EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING ON LEARNERS’

ATTITUDE AND PERFORMANCE USING TOPICS IN MAGNETISM

M.Ed. Thesis

TESHOME TEREFE

June 2010

Haramaya University
 EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING ON LEARNERS’
ATTITUDE AND PERFORMANCE USING TOPICS IN MAGNETISM

A Thesis Submitted to College of Natural and Computational Science:

Department of Physics, School of Graduate Studies
HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

MASTER OF EDUCATION IN PHYSICS

By
Teshome Terefe

June 2010
Haramaya University

i
 SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY

As thesis research advisors, we hereby certify that we have read and evaluated this Thesis
prepared under our guide, by Teshome Terefe entitled: ‘‘Effect of Cooperative Learning on
learners’ Attitude and Performance using Topics in Magnetism’’ We recommend that it be
subjected as fulfilling the Thesis requirement.
Getachew Abebe (PhD) ____________ _________
Major Advisor Signature Date
Abi Taddesse (PhD) _____________ __________
Co-advisor Signature Date
As members of the Board of Examiners of the M.Ed. Thesis Open Defense Examination, we
certify that we have read, evaluated the thesis prepared by Teshome Terefe and examined the
candidate. We recommended that the Thesis be accepted as fulfilling the thesis requirement
for the degree of Master of Education in Physics.

___________________________ _____________ _________

Chairperson Signature Date

___________________________ ______________ _________

Internal Examiner Signature Date

__________________________ _____________ _________

External Examiner Signature Date

ii
 DEDICATION
I dedicate this thesis manuscript to my brother D E M I S T E R E F E (1978-2009 G.C)

iii
 STATEMENT OF THE AUTHOR

I the undersigned declare that this Thesis is my original work and has not been presented for
any degree in any University all the resource of materials used for the Thesis have been dually
acknowledged. It has been submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for M.Ed.
degree in physics at the HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY and is deposited at the University
Library to be made available to borrowers under the rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission provided that
accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation
from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the
major department or the Dean of the School of Graduate Studies when in his or her judgment
the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances,
however, permission must be obtained from the author.

Name of the author: Teshome Terefe Signature __________________

Place: Haramaya University, Haramaya
Date of Submission: June 2010

iv
 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

The author was born in Arsi Zone Gobessa town, which is found in Oromia Regional State in
May 1984 G.C. He attended his elementary and secondary education at Shirka Elementary
School and Bokoji S.S.S respectively. He completed his B.Ed. degree in Physics from
Haramaya University in 2008 G.C and immediately after that, he joined the School of
Graduate Studies of Haramaya University in 2008 to pursue M.Ed. program in Physics.

v
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First, I would like to praise the Almighty God for the blessing, providing me the opportunity
strength and patience in the entire period of this study. I would like to extend heartfelt
gratitude to my major advisor Getachew Abebe (PhD) and co-advisor Abi Taddesse(Ph.D) for
their positive, valuable, reliable professional guidance, constructive comments, suggestions
and encouragement starting from proposal development up to thesis research writing and
completion.

My special thanks again go to my brother Abera Terefe and Demis Terefe, It is because of
them that I get courage to proceed with my education, feel confident and dreaming more. It is
my special thanks forwarded to my dad, mom, sisters and brother for their love to me and
concern to my life and success.

I would like to forward my warm appreciation and great thanks to my friends, Basha Haile,
Ayalew Temesgen, Admasu Kasahun, Mengistu Tulu, Abdella Hasso, Idiris Yimam, Tamene
Fikadu, Tigist Dinku, Abreham Shiferaw, Mulualem Hailu, Yohans Mamo, Belay Abebe,
Zewge W/Mariam, Abebe Adugna, Girm Tessema, Nigusie Arefain and others for their
encouragement, technical, material and moral support during this study.

My thanks go to Haramaya University physics department head Ato Birhanu Mengistu, Prof.
Ameranda Rajput, Dr. Surendra, Emili Pamplona and others for their valuable support.
Aboker Preparatory School principals ( Ato Tesfaye Demsie, Abadi Belay and Ibro) and
student who gave me cooperation during data collection.

Above all, I like to thank my family as a whole, especially my father Terefe Gebreyes, my
mother Tayech Kebede, my sisters Shitaye Terefe, Nafkot Terefe, Minda Terefe, Muna
Terefe, Asres Terefe and Tesfu Getachew for their encouragement and special treatment both
morally and psychologically for their key and principal role in the success of my life.

vi
 LIST OF ACRONYMS

APS Aboker Preparatory School

CL Cooperative Learning Strategy
CG Control Group
EG Experimental Group
LM Lecture Method
PAT Physics Achievement Test
PBL Problem Based Learning
SATP Students Attitude towards Physics
SGS School of Graduate Studies
STAD Students Team Achievement Division
LTA Learning Together and Alone
TGT Team –Games- Tournaments
GI Group Investigation
TAI Team Accelerated Instruction
CIRC Cooperative Integrated Reading And Composition

vii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF THE AUTHOR iv

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT vi

LIST OF ACRONYMS vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS viii

LIST OF TABLES xi

LIST OF TEBLES IN APPENDICES xii

LIST OF FIGURES xiii

LIST OF FIGURES IN APPENDICES xiv

ABSTRACT xv

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. LITERATURE REVIEW 8
2.1. Essence of Learning Physics 8
2.2. How Teachers can Help their Students to Internalize the Subject? 8
2.3. Cooperative Learning 9
2.3.1. Working definition of CL 9
2.3.2. What is Cooperative Learning? 9
2.3.3. Application and Organization of CL in Class 10
2.4. Relationship between CL and Students' Motivation to Learn 11
2.5. Relationship between CL and Students' Academic Achievement 12
2.6. The Role of Teacher in CL 13
2.7. Basic Elements for Effective CL 14
2.7.1. Positive interdependence 14
2.7.2. Face-to-Face interaction 15
2.7.3. Individual accountability 15
2.7.4. Interpersonal and small-group skills 16

viii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
2.7.5. Group processing 16
2.8. Barriers to CL 16
2.9. Advantages and Disadvantages of CL 17
2.10. Lecture Method 17
2.11. Students Attitude and Academic Achievement 19

