Content uploaded by Hezekiah Obabori
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hezekiah Obabori on Oct 07, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1217
www.rsisinternational.org
Effects of Lesson Study and Team Teaching on Students’
Achievement in Physics in Selected Secondary Schools in Niger
State
OBABORI, H. F1., GANA, C. S.2, GIMBA, R. W.3, & *ALHASSAN, D. U.4
1, 2, & 3Department of Science Education, School of Science & Technology Education,
4Department of Geophysics, School of Physical Sciences, Federal University of Technology, Minna,
Nigeria
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2023.7012090
Received: 22 November 2023; Revised: 06 December 2023; Accepted: 09 December 2023; Published: 10
January 2024
ABSTRACT
The study was carried out to examine the effects of Lesson study and Team teaching on students’
achievement in Physics in selected secondary schools in Niger State. The study employed a quasi-
experimental (pre-test post-test non-equivalent group design) and was guided by two research questions and
two corresponding hypotheses. The population of the study comprised of 34,694 Senior Secondary School II
Physics students (20,320 Male, 16,374 Female). 380 students (213 male, 167 Female) in the six purposively
sampled science and technical colleges were used for the study. Data was collected from the sampled
students using Physics Achievement Test for Students (PATS). The reliability coefficient for PATS was
calculated using Pearson Product Moment Correlation (PPMC) and its value given as 0.77. To answer the
research questions, mean and standard deviation were used. The corresponding hypotheses were tested using
ANOVA at 0.05 decision level. The Tukey procedure was used to make pairwise comparisons of means
where necessary. The results revealed that there was a statistically significant difference among the groups
taught Physics using Lesson Study model, Team Teaching and Lecture method (F (2,377) = 8.708, p (0.000)
< 0.05). A further analysis shows that significant difference exists between the group of students taught
using Lesson Study model and those taught using Lecture method (p = 0.000). Another significant
difference was also found between the group of students taught using Team Teaching and those taught using
Lecture method. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the students taught using
Lesson Study and those taught using Team Teaching The male and female in the experimental groups
performed better than male and female in the control group F(5,374)=4.517, p (0.001) < 0.05. From the
study, it was recommended that Physics teachers should implement Lesson Study for active participation of
students towards enhancing students’ achievement in Physics.
Keywords: Lesson study, Team teaching, Collaboration, Professional Development, Content Knowledge,
Academic achievement, Gender
INTRODUCTION
Physics is a branch of science that deals with the structure of matter and how the fundamental constituents
of the universe relate. When compared to other science subjects, a large number of students perceived
Physics as a tough subject probably because of its relationship with mathematics. Also, physics has been
perceived as a difficult subject across all levels of learning (Chala et al., 2020).
There are several factors which affect the quality of Physics education. According to Suma et al. (2019), one
of such factors is teachers’ knowledge base for teaching. Teachers’ knowledge base has significant impact
on the quality of instruction and student achievement. Shulma (1987) documented various forms of
knowledge which are pertinent to teaching. These include; (1) content knowledge, (2) general pedagogical
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1218
www.rsisinternational.org
knowledge (3) curriculum knowledge (4) pedagogical content knowledge (5) knowledge of learners and
their characteristics (6) knowledge of educational end, purposes and values (7) knowledge of
educational contexts.
Shulma emphasized the importance of pedagogical content knowledge of teacher above others in improving
the quality of instruction. When a blend of pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge is developed,
teachers will be able to put students’ academic achievement into account when defining and planning the
curriculum and teaching strategy to be implored so as to meet the diverse needs of learners.
A correlational study by Jolif (2018) affirmed the relationship between teachers’ content knowledge and
students’ academic achievement. He opined that teachers’ poor content knowledge is one of the causes o f
poor students’ achievement in science. Corroborating this is the opinion of Poopola and Falebita (2016), that
the impact of teachers on students’ achievement in any subject depends on teachers’ content knowledge of
the subject matter. This impact can be enhanced through a continuous enrichment of experience and
systematic examination of own teaching styles by other teachers through collaboration teaching. Hence, the
need for sustainable teacher professional development programmes which can develop teachers’ content
knowledge (Suma et al., 2019).
