in science education
research. Proc. Of the first international conference
on concept mapping. Pamplona, Spain.
6. Ivie, Stanley D. (1998). Ausubel's learning theory:
An approach to teaching higher order thinking
skills. High School Journal, 82(1),35-42.
7. Jegede OJ, Inyang Nsendu (1990). Gender
difference and achievement in integrated science
among junior secondary school students: A Nigerian
Study. Intl. Rev. Educ. 36(3), 364-368.
8. Joyce, B., and Weil M., (1996) Models of teaching,
New Delhi Prentice hall of India Pvt Ltd.3536.
9. Koballa, T. R., and F. E. Crawley. 1985. The
influence of attitude on science teaching and
learning. School Science and Mathematics, 85(3):
222-32.
10. NCERT. (2007). Science (Textbook for Class
IX).New Delhi, India: NCERT.
11. Novak J.D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool
for science education. Journal of research in
science teaching.27 (10), 937-949.
12. Novak, J.D., Gowin, D.B.: Learning how to learn.
Cambridge University Press, New York (2006).
13. Pankratius W. J. (1990) .Building an organized
knowledge base: Concept mapping and
achievement in secondary school physics. Journal
of research in science teaching. 27(4), 315-333.
14. Pankratius, W.J.
&
Keith, T.M. (1987). Building an
Organized Knowledge Base: Concept Mapping in
Secondary School Science.