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 21
3.1. Description of the Study Area 21
3.2. Research Design 21
3.3. Subject of the Study 22
3.4. Sources of Data 22
3.5. Sampling Technique 22
3.6. Methods of Data Collections 23
3.7. Reliability and Validity 26
3.7.1. Reliability 26
3.7.2. Validity of the Test 26
3.8. Variables of the Study 26
3.8.1. Definition of variables 27
3.8.2. Dependent variables 27
3.8.3. Independent variables 27
3.9. Methods of Data Analysis 27
3.10. Ethical Consideration 28

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 29

4.1. Pretest and Posttest Results of Students in EG and CG 29
4.1.1. Analysis of pre-test 29
4.1.2. Comparison of EG and CG on the post-test results 30
4.1.3. The mean gains of EG and CG students 31
4.2. Systematic Classroom Observation using Checklist 32
4.2.1. Interest behavior of learners 33
4.2.2. Motivation behavior of learners 34
4.3. Post-Activity Interviews 36
4.4. Students` Attitude towards Physics. 39

5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 43

5.1. Summary 43
5.2. Conclusion 44
5.3. Recommendation 45

ix
 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

6. REFERENCES 46

7. APPNDICES 51
7.1. Appendix-I : Pre-test 51
7.2. Appendix-II: Post-test 56
7.3.Appendix-III 62

x
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
Table1: Comparison of EG and CG on pre-test results …………………....………….. 29
Table 2: Comparison of EG and CG on post-test results ………………….…………. 30
Table 3: The mean gain of both CG and EG students..................................................... 31
Table 4: Summarized frequency distribution of systematic classroom observation of
students interest towards the subject……………………………………………………. 33
Table 5: Summarized frequency distribution of systematic classroom observation of
students motivation towards the subject………………………………………………... 34
Table 6: Summarized frequency distribution of attitude towards physics for both CG
and EG students………………………………………………………………………... 40

xi
 LIST OF TEBLES IN APPENDICES
Table Page
Appendix Table- I Pretest and posttest result…………………………..…………… 63
Appendix Table-II Independent t-tests to determine the mean difference of Pretest… 64
Appendix Table-III Independent t-tests to determine the mean difference of post-test 64
Appendix Table-IV Systematic classroom observation technique of Interest………….. 65
Appendix Table-V Systematic Classroom Observation Technique of Motivation
Behavior and Results…………………………………………………………………… 66
Appendix Table-VI Attitude Scale for treatment group………………………………... 67
Appendix Table-VII Attitude Scale for control group …………………………………. 68
Appendix Table-VIII U-test to determine the significant level of attitude……………. 69

xii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure -1 page

Mean gain of both control and experimental groups………………………………. 32

xiii
 LIST OF FIGURES IN APPENDICES

Figures Page
Appendix figure 1. When students were engaging in cooperaive learning………...... 70

Appendix figure 2. When the teacher was facilitating the teaching learning process... 70

Appendix figure 3. Sample photo when the teacher was giving a clue for the student.. 71

Appendix figure 4. Sample photos when students were presenting what they have
discussed……………………………………………………………………………… 71
Appendix figure 5. When students were attending a dialogue……………………... 72

xiv
EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING ON LEARNERS’ ATTITUDE
AND PERFORMANCE USING TOPICS IN MAGNETISM

ABSTRACT

The present study made comparison between two learning strategies on students attitudinal
and performance changes using concepts in magnetism. The study was carried out in Aboker
preparatory school found in Harar town, Eastern Ethiopia.76 sample students were taken
from the school by using stratified random sampling technique. As a result, the sample
consisted of 76 students: Since the nature of this research is experimental, the sample students
were divided into experimental (38) and control (38) groups. Various cooperative learning
structures were used to teach the topics on magnetic field, magnetic force and
electromagnetic induction over 28 periods. To suit to the purpose, the subjects in both the
treatment and control groups were exposed to the same topics. To measure differences
between experimental and control group before and after treatment, pre-test and post-test
evaluations were administered. The data obtained from pre and post-test results were
analyzed using t-test. No significant difference was observed between control and
experimental groups on pretest whereas, statistically significant difference (p<0.05) was
observed on post-test between the two. The experimental group students (who attended
lessons offered with the cooperative learning are found to be more benefited than those in the
control group (who attended the same lessons offered with the lecture method. The mean gain
of control group was 3.48 while the mean gained for experimental group were 8.71. The mean
gain by experimental group was statistically significant as compared to control group
students on post-test result. The results obtained from systematic classroom observation,
interview and students attitude towards physics questionnaire strongly supported the above
result. In general, cooperative learning had significant positive impact on students’
performance and attitude towards physics than lecture method.

xv
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Physics is the cornerstone of the natural sciences and has been highly successful in unlocking
many of the fundamental secrets of nature (Matt, 2007). It is the study of the laws that govern
the interaction between matter and energy in the universe. According to this author physics
endeavors to understand the underlying laws governing our universe. By understanding those
laws, we can better interact with and harness our environment.