The use of all-inclusive collaborative teaching strategies to facilitate sustainable teacher professional
development for the implementation of the curriculum content by Physics teachers will allow the integration
of the students into active participation during the teaching and learning processes. Examples of such all-
inclusive collaborative teaching strategy include Lesson Study and Team Teaching. Kafula (2019), found a
link between students’ achievements and teacher’ collaboration. It was noted that as teachers improve skills
and knowledge, classroom instruction also receives a boost. Moreso, improving students learning outcomes
such as achievement and attitude were identified to constitute a serious challenge for science education
(Vilia et al., 2017).
Richit (2023), described Lesson Study as that which involves a conglomeration of teachers developing
lesson plans that are observed, analyzed and revised together with the aim of achieving a common goal.
Lesson study was defined as an approach that is systematic, and cyclical to the planning, teaching,
observing, revising, and re-teaching of lessons. It is a model that permits group of teachers with a minimum
of three teachers, to synergistically set goals and design instruction in line with the goals for students and the
context of improvement of instruction is placed within the classroom Lesson. Once this is done, one lesson
study member teaches while other members observe and collect data regarding how well goals are achieved
via how he delivers and how well students assimilate instruction. Lesson study has the potential to enhance
instruction and enrich classroom activities among others (Suma et al, 2019).
According to Goldshaft (2016), the fundamental philosophy of Lesson Study is that; it is only in the
classroom that the evidence of effective classroom practice is proved. With the teacher as a researcher,
professionalism of teaching practice is enhanced, learning is strengthened, teaching activities enriched, and
the learning environment is changed. Also, Lesson Study does not only improve learning and teaching, it is
also improving schools and raising standards (Goldshaft, 2016). Several literatures abound on the Japanese
Lesson Study model which have been used in order countries to enhance students’ achievement (Shuaibu,
2019; Poopola & Falebita, 2016; Nofrion et al., 2018; Kafula, 2019).
Similarly, Team Teaching also performs dual functions, that is, enhancement of quality of teaching and
Professional learning through the collaborative efforts of teachers. It fosters the awareness of teachers to
expand their scope of expertise through teamwork and interaction with other colleagues (Jui-min, 2007).
Basically, the two broad categories of Team Teaching include:
1. Group of teachers collaborating to teach the same set of students, at the same time, in the same
classroom;
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1219
www.rsisinternational.org
2. Teachers working together but not necessarily teaching the same set of students nor necessarily
teaching at the same time (Rottier, 2001).
The form of Team Teaching employed in the present study is the monitoring teacher. Two teachers
collaborate and jointly plan a lesson then one teaches while the other teacher moves round to monitor
students’ understanding and behaviour (Rottier, 2001).
Several testimonials of teachers and researchers who have been involved in team teaching affirmed it to be
an effective strategy to enhance students learning outcomes (Besharati & Mazdayasna, 2017; Nandwa,
2017; Ike, 2016; Hooda & Sharma, 2016). Some of the benefits of team teaching as outlined by (Ferradans,
2016; Dalal, 2014; Nor et al., 2012; Plank, n.d) include the following;
1. Emergence of a greater curricular coherence for students.
2. Deepening of Students’ analytical skills.
3. The collaborative process of planning and designing the Lesson contents together also improves the
quality of instruction. This leads to improved students learning outcomes and retention rates.
4. The diversification of teaching methods and teachers’ expertise exposes the students to different
teaching styles and delivery.
5. Teachers’ contributive ideas during co-planning leads to the emergence of high-quality lessons.
6. It provides opportunity for students to develop cooperation among themselves and good human
relation with teachers and the society at large.
