Casiguran Technical Vocational School ... - DepEd Naga City

Casiguran Technical Vocational School
Casiguran, Sorsogon

Background & Motivation for Study
Below national and international
standard performance in Science
Results of Education Researches
in Physics
Need for a new, effective and
innovative teaching-learning
approach in Science that focus
on hands-on and minds-on
activities

Conceptual Framework
ILD’s Procedure
1.Presentation
2.Prediction
3.Peer Discussion
4.Demonstration
5.Solicitation of observation
6.Consolidation of observation
7.Teacher-led discussion
8.Application

Statement of the Problem
1. What are the students’ conceptual
understandings on Reflection and
Refraction of Light before and after
ILD’s
2. Is there a significant increase on
the conceptual understanding
between those students exposed to
ILD’s and those exposed to TLM
3. What are students’ views of ILD’s
as new teaching approach

Research Design
Experimental pretest-posttest
control design
Respondents
2 classes of 4 th Year students at
Magallanes NHS, Sorsogon, S.Y. 2009-2010
Experimental Group (ILD)
Control Group (TLM)
Research Instruments
Validated researcher-made test
-Test of reliability : Cronbach’s Alpha (0.312)
ILD’s Lessons / TLM (RBEC LP’s)
Opinionnaire

Analysis of Students’ Conceptual
Understanding Prior and After Instruction
Percentages were determined for responses
in pretest and posttest of both groups.
30
Correct responses reflect conceptual
0
understanding. Incorrect responses reflect
conceptual misunderstanding/ and or
alternative conceptions
Prediction sheets were analyzed
Performance Mastery Level (RBEC)
PL = (mean / no. of items) x 100%

Problem 1 Students’ Conceptual Understanding
Above Satisfactory Mastery Level of Two Groups in
Different Concepts in Reflection and Refraction
Concept
Pretest Posttest
TLM ILD TLM ILD
Image Formation in Mirrors ⁄
1. distinguishing characteristics among plane and
spherical mirrors ⁄ ⁄
2. second law of reflection applies in both plane
and curved mirrors ⁄ ⁄
3. image formed by a concave mirror depends on
the location of the object in front of it ⁄ ⁄
4. observer’s speed as he approach his/her image
is twice his speed ⁄
5. distance of the observer to his/her image is
twice as his/her distance from the mirror /
6. plane mirror produces an image that is virtual
and laterally inverted ⁄

Students’ Conceptual Understanding
Above Satisfactory Mastery Level of Two Groups in
Different Concepts in Reflection and Refraction
Pretest Posttest
Concept
TLM ILD TLM ILD
Laws of Reflection of Light
1. ray tracing the path of light from object
to observer ⁄
Refraction of Light
1. the direction light travels changes when
the medium through it travels changes ⁄
2. when an object is viewed through a
transparent material, the object is not
seen exactly where it is located ⁄
Snell's Law of Refraction
1. determining the index of refraction ⁄

Problem 2 On the Effectiveness of ILD’s
Statistical Analysis
One-tailed t-test,
α = 0.05, df = 106
hypothesized mean diff (μ ILD - μ TLM = 0),
t-critical one-tail (t tab =1.66).
normalized gain or the g – factor (Hake, 1998)
Ratio of actual average gain to the maximum
possible average gain
g = Posttest Score − Pretest Score x 100%
Maximum Score − Pretest Score

Statistical Analysis on the Effectiveness of ILD
Test of Differences in Pre Test Mean Scores
Group
N
Mean
Score
Mean
Diff t tab t-value Interpretation
TLM 54 6.56
Not
ILD 54 6.56 0.00 1.66 0.00 Significant
Maximum score = 25

Statistical Analysis on the Effectiveness of ILD
Test of Differences in Hake Gain Scores by Topic
Highest
PostTest
Mean
Normalized
Gain
Topic
Possible
Score ILD TLM ILD TLM
t-value Interpretation
Laws of
Reflection 4 2.31 1.43 0.05 0.03 1.61 not significant
Image
Formation
in Mirrors 15 7.63 6.54 3.37 2.09 2.55 significant
Refraction 4 2.72 1.79 0.59 0.08 5.22 significant
Snell's Law 2 1.02 0.65 0.31 -0.06 3.27 significant
Overall 25 13.69 10.37 0.38 0.2 5.72 significant
df = 106 t tab = 1.66
α = 0.05

Statistical Analysis on the Effectiveness of ILD
Test of Differences in Pre Test, Post Test
and Hake Gain Scores
Group
N
Pretest
mean
t-
value
Posttest
mean
Hake
gain
t tab
t-
value Interpretation
ILD 54 6.56
13.69 0.27
TLM 54 6.56 0.00 10.37 0.14
1.66 6.62 Significant
df = 106 t tab = 1.66
α = 0.05

Problem 3 Students’ View on ILDs
ILD’s teaching procedure result to
better understanding.
Procedure of the ILD was easy to
follow
ILDs provide greater opportunity
to express their ideas
Lessons were better remembered
because they where asked to write the
result of the demonstration.

Conclusion
The effectiveness of the Traditional Lecture
Method (TLM) and the Interactive Lecture
Demonstration (ILD) as approaches to teaching
reflection and refraction of light was compared.
Two equal groups of students were each
exposed to TLM (control group) and ILD
(experimental group) instructions. The same
pretest and posttest were used to investigate
the change in the mastery level of the
respondents.
On the onset of study, both group exhibit
comparable performance considering their
responses to the pretest.

Conclusion
Both groups have below satisfactory level of
mastery level on conceptual understanding on
concepts on reflection and refraction in pre test
Result of posttest and normalized gain
indicates improvement in the conceptual
understanding of both groups
Results showed that there is a statistically
significant increase in the mean gain of scores
of the ILD group compared to the TLM group in
general.
Students exposed to ILD method showed positive
attitude toward the activities of the ILD's.

The use of Interactive
Engagement were on average,
more than twice as effective as
traditional courses in promoting
conceptual change…
- Richard Hake

Thank you…