Even though physics is a gateway for many fields like engineering, medicine and the likes
learners consider physics as the most difficult subject to learn and understand. In many
countries, there has been a decline in the number of students wishing to continue with physics
(Woolnough, 1994). Various researchers pointed out such a decline by explaining a number
of contributing factors for this decline. Smithers (2006) noted the difficulty of the subject
matter for the declining of students learning physics in high schools and universities. Sillitto
and MacKinnon (2000) noted that physics has an image of being both difficult and boring. As
Williams et al. (2003) observed that the major general reasons for students finding physics
uninteresting were the difficult and irrelevance of the subject. Due to the fact that physics
deals with abstract concepts, students find these concepts difficult to grasp.

Magnetism is considered as one of the most difficult topics in physics to learn and understand
by the students (Chabay and Sherwood, 2006). Several research dealing with students
misconception in magnetism in particular have been carried out ranging from the simple
notions treated in primary school science to the more sophisticated notions addressed in
introductory physics courses at University level has extensively studied. The studies at
University level determined that students have many misconceptions and learning difficulties
on magnetism topics (Guisasola et al., 2004; Dunn, 2000; Saarelainen et al., 2007). Despite
the fact that, there are several factors attributed to such misconceptions; one of them is the
style of learning strategies.
1
1.1 Learning Strategies

Generally, there are two types of teaching-learning strategies i.e. teacher centered and
student-centered. The teachers-centered model includes three main teaching methods,
demonstration, lecture, question and answer. The specific activities or instructional functions
connected with such teaching can include a daily review, checking homework, presenting new
contents or skills, set feedback and evaluation student’s performance. Student centered (active
learning) refers to techniques where students do more than simply listen to a lecture. Students
are doing something including discovering, processing and applying information. Student
centered strategies involve instruction where the teacher is a facilitator. According to Johnson
et al. (1991), there are a number of methods in this category that are listed and explained
below.
• Cooperative learning:-involves small heterogeneous student groups working to either
solve a problem or complete a task. All students in the group must actively participate
with each being independent. The success of the group depends on the input of each
individual. Problem based learning:- involves giving the students a problem and they
must do in query to solve the problem.
• Discovery learning: -provides learners with information they use to construct learning.
• Role-play:- deals with solving problems through action. A problem is identified, acted
out and discussed. Simulations: - are meant to put the students in a real situation without
taxing the risks involved.
The choice of suitable teaching method is based on objective of the lesson, needs of the
learner, and nature of the content is needed. As cited in Fantahun (2007), when a science
teacher selects and uses any particular teaching method he or she should focus on how and
what students learn. One important trend in the research at the center of science education
has been to use an information-processing model to explore how students lay down
information in long-term memory in a readily retrieval and useable form and to have
favorable attitude (Otis, 2005).

2
In this study the effectiveness of the two learning (lecture method and cooperative learning)
strategies in terms of attitudinal and performance of students were investigated. Currently,
cooperative learning is perceived as a generic term for a number of instructional techniques
and procedures that address conceptual learning and social development. It encompasses the
following instructional methods: Learning Together and Alone (LTA), Student Teams
Achievement Divisions (STAD), Jigsaw Technique, Team Accelerated Instruction (TAI),
Teams-Games-Tournaments (TGT), Group Investigation (GI), Cooperative Integrated
Reading and Composition (CIRC). Each of these methods has its own characteristics and
relevance to different curriculum areas and students in different key stages of learning; they
are different in grade levels, subjects, and advantages. For example, while STAD, TGT and
Jigsaw can be adapted for use across most subjects and grade levels, TAI is specifically
designed for mathematics and CIRC for reading and writing instruction in Grade 2-8. The
present study therefore adopted three techniques (i.e. STAD, LTA and Jigsaw Technique).
They can easily be used in most physics and mathematics classes, and they combine
cooperative goals and tasks with a high degree of individual accountability (Slavin and
cooper, 2000).

1.2. Statement of the Problem

The reasons that made the researcher to focus on the area of studying effect of cooperative
learning and lecture based learning on learners attitudinal and performance change were:
researchers’ experience as a school teacher in the selected preparatory school. During his stay
in this school, the researcher observed that almost all physics teachers who are the researcher
colleague prefer lecture method. The other reason for the study was the absentee of similar
work in this area of the study. Therefore, these reasons initiated the researcher to assess effect
of cooperative and lecture based learning on learners attitudinal and performance change in
physics of preparatory school students, and come up with clear understanding of concepts and
attitude towards physics of the students.

3
In review to the literature, the researcher tried to assess some of the related work in the area of
learning strategies. It seems that, now days, effective use of learning strategies has emerged as
a critical variable in recent models of human learning (Tolla, 2004). In countries like Ethiopia
with low supportive environment for quality of education or learning, learners have the
problem of understanding the concept of physics. This is because the current learning strategy
does not make learners acquire sufficient knowledge and may not meet the learning objectives
of the course syllabus. Learners benefit from the planning of instruction that allows them to
see the relationships between classroom learning and problem solving in everyday life. It is
necessary to move from the passive learning to participatory learning, to find a better way of
engaging learners in learning process.