7. tudents are accorded the opportunity to freely express themselves as they view the subject content
from different perspectives making the classes more interesting.
8. The students can give feedback and suggestions for improvement having evaluated different teachers’
styles of teaching.
Also, of utmost importance, is the influence of gender difference on students’ achievement. Vokic and
Aleksic (2020) highlighted factors such as learning experience and gender as part of the factors that affect
how students learn during teaching and learning process. Other factors include culture, cognitive abilities,
creativity and learning style. Dawal (2021), found out that there was significant difference between the
mean achievement of male and female students in physics. The finding contradicts the findings of Areo
(2022) and that of Poopola and Falebita (2016) who in their different studies found no significant difference
in the achievement scores of male and female students in Physics and Mathematics respectively.
Furthermore, the West Africa Examination Council Physics Chief examiners’ report documented that
students’ achievements have not been encouraging in topics such as projectile, linear momentum,
measurement of heat energy II and sound waves. Nge’the (2016) noted that the conventional lecture method
has not been carrying students along for active participation and has also failed to deliver the desirable
outcomes when dealing with students’ misconceptions. Therefore, the present study sought to examine the
effect of lesson study and team teaching on students’ achievement in selected topics in Physics, where
students have recorded low achievement as documented in West Africa Examination Council Chief
Examiners report.
Aim and Objectives of the Study
The aim of this study was to determine the effect of Lesson study and Team teaching on students’
achievement in physics. Specifically, the study sought to determine the;
1. effect of lesson study and team teaching on physics achievement of the participating students.
2. gender difference in the achievement scores of physics students who participated in lesson study and
team teaching.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1220
www.rsisinternational.org
Research Questions
The following research questions were answered in the study;
1. What is the mean difference in the physics achievement of students who participated in lesson study
and those who participated in team teaching?
2. What difference exists in the mean achievement scores by gender of physics students who participated
in lesson study and team teaching?
Research Hypotheses
Based on the above questions, the following null hypotheses were raised to guide the study: –
HO1: There is no significant difference in the mean scores of students who learnt physics using lesson
study and team teaching.
HO2: The mean achievement score of male and female physics students who participated in lesson study is
not significantly different from those who participated in team teaching.
METHODOLOGY
The study employed a quasi-experimental (pre-test post-test non-equivalent group design). It involves the
use of multiple-choice questions to elicit responses from the participating physics students. The population
of the study consists of all the thirty-four thousand six hundred and ninety four students (20,320 Male;
16,374 Female) in all the four hundred and six (406) Senior Secondary Schools in Niger State in the
2020/2021 academic session.
There are three Senatorial zones in Niger State, namely; Zone “A” Zone “B” and Zone “C”. Multi-stage
sampling technique was employed to obtain the sample for the study. Firstly, by simple random sampling
technique, two out of the three Senatorial zones were selected for this study. Afterwards, by purposive
sampling technique, three schools were selected from each of the two selected senatorial zones, making a
total of six schools. However, the emerged schools were randomly assigned to control and experimental
groups in their respective intact classes.
A fifty-item standardized multiple choice Physics Achievement Test for Students (PATS) was the only
instrument used for data collection. The researcher used test-retest method to obtain two sets to determine
the reliability coefficient to be 0.77 using Pearson Product Moment Correlation (PPMC). The chosen topics
were taught using Lesson Study, Team Teaching for the experimental groups while Lecture Method was
used for the control group.
The three groups were subjected to a Pre-test and Post-test. The researcher trained the participating teachers
in the experimental groups and prepared all teaching instruments. The scores obtained from the pre-test and
post-tests were analyzed using mean and standard deviation to answer the
research questions. The corresponding hypotheses were tested with ANOVA at 0.05 decision level. The
Tukey procedure was used to make pairwise comparisons of means where necessary.