Temechegn (2008) emphasized that expanding the learning experience is necessary in

national case. Since traditional teaching method, has students to read a text, listen to a lecture,
and a very limited form of dialogue with each other’s. This indicates that learners will have
less chance to participate in learning activities. Consequently, learners’ interest in learning
science is radically decreasing. Supporting this, the finding of Fantahun (2007) revealed that
students in our country are running away from the natural science field of study. Besides, the
subject nature, there are different factors that affect students not to take a science subject as a
field of career. Student’s poor performance in physics has been attributed to poor teaching
methods, poor student attitude toward physics, poor learning environment (Ivowi, 1997).
Though physics has many applications, students do not like it consequently they score poor
result. Taking all these points in to account, the purpose of this study is to analyze effects of
cooperative and lecture based learning on learners’ attitude and performance of preparatory
student in teaching magnetism topics.

1.3. Objective of the Study

This study is aiming to examine the effect of cooperative and lecture- based learning on
learners’ performance and attitudinal change using concepts in magnetism.

4
The specific objectives of this study are:
1. To examine in which of the methods (CL or LM) students perform better.
2. To identify in which of the methods (CL or LM) the learners are more motivated and show
interest.
3. To examine if there is a difference in the attitudes of students who have been taught
with CL and LM.

1.4. Hypotheses

A null hypothesis was tested:

1. There is no significant difference in the academic achievements of students taught with
cooperative and lecture- based learning.
2. There is no significant difference in motivation and interest of students taught with
cooperative and lecture-based learning.
3. There is no significant difference in attitudes amongst the students taught with cooperative
and lecture -based learning.

1.5. Significance of the Study

As it was mentioned earlier under “Statement of problem”, little is known about the practice
of cooperative learning in preparatory schools in Ethiopia for teaching physics. The present
study is expected to have the following theoretical and practical contribution
1. The study will have some contributions in the sense that the results could encourage
for practicing cooperative learning.
2. The study may be useful for physics teachers in planning the teaching learning process
during their physics classroom.
3. It may introduce on the importance of cooperative learning among students in solving
problems in the class and out of the class.
4. The study may also help as a basis for further research in this area.
5. It can serve as valuable document to educational bureau officers, policy makers etc.

5
1.6. Limitation of the Study

For more relevant and reliable results, it would have been better if it had included
representatives of all Ethiopian preparatory students enrolled in natural science and all topics
of physics, but due to shortage of time, budget and resources the study was limited to Harari
region grade 12 students on the concept of magnetisms.

1.7. Scope of the Study

This study is delimited to be carried out in Harari Region on 12th grade Aboker preparatory
school students on the effects of cooperative learning and traditional learning to comprehend
magnetism. It was also aiming to investigate if there was be certain attitudinal and
performance changes developed among students by using cooperative and lecture based
learning strategy focusing only on topics of magnetic field and force and electromagnetic
induction.

1.8. Overview

This thesis is organized into five chapters: Chapter-1 focuses mainly on giving a brief
background concerning the topic under the study. It also gives definitions of the concepts
used for the study. It introduces the problem and objective of the study. Chapter-2. includes
reviews of the published and unpublished researchs done either nationally or internationally,
which are used to support the choices of the research methods and to address what other
scholars have written about the effect of cooperative and lecture based learning on learners
attitude and performance as well as advantages’ and disadvantages’ of each methods. The
research designs, instruments, sampling techniques, the research procedures chosen for the
study were discussed in Chapter-3. The most important research instrument used in this study
was the two achievements tests, SATPQ, Interview and Observation. Hence, it is crucial that
its validity and reliability be discussed in detail: the development, structure, validation, and
evaluation of the instruments.

6
Reports on the outcomes of the analysis of the study were presented in Chapter-4. The
analyzed pre-test and post-test results are presented in this chapter, Table 3 shows that there
was significant mean differences between cooperative and lecture method of teaching. The
mean gain for experimental group was 8.71 while the mean gain for control group is 3.48 and
it is significant at p<0.05. The analysis results for the data obtained from the SATPQ,
Interview and Observation are discussed as practical indicators of the existence of
significance attitudinal and performance change between cooperative and lecture method of
teaching. Finally, the summary, conclusion and recommendation of the study are presented in
Chapter-5.

1.9. Conceptual Definitions

Cooperative Learning: is a mode of learning in which students of different levels of ability

work together in small groups to achieve a purpose
Attitude: is a manner of acting, feeling, or thinking that shows one’s disposition, opinions
According to Eagly and Chaiken (1993), attitude is a “psychological tendency that is
expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor”. "Attitudes
express passions and hates, attractions and repulsions, likes and dislikes.
Performance: refers to successful accomplishment in particular subjects, areas or courses
(Encarta, 2008).
Interest: feeling of curiosity or concern about something that makes the attention towards it
(Encarta, 2009).
Lecture methods: is an exposition of knowledge, facts, principle or other informations
through which a teacher wishes to present to his pupils (Nayak, 2005).
Learning strategy: is special way of processing information that enhances comprehension,
learning, or retention of the information (O’Malley and Chamot, 2009).
Motivation: feeling of commitment that makes somebody want to do something that cause
such a feeling (Encarta, 2009).

7
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Essence of Learning Physics

Physics is the study of matter and natural events, based mostly on empirical observations and
quantitative measurements. Many technical or basic tools and equipments surrounding us
work according to the laws of physics. Science mainly constitutes the infrastructure of an
objective, rationalistic, scientific, and technologic modern viewpoint. The results obtained
from the scientific research have influenced the developments of other areas in science and
these new developments have been widely applied to the daily life. Mestre et al. (1993) stated
two important instructions (CL and PBL) to help students achieve a deep, conceptual
understanding of the subject and to help them develop the power of problem solving capacity
in and out of the class. However, learning the concepts of physics may not be easy to
comprehend. In most circumstances, students have considerable difficulty in understanding
the concept of physics. Specially, a topic like magnetism is found to be challenging aspect of
physics (Törnkvist et al., 1993).

2.2. How Teachers can Help their Students to Internalize the Subject?

It is a question to be asked by teachers regardless of their disciplines. As mentioned before,

students lack the ability or motivation to go beyond factual knowledge to a deeper
understanding of the course material. Duch (1997) pointed out that learners seem to have
difficulties connecting basic principles and concepts to their related essential applications.
Cooperative learning believed to prepare students to help each other, to think critically, and to
find and use appropriate learning outcomes. The new assumption about the purpose of
education is assisting students to learn more effectively without the constant interventions of a
teacher; which can be achieved through developing the skills of autonomous (independent)
learning (Mekonnen, 2008).

8
2.3. Cooperative Learning

According to Johnson and Johnson (1994), cooperative learning is defined as “the

instructional method that uses small groups so that students work together to maximize their
own and each other’s learning.” Other scholar, Slavin (1995), described cooperative learning
as a “vehicle” for increasing students' active involvement in learning activities and having
students take more responsibility for managing their own instruction, thus allowing the
teacher more opportunities to have academic interactions with individuals and small groups.

2.3.1. Working definition of CL

Cooperative learning is a mode of learning in which students of different levels of ability

work together in small groups to achieve a purpose (Akinbobola, 2006). It involves the use of
a variety of learning activities to improve their understanding of a subject (Slavin, 1990).
Students in a group interact with each other, share ideas and information, seek additional
information, and make decisions about their findings to the entire class. Cooperative learning
is student centered versus teacher centered leading to a stronger emphasis on the goal of
learning instead of a performance goals. It encourages teachers to use alternative assessment
techniques further reducing the emphasis on competitive examinations (Slavin, 1990).

2.3.2. What is Cooperative Learning?

Cooperative learning is one of the most remarkable and fertile areas of theory, research, and
practice in education. Cooperative learning exists when students work together to accomplish
shared learning goals (Johnson and Johnson, 1990). Each student can then achieve his or her
learning goal if and only if the other group members achieve theirs.

According to Brubacher et al. (1990), cooperation is referred as working together to

accomplish shared goals and CL is the instructional use of small groups so that students work
together to maximize their own and one another’s learning.

9
Within CL groups, students are given two responsibilities: to learn the assigned material and
to make sure that all other members of their group do likewise. Thus, a student seeks an
outcome that is beneficial to him/her and beneficial to all other group members. Cooperative
learning is achieved by dividing the class into small groups that work together to achieve the
best group results by means of mutual assistance among the group members. All the members
of the group must work on the task assigned by the teacher and each is aware that the success
or failure of each individual will affect the results of the whole group (“your success benefits
me and my success benefits you, in short we all sink or swim together here”) (Johnson and
Johnson, 1998).

2.3.3. Application and Organization of CL in Class

Application of cooperative learning is possible from kindergarten to higher education levels.

However, with each school that implements cooperative learning, modifications are often
necessary to allow cooperative learning to be introduced into local environment due to
different shortcomings. The use of cooperative learning in existing or conventional
curriculum may require a hybridized or integrated approach of cooperative learning with
existing learning method to overcome the difficulties.

According to Slavin (1987), the two major theoretical perspectives related to cooperative
learning are motivational and cognitive. The motivational theory of cooperative learning
emphasizes on encouragement of the student to do academic work, while the cognitive
theories emphasize the effects of working together. Motivational theories related to
cooperative learning focus on reward and goals. One of the elements of cooperative learning
is positive interdependence, where students perceive that their success or failure lies within
their working together as a group (Johnson et al., 1986). From a motivational perspective,
cooperative goal structure creates a situation in which the only way group members can attain
their personal goals is when the group is successful (Slavin, 1980). Therefore, in order to
attain their personal goals, students are likely to encourage members within the group to do
whatever will help the group to succeed and to help one another with a group task.

10
Theoretically, cooperative learning groups can be categorized as formal, informal and base
cooperative learning groups (Johnson et al., 1986). According to them, the formal group
ranges from one class period to several weeks. This group ensures that students are actively
involved in the intellectual work of organizing materials, explaining it, summarizing it, and
integrating it into existing conceptual structures. Informal cooperative learning group task
from a few minutes to a whole class period and the teachers uses them during direct teaching
to focus student’s attention on the materials to be learnt. A base cooperative learning group
task extends for at least a year. It provides students with long-term committed relationship

2.4. Relationship between CL and Students' Motivation to Learn

Nichols and Miller (1994) reported that cooperative learning produced a great motivational
effect on high school students studying algebra. Wang et al. (1993) also found a strong
correlation between motivation to learn and student achievement. Peterson and Miller (2004)
compared the experiences of college students during CL and large-group instruction and
found that the most consistent results of this study related to student motivation, all aspects of
which were more positive during cooperative learning. They found that students were more
engaged, when they taught using cooperative learning.