Results
The results were analyzed and presented based on the raised research questions.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1221
www.rsisinternational.org
Research Question One
What is the mean difference in the physics achievement of students who participated in lesson study and
those who participated in team teaching? To answer this research question, mean and standard deviation
were used and the results of the analysis are presented in Table 1
Table 1: Comparison of Mean and Standard Deviation in Pre-test and Post-Test Achievement Result
for Students Taught Lesson study Model, Team Teaching and Lecture Method
Group
N
Post-test
Pre-test
Mean Diff.
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Lesson Study
129
63.35
9.4
30.93
7.3
32.42
Team teaching
125
61.46
7.2
31.52
6.4
29.94
Lecture method
126
58.93
8.6
30.06
5.3
28.87
The results in table 1 shows the mean and standard deviation of the pre-test and post-test result of students
taught physics using lesson study, team teaching and lecture method. The findings show a pre-test mean
score of 30.93 with a standard deviation of 7.34 and post-test mean score of 63.35 with a standard deviation
of 9.41 for Lesson study group. A pre-test mean score of 31.52 with a standard deviation of 6.35 and post-
test mean score of 61.46 with a standard deviation of 7.23 for team teaching group. A pre-test mean score of
30.06 with a standard deviation of 5.31 and post-test mean score of 58.93 with a standard deviation of 8.63
for lecture method group. However, the students taught using lesson study had the highest mean gain of
32.42, followed by the group taught using team teaching of 29.94 and the group exposed to lecture method
had 28.87. Thus, from the mean gain comparison, students in the lesson study group recorded the highest
improvement in the knowledge of the concepts taught.
Research Question two
What difference exists in the mean achievement scores by gender of Physics students who participated in
lesson study and team teaching? To answer this research question, mean and standard deviation was used
and the results of the analysis are presented in Table 2.
Table 2: Comparison of Mean and Standard Deviation of Pre-test and Post-Test Achievement Result
for students by gender taught Lesson study Model, Team Teaching and Lecture Methods
Gender
N
Post-test
Pre-test
Mean
Diff.
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
LS
male
82
64.49
9.283
29.90
6.892
34.59
LS
female
47
61.36
9.391
32.72
7.829
28.64
TT
male
82
62.00
7.310
30.51
6.141
31.49
TT
female
43
60.42
7.045
33.44
6.374
26.98
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1222
www.rsisinternational.org
Lec
Male
49
58.98
8.623
32.45
4.869
26.53
Lec
Female
77
58.90
8.684
28.55
5.033
30.35
The results in table 2 shows the mean and standard deviation of the pre-test and post-test achievement result
for students by gender taught with Lesson study model, Team teaching and lecture method. The findings
show a pre-test mean score of 29.90 with a standard deviation of 6.89 and post-test mean score of 64.49
with a standard deviation of 9.28 for Lesson study male group. A pre-test mean score of 32.72 with standard
deviation of 7.83 and post-test mean score of 61.36 with standard deviation of 9.39 for Lesson study female
group. Pre-test mean score of 30.51 with standard deviation of 6.14 and post-test mean score of 62.00 with
standard deviation of 7.31 for team teaching male group. Pre-test mean score of 33.44 with standard
deviation of 6.37 and post-test mean score of 60.42 with standard deviation of 7.05 for team teaching female
group. Pre-test mean score of 32.45 with standard deviation of 4.87 and posttest mean score of 58.98 with
standard deviation of 8.62 for lecture method male group. Pre-test mean score of 28.55 with standard
deviation of 5.03 and post-test mean score of 58.90 with standard deviation of 8.68 for lecture method
female group. However, the mean difference comparison shows that the lesson study male group had the
highest improvement in the knowledge of the concepts taught.
RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
Pre-test Physics Achievement Score
The pre-test data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine whether the Lesson
study model, Team teaching and Lecture method groups were equivalent in the overall score in Physics
achievement before the intervention. The result is as displayed in Table 3.