Motivation and positive attitude play important roles in students’ learning. The problem of
devising effective strategies that influence attitude relies initially on the identification of
specific motivational factors (Howey, 2008). Look into a classroom will not be hard to see
who is interested and who is not. It is easy to spot the students who are motivated and the
ones who are not (Levine, 2009). Threatening student is not an effective way to motivate.
Remaining positive and focusing on achievement will motivate students and help to create
mutual respect for each individual and for learning (Wagzaman, 2008). Furthermore, Treurer
(2006) wrote that learners need some intelligence, knowledge base, study skills, and time
management skills, but if they are not motivated, they will not get far. This indicates that
motivation is the key toward achieving our goal. It is possible to get a student interested in
even the most boring task by devising motivating strategies.

11
If students find the relationship between their schoolwork or other daily tasks, and their life
as a whole, motivation will rise. Helping students to connect seemingly abstract events in
their lives to who they are and what they will become is the key to motivation (Levine, 2009).

Students are likely to be motivated to engage in school tasks, if they expect that they will
succeed. If they value participation in the task and work cooperatively, they will have positive
attitude towards participation in the task (Cole, 1994). According to these authors, the
following principles are concerned with general issues of instructional programming and the
structuring of the learning environment to maximize the expectancy, value and emotional
components of school motivation.
1. Set realistic goals and reinforce learners to the goals.
Students will be motivated if they perceive the instructional goals as realistic and relevant.
They strive for success and accomplish goals that are realistic, relevant and attainable. If
students feel that the goal of learning are beyond their capabilities or irrelevant to their
needs, they are likely to become discouraged and may not perceive the need to strive for
these goals. Frequent encouragement and support are necessary if students are to maintain
a high level of motivation.
2. Cooperation among students to achieve common learning goals rather than stressing
competition for class grades. Learners who collaborate with each other in their learning
are likely to attain the learning goals. If classrooms are structured to encourage students to
help each other with acquisition of new skills as in co-operative learning, rather than to
compete with each other to demonstrate their superiority relative to others, attainment of
mastery, self-improvement and effort attributions will be developed. Learners will be
motivated to meet challenges and to persist when faced with difficulties.

2.5. Relationship between CL and Students' Academic Achievement

Johnson and Johnson (1988) found that CL promotes higher achievement than competitive or
individualistic learning. The results hold for several subject areas and a range of age groups
from elementary school through to adult.

12
They found that students with cooperative experiences are more able to appreciate the
perspective of others, are more positive about taking part in controversy, have better-
developed interaction skills, and have a more positive expectation about working with others
than students from competitive or individualistic settings. Slavin (1980) reported that CL were
applicable in both elementary and secondary school. He concluded that:
1. For academic achievement, cooperative learning techniques are no worse than lecture
method in most cases, they are significantly better.
2. For low level learning outcomes, such as knowledge, calculation and application principles,
CL techniques appear to be more effective than LM.
3. For high-level cognitive learning out comes, such as identifying concepts, analysis of
problems, judgment and evaluation, less structured CL techniques that involve high student
autonomy and participation in decision-making may be more effective than traditional
individualistic techniques.

2.6. The Role of Teacher in CL

A role is essentially a set of expectations imposed on a person by others; in this case, it could
be parents, society, students or school curriculum. Teachers’ role is also described as "subject
specialist, classroom director, as employee and curriculum implementer". In other words, a
teacher needs to have the role of coach, acting as a mentor, assistant and collaborator who,
with a blend of empathy, compassion and fun, guides and instructs.

The role of a teacher is assumed the essential link in the relationship between the teacher’s
functions and his/her behavior and attitude. The functions of a teacher include diagnosing,
mediating, and facilitating in the classroom. This means that the teacher has to
diagnose students' prior knowledge before bringing in new knowledge. Especially for the
newly introduced program (CL), the role of the teacher is critical to the success. At the
beginning of a cooperative lesson, the teacher's role, often in cooperation with the class, is
that of "task setter." As groups work on tasks, the teacher acts as a coach moving from group
to group to monitor the learning process.

13
In addition, give feedback on how well the groups are working together and the class as a
whole in order to ensure that small-group processing takes place, teachers allocate some time
at the end of each class session for each cooperative group to process how effectively
members worked together. From curriculum planning through to the physical layout of the
classroom, the teacher’s role is the key to success. Teachers that use cooperative learning in
their classroom play multiple roles. The way these roles are enacted depends on the age
group, the nature of the tasks students are engaged in, prior experiences of the students, and
the broader school and community culture. The following roles form the basis of the teacher’s
selection in cooperative learning activities: explicit instruction, modeling, feedback,
intervention and strategic task selection.

2.7. Basic Elements for Effective CL

In order for a lesson to be cooperative in the classroom, the following five basic elements are
included for long-term success: Those conditions are:

Positive interdependence,

Face-to-face interaction

Individual accountability

Interpersonal and small-group skills and

Group processing

2.7.1. Positive interdependence

Positive interdependence is successfully structured when group members perceive that they
are linked with each other in a way that one cannot succeed unless everyone succeeds. Group
goals and tasks, therefore, must be designed and communicated to students in ways that make
them believe they sink or swim together. When positive interdependence is solidly structured,
it highlights that
 Each group member’s efforts are required and indispensable for group success

14
  Each group member has a unique contribution to make to the joint effort because of
his/her resources and role and task responsibilities.
Doing so creates a commitment to the success of group members as well as one’s own, and is
the heart of CL. If there is no positive interdependence, there is no cooperation (Johnson et al.
1993).