Table 3: Shows the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Comparison of Experimental and Control Groups
on Pre-test
Source
Sum of Squares
Df
Mean Square
F-value
P-value
Remark
Between Groups
134.820
2
67.410
1.647
0.194
NS
Within Groups
15427.064
377
40.921
Total
15561.884
379
Table 3 displays ANOVA results. The finding shows that there is no statistically significant difference
between the pretest scores of the experimental groups (Lesson study and Team-teaching groups) and the
control group, F (3,379) = 1.647, p (0.19) > 0.05. This implies that the students in the three groups were
equivalent with respect to their prior knowledge on the topics covered in the administered pretest. Therefore,
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze the post-test data to determine the effect of treatment.
HO1: There is no significant difference in the mean scores of students who learn physics using lesson study
and team teaching. To test this hypothesis, ANOVA was used, the result of the analysis is presented in table
4a.
Table 4a: Summary of ANOVA Results of Students’ Achievements Taught Physics using Lesson
Study Model, Team Teaching and Lecture Method
Source
Sum of Squares
Df
Mean Square
F-value
P-value
Remark
Between Groups
1252.540
2
626.270
8.708
0.000
Sig
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1223
www.rsisinternational.org
Within Groups
27112.667
377
71.917
Total
28365.208
379
Table 4a show ANOVA results. The finding shows that there was a statistically significant difference
among the groups taught Physics using Lesson study model, Team teaching and Lecture method, F (2,377)
= 8.708, p (0.000) < 0.05. Hence, HO6 was rejected.
In view of the significant difference, a follow up analysis of Tests Between- Subjects Effects was conducted
for each of the independent variable with the significant level of 0.05. The result is as shown in table 4b.
Table 4b: Pairwise Comparisons of Students’ Achievements Taught Physics using Lesson Study
Model, Team Teaching and Lecture Method
Dependent Variable: PAPost-test
(I) Method
(J) Method
M. D (I-J)
Std. Error
Sig.
95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
LS
TT
1.89284
1.06435
.178
-.6116
4.3972
LECT
4.42027*
1.06220
.000
1.9209
6.9196
TT
LS
-1.89284
1.06435
.178
-4.3972
.6116
LECT
2.52743*
1.07056
.049
.0084
5.0465
LECT
LS
-4.42027*
1.06220
.000
-6.9196
-1.9209
TT
-2.52743*
1.07056
.049
-5.0465
-.0084
Table 4b shows test of between subjects of the achievement of students taught Physics using Lesson study
model, Team teaching and Lecture method. It shows that significant difference exists between the group of
students taught using Lesson study model and those taught using Lecture method (p = 0.000). Another
significant difference also exists between the group of students taught using Team teaching and those taught
using Lecture method. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the students taught
using Lesson study and those taught using Team teaching (p = 0.178).
HO2: The mean achievement score of male and female physics students who participated in lesson study is
not significantly different from those who participated in team teaching. To test this hypothesis, ANOVA
was used, the result of the analysis is presented in table 5a.
Table 5a: Summary of ANOVA Results on Achievement Between Male and Female Students Taught
Physics using Lesson Study Model, Team Teaching and Lecture Method
Source
Sum of Squares
Df
Mean Square
F-value
P-value
Remark
Between Groups
1615.255
5
323.051
4.517
.001
Sig
Within Groups
26749.952
374
71.524
Total
28365.208
379
Table 5a shows ANOVA results on Achievement between Male and Female Students taught Physics using
Lesson study model, Team teaching and Lecture method. The finding shows that there was a statistically
significant difference between Male and Female taught using Lesson study model, Team Teaching and
Lecture method, F (5, 374) = 4.517, p (0.001) < 0.05. Hence, HO7 was rejected.
In view of the significant difference, a follow up analysis of Tests Between- Subjects Effects was conducted
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1224
www.rsisinternational.org
for each of the gender variable with the significant level of 0.05. The result is as shown in table 5b.
Table 5b: Pairwise Comparisons of Male and Female Students Achievements Taught Physics using
Lesson Study (LS) Model, Team Teaching (TT) and Lecture Method
Dependent Variable: PAPost-test
(I) Gender
(J) Gender
Mean Difference (I-J)
Std. Error
Sig.
95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
LS male
LS female
3.12610
1.54727
.333
-1.3061
7.5583
TT male
2.48780
1.32079
.414
-1.2957
6.2713
TT female
4.06920
1.59235
.111
-.4922
8.6306
Lec Male
5.50821*
1.52706
.005
1.1339
9.8826
Lec Female
5.59170*
1.34206
.001
1.7473
9.4361
LS female
LS male
-3.12610
1.54727
.333
-7.5583
1.3061
TT male
-.63830
1.54727
.998
-5.0705
3.7939
TT female
.94310
1.78469
.995
-4.1693
6.0555
Lec Male
2.38211
1.72669
.739
-2.5641
7.3283
Lec Female
2.46560
1.56546
.616
-2.0188
6.9500
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Table 5b shows test of between subjects of the achievement of male and female taught Physics using Lesson
study, team teaching and Lecture method. The result indicates that there was no significant difference
between the achievement of LS male and LS female taught Physics. Estimated mean is 3.12610, p = (.333)
> 0.05.
The result shows that there was no significant difference between the achievement of LS male and TT male
taught Physics. Estimated mean is 2.2 4780, p = (.414) > 0.05.
The result shows that there was no significant difference between the achievement of LS male and TT
female taught Physics. Estimated mean is 4.06920, p = (.111) > 0.05.
The result shows that there was significant difference between the achievement of LS male and Lec Male
taught Physics. Estimated mean is 5.50821, p = (.005) < 0.05. Therefore, the significant difference was in
favour of Lesson study male group.
The result shows that there was significant difference between the achievement of LS male and Lec Female
taught Physics. Estimated mean is 5.59170, p = (.001) < 0.05. Therefore, the significant difference was in
favour of Lesson study male group.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The mean gain comparison revealed that the students in the lesson study group recorded the highest
improvement in the knowledge of the concepts taught. Aligning with this, is the findings of Poopola and
Falebita (2016) in Mathematics which revealed that students in the lesson study had higher achievement
mean scores than those in the control group (lecture method). Also, the study further showed that there was
a statistically significant difference in the achievement of students taught physics using lesson study model
and those taught using lecture method in favour of lesson study. This could be as a result of the effective
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1225
www.rsisinternational.org
implementation of lesson study. This corroborates the findings of Shuaibu (2019) in Basic Science and
Technology which found out that learners taught using lesson study improve significantly than their
counterpart in control group.
Also, the mean gain comparison revealed that the students in the team teaching group recorded a higher
improvement in the knowledge of the concepts taught than those in the control group (lecture method). This
finding corroborates the findings of Besharati and Mazdayasna (2017), Hooda and Sharma (2016) who in
their separate studies found out that the students in the experimental group (team teaching) recorded higher
academic achievement in the post-test than the students assigned to control group (traditional method).
Furthermore, there was a statistically significant difference in the achievement of students taught physics
using Team teaching and those taught using Lecture method. This agrees with the finding of Nandwa (2017)
in Mathematics which revealed that there was significant difference in the mean achievement of students
taught using team teaching and those taught with conventional method in favour of the team teaching group.
Similarly, aligning was the findings of Ike (2016) having done a comparative study on the effects of team-
teaching strategies and conventional teaching approach in secondary schools found out that students taught
with team teaching performed better than students taught with conventional strategies. However, there was
no statistically significant difference between the students taught using Lesson study and those taught using
Team teaching.