2.7.2. Face-to-Face interaction

This element is made necessary by the existence of positive interdependence. By arranging

the students in small groups, seating the students face-to-face, and creating a group task such
that all group members need to work together to obtain a solution. This could be contrasted to
a traditional classroom setting in which all of the students are facing forward, working
independently, and spending the overwhelming majority of the time sitting quietly, listening
only to the teacher. Individuals providing each other with efficient and effective help and
assistance; exchanging needed resources, such as information and materials, and processing
information more efficiently and effectively; providing each other with feedback in order to
improve their subsequent performance characterize promotive interaction. Teachers structure
the groups so that students sit knee to knee and talk through each aspect of the assignment.

2.7.3. Individual accountability

The third essential element of cooperative learning is individual accountability, which exists
when the performance of individual students is assessed; the results are given back to the
individual and the group in order to ascertain who needs more assistance, and encouragement
in learning. It is important for the groups to know who needs assistant, encouragement and
help for the completion of the given tasks. According to Johnson and Johnson (1994) the
intention of cooperative learning group is to make each members of individuals learn the
given material with own effort in the future.

15
Common ways to structure individual accountability include keeping the size of the group
small, giving an individual test to each student, calling students to present his or her group’s
work for the teacher or for the whole class, observing each group and recording each group’s
contribution to the group’s work and giving roles for each student in their groups.

2.7.4. Interpersonal and small-group skills

This element of cooperative learning involves the use of interpersonal and small group skill.
But the student should be taught these social skills and be motivated to use them in
cooperative groups. To achieve common goals, the members of the groups must know each
other, accept and support each other, and resolve conflicts reflectively. Social skills for
effective cooperative work do not magically appear when cooperative lessons are employed.
Instead, social skills must be taught to students as purposefully and precisely as academic
skills. Leadership, decision-making, trust-building, communication, and conflict management
skills empower the students to manage both teamwork and task work successfully (Christson,
1994).

2.7.5. Group processing

Kagan (1994), define group processing as the discussion (among group members) of how
well group members are learning and maintaining effective working relationships. Victorina
(2000) defines as an act of reflecting on what action of the group members were helpful and
not helpful to the achievement of the goals and deciding what actions should be changed and
continued.

2.8. Barriers to CL

To effectively implement CL, teachers must adopt new roles that are frequently different from
those of their past. In lecture-based instruction, the teacher is in control and is the
"professional" providing knowledge.

16
In CL, the teacher provides directions for students how to help each other. The teacher
functions as a facilitator, and the student controls the learning process. For many teachers,
such a change is unattainable or invalid. Another factor that may inhibit application of CL is
that most of the learning programs still rely heavily on rote learning and traditional lecture
formats. It is difficult to expect teachers to adopt learning methodologies that they have not
experienced personally or through their teacher education programs. Time constraint large
class sizes are another barrier to implement CL.

2.9. Advantages and Disadvantages of CL

According to Johnson and Ahlgren (1976), the use of cooperative learning in various settings
has both advantages and disadvantages. Cooperative learning is viewed as diverse outcomes
as achievement, higher-level reasoning, time on task, transfer of learning, achievement
motivation, intrinsic motivation, continuing motivation, social and cognitive development,
moral reasoning, interpersonal attraction, social support, friendships, reduction of stereotypes
and prejudice, valuing differences, psychological health, self-esteem, social competencies,
internalization of values, the quality of the learning environment, and many other outcomes.

Through the careful process of coaching and modeling, teachers empower students to become
self-directed and independent learners, capable of approaching the kinds of complex problems
they will face as professionals. The major problem in cooperative learning is that it is difficult
to apply in large class and it more time consuming.

2.10. Lecture Method

Although some educators consider the lecture method outdated and ineffective, it offers
several advantages and reasons for its continued use. According to Adsit (2002), some points
of traditional method (lecture) were discussed as follows: Today the lecture system is the
preferred teaching style used by 89% of science professors (Timberlake, 2009). Indeed,
lecture is a comfortable format for many instructors and a non-threatening one for students.

17
It is low cost, easy to control, and an excellent method for organizing course content.
However, every teacher knows that during lecture students are not actively engaged with the
topic, they do not listen for very long time, and their retention of concepts is minimal.

All methods of instruction can be classified as telling, lecturing, or discussing; showing

or demonstrating; or any combination of these. Often the best method of teaching
combines the various methods (http://www.tpub.com/ ). It must be decided which methods
to combine and the emphasis to place on each unless the curriculum itself dictates the
combination needed. In making that decision, consider (1) the nature of the learners,
(2) the subject matter, and (3) the limitations of time. In line with the above idea, Adsit
(2002) and Nayak (2005), proposed the following strategies, for supplementing lecturing style
with other strategies.

i. When to use lecture vs. other strategies?

There are three main reasons to use the lecture format:

• to transmit information,
• to create interest,
• to promote understanding (affect)

ii. Lectures are preferred when:

• the background information is not available or accessible to the students

• the facts or problems are conflicting or confusing in nature
• the experience of speaker will contribute to clarification of the issues
• time is of the essence
• a change of pace is needed
If teachers need to lecture vs. another instructional strategy (integrating with other method),
the following should be considered:

18
iii) Advantages of the LM

• It is good to introduce a new subject or focus on a content area

• Can be used to put the subject into its context.
• Can present material that is not yet available in print or books.
• Is efficient (in transmission, not necessarily learning)

iv) Disadvantages of the LM

 In its purest form, it is a passive method of learning.

 Lecture method is inadequate for teaching certain type of concepts such as feeling,
values and skills
 Usually does not allow the opportunity for students to ask questions.
 Attempts to transfer the same content at the same pace. How can students distinguish
what is most important?
 Provides one teacher's interpretation of the subject matter.