Furthermore, when the effects of lesson study model, team teaching and lecture method on male and female
Students taught Physics were analysed using ANOVA, there was a statistically significant difference
between both genders. A further analysis using a test of between subjects of the achievement of male and
female indicates that there was no significant difference between the achievement of male and female
groups taught Physics using lesson study. Also, there was no significant difference between the achievement
of students taught Physics based on gender using
lesson study and team teaching. This could be as a result of gender differences being considered during the
implementation of both lesson study and team teaching. This aligns with the finding of Areo (2022) whose
study revealed that there was no significant influence of gender on students’ achievement in Physics. Also,
the finding of Poopola and Falebita (2016) revealed that there was no significant difference in the
achievement scores of male and female students in Mathematics. However, the finding contradicts the result
of Dawal (2021), whose study revealed a significant difference between the mean achievement of male and
female students in physics. We could therefore infer that both lesson study and team teaching enhanced the
achievements of both gender in Physics equally.
However, there is a significant difference between the achievement of lesson study male group and lecture
method male group taught Physics. This is in agreement with the finding of Dawal (2021), who found out
that there was significant difference between the mean achievement of male and female students in physics.
The finding contradicts the findings of Areo (2022) and that of Poopola and Falebita (2016) who in their
different studies found no significant difference in the achievement scores of male and female students in
Physics and Mathematics respectively.
CONCLUSION
It was concluded that among the three strategies considered in the study, the students taught using lesson
study achieved better than students taught using team teaching and lecture method strategies. Hence, lesson
study is the best strategy for improving on the academic achievement of students in Physics. Also, it was
further found out that gender do not have significant effect on the achievement of male and female students
taught Physics using lesson study, and also on the achievement of male (lesson study) and female (team
teaching) groups taught Physics. However, there was significant difference between the achievement of
male (lesson study) and male (lecture method) groups taught Physics in favour of lesson study.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1226
www.rsisinternational.org
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Physics teachers should implement lesson study for active participation of students towards enhancing
students’ achievement in Physics.
2. Nigerian Curriculum planners should take a cue from Japanese curriculum planners who used lesson
study to teach difficult topics.
3. School administrators should create an enabling environment where teachers can collaborate and
synergize resources in order to enhance teaching and learning processes, thereby building a learning
community of teachers.
4. When implementing lesson study, individual and gender differences should be catered for.
REFERENCES
1. Areo, O. O. (2022). Influence of gender on students’ achievement and attitude towards physics in
secondary schools in Ondo state, Nigeria. International Journal of Research in Education and
Sustainable Development, 2(6), 1-9. Retrieved January 05, 2021, from
https://www.ijaar.org/articles/ijresd/v2n6/ijresd-v1n12-Dec21-p11231.pdf
2. Besharati, M. H. & Mazdayasna, G. (2017). Investigating the effect of team-teaching approach on
ESP students’ English proficiency; evidence from students’ attitudes. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics & English Literatures, 6(5).http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.5p.41
3. Chala, A. A., Kedir, I. & Wawi, S. (2020). Secondary school students’ beliefs towards learning
physics and its influencing factors. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 10(7), 37- 49.
Retrieved August 20, 2023, from www.iiste.org
4. Dalal, S. (2014). Use of team teaching in instruction. International Journal of Scientific Research,
3(2),108-110. Retrieved January, 12, 2020, from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viedoc/download?doi=10.1.1.680.2089&rep=rep1&t pe=pdf
5. Dawal, B. S. (2021). Investigating gender differences in the attitude and achievement of secondary
school students towards stem education in Plateau state. Kashere Journal of Education (KJE), 2(1),
192-200. Retrieved January 15,2020,
fromhttps://www.ajol.info/index.php/kje/article/download/222767/210160
6. Ferradans, C. (2016). Team-teaching: rewards and challenges. Council for excellence in teaching and
learning. Retrieved May 12, 2021, from
https://www.iwu.edu/melloncenter/teachinglearning/teamteaching_may2016.pdf
7. Goldshaft, B. (2016). A case study of lesson study: how could lesson study contribute to collaborative
professional learning in Norwegians schools? Master’s thesis. Norwegian University of Science and
Technology.
8. Hooda, M. & Sharma, M. (2016). The effect of team-teaching on academic achievement of 9th
graders in science. Scholarly Research Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 3(23), 1906-1915
9. Ike, E. A. (2016). Comparative analysis of the effects of team-teaching strategies and conventional
teaching approach in secondary schools in Imo State, Nigeria. International Journal of Education and
Research, 4(6), 417- 432.
10. Jolif, O. J., (2018). Factors contributing to poor performance of science subjects: A case of secondary
schools in Busia County. A PGDE Dissertation. University of Nairobi.
11. Jui-min Tsai, M. A. (2007). Team teaching and teachers’ professional learning: Case studies of
collaboration between Foreign and Taiwanese English teachers in Taiwanese elementary schools.
Phd Thesis. The Ohio State University.
12. Kafula, F (2019). An assesment of the influence of lesson study on learners’ academic performance in
mathematics: Case study of selected secondary schools in Kawambwa district. International Journal
of Multi-Disciplinary Research, 1-12. Retrieved May 07, 2022, from www.ijmdr.net
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VII Issue XII December 2023
Page 1227
www.rsisinternational.org
13. Nandwa, M. O. (2017). Effect of team teaching method on students’ achievement in mathematics in
Mumi as Sub-county Kenya. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research
(IJSBAR), 32(3), 239 – 245. Retrieved June 15, 2021,
fromhttp://gssrr.org/index.php?journal=JournalOfBasicAndApplied
14. Ng’ethe M. A. (2016). Effects of practical work on students’ achievements in physics at secondary
school level in Murang’a East Sub-County, Kenya. A Phd Thesis. Kenyatta University.
15. Nofrion, N., Ananda, A., Anwar, S., Hasan, H. &Furqon, I. (2018). Effectiveness of EXO OLO
TASK learning model based on lesson study in geography learning. IOP Conf. Series: Earth and
Environmental Science. Retrieved from: Doi:10.1088/1755 1315/145/1/012038
16. Nor, M. M., Jin, N. Y., Ibrahim, A. H., Tong, C. S., Ling, L. Y. &Tarmizi, M. A. A. (2012). Team
teaching in higher education: the relationship between tem norms and effectiveness. International
Journal of Arts and Commerce, 1(1). Retrieved August 02, 2020, from
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/260317817
17. Plank, k. M. (n.d). Team teaching. AN IDEA PAPER.
https://www.ideaedu.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/IDEA%20Papers/PaperIDEA_55.pdf
18. Poopola, A. A. & Falebita, O. S. (2016). Effects of teachers’ lesson study on ekiti state secondary
school students’ achievement in mathematics. Research Journali’s Journal of Education, 4(6), 1 – 10.
19. Richit, A, (2023). Professional development of professors in lesson study. Research gate.
https://doi:10.4013/edu.2023.271.20
20. Rottier, J. (2001). Team teaching. national middle school association
21. Shuaibu, M. Z. (2019). Lesson Study: An innovation for inspiring lifelong learning among basic
science and technology teachers in Nigeria. A Paper Presented at the 9th Pan-Commonwealth Forum
on Open Learning held at BTMurray field Stadium in Edinburgh, Scotland.
22. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard
Educational Review, 57,1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
23. Suma, k., Sadia, I. W., Pujani, N. I. (2019). The effect of lesson study on science teachers’
pedagogical content knowledge and self efficacy. International Journal on New Trends in Education
and Their Implications, 10 (4), 1-11.
24. Vilia, P. N., Candeias, A. A., Neto, A. S., Franco, M. S., & Melo, M. (2017). Academic achievement
in physics-chemistry: The predictive effect of attitudes and reasoning abilities. Frontiers in
Psychology, 8 (1064),doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01064
25. Voki´c, N. P. & Aleksi´c, A. (2020). Are active teaching methods suitable for all generation Y
students? —Creativity as a needed ingredient and the role of learning style. Education Sciences 10
(87), 1-14.