2.11. Students Attitude and Academic Achievement

Attitudes are acquired through learning and can be changed through persuasion using variety
of techniques. Positive attitudes, once established, help to shape the experiences the individual
has with object, subject or person. Although attitude changes gradually, students constantly
form new attitudes and modify old ones when they are exposed to new information and new
experiences (Adesina and Akinbobola, 2005). Gagne (1979) defines attitudes as an internal
state that influences the personal actions of an individual. He recognized attitude as a major
factor that affected learners’ academic achievement. Alao (1990) showed that there is
positive correlation between attitudes and performance in the science subjects. Moreover, in
order to bring a positive attitude towards the subject matter using the appropriate teaching
strategy is one of the most important things developed negative attitudes to science learning
probably because teachers are unable to satisfy their student.

19
Attitudes have a positive correlation to academic achievement, it plays a great role either to
enhance or hamper academic achievement. According to Simpson et al. (1994), a negative
attitude toward a given subject leads to lack of interest and motivation. Furthermore, a
positive attitude toward science “leads to a positive commitment to science that influences
lifelong interest and learning in science” (Simpson and Oliver, 1990). This is one reason why
major science education reform efforts have emphasized the improvement of students’
attitudes.
Physics subject in the upper secondary school is a kind of “gate-keeper” for science,
technology, and medical studies. According to Johnson and Johnson (1989), cooperative
learning method promotes more positive attitudes towards the instructional experience than
traditional lecture methodologies.

Johnson and Ahlgren (1976) examined the relationships between students’ attitudes toward
cooperation, and their attitudes toward education. In support of this the above ideas Iqbal
(2004) reported that cooperative learning encourage students learn to cooperate with others
the class atmosphere tends to be relaxed and informal, help is readily available, questions are
freely asked and answered, and the shy students tend to become friends with their group
members, and the teacher -students` relationships to be more relaxed.

20
 CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This section presents description of the study area, research design, subject of the study,
procedures of data collection, the instruments used to collect data, the sampling procedure
applied and methods of data analysis.

3.1. Description of the Study Area

This study was conducted at Harar town in Harari region; Harari is one of the nine regions in
Ethiopia, which is located in the eastern part of Ethiopia at about 526km away from Addis
Ababa (the capital city). There are five governmental high schools and two private high
schools in the region. Among these, only one governmental and one private high school are
hosting preparatory program. In this study, however the governmental preparatory school was
selected because in the governmental preparatory school there is less practices of cooperative
learning as compared to the private preparatory school.

3.2. Research Design

Bless and Higson-Smith (1995) reported that research design is the specification of the most
adequate operations to be performed in order to answer the research hypothesis under a given
condition. In the present study, the design of the research was experimental research involving
two equivalent groups: experimental and control group. In this experimental research, the
experimental group was treated with the cooperative approach and the control group received
the lecture method. Both groups were treated in similar ways except the instructional
approach, assuming other conditions constant. To investigate the efficiency of cooperative
and lecture based learning in terms of conceptual understanding, changes in performance and
attitude towards physics; a comparative study was carried out using the topics of magnetism.

21
To reduce the effect of other uncontrollable variables, that might come from two different
physics instructors, both groups were taught by the same physics teacher. Finally, after
completing instruction, both experimental and control groups sat for post-test examination.

3.3. Subject of the Study

Two equivalent groups were used for conducting this research. It was carried out on Grade 12
students of Aboker preparatory schools in Harari region. Since there is no any other
governmental preparatory school in the region, the selection of students was made from the
same school. The target populations were taken from grade 12 students of 2009/2010
academic year. Most of the students were seventeen to twenty years old.

3.4. Sources of Data

In order to gather relevant information’s primary data sources were used. These include pre-
test scores, observation, interview responses, responses to questionnaires and posttest scores.

3.5. Sampling Technique

According to Bless and Higson-Smith (1995), sampling is a technical device to rationalize the
collection of information, to choose an appropriate way of selecting the restricted set of
objects, persons and events. Thus, the present study was conducted on Aboker Preparatory
Secondary School. The School was chosen deliberately since it is the only governmental
school in the region and a representative sample of (17%) 76 students were taken from the
school.

The required sample size from the school was taken by using stratified random sampling
technique. There are 442 students in the seven sections ranging from 61-67 students in a class.
To encompass the representative students from all score levels in the study, stratified random
sampling method was used.

22
Accordingly their previous physics scores of grade 11th were arranged in descending order,
then depending on the bench mark stated by the school, students were classified in to three
strata (i.e. high scorer from 80-100, average scorer from 50-79 and low scorer below 50).

Proportional representatives were taken by calculating from each stratum. From the total
number of 442 students, 76 students were taken as a representative and from 76 students 38
students were randomly assigned to experimental groups and similarly 38 students for control
group. In this grouping again, the score of the student was considered to guarantee the
equivalency of the group in terms of previous physics performance. Pre-tests were
administered to assess their prior knowledge equivalency. And there is no significant
difference between the two groups.

3.6. Methods of Data Collections

a. Delivery and Activities

The main purpose of this research was to examine the effectiveness of cooperative learning in
teaching magnetism as opposed to traditional approach. Both the control and treatment
(experimental) groups were taught the topic by the same teacher who is the researcher’s
colleague. The teacher is a BEd. holder and all physics teacher in the school including the
researcher as well as the selected teacher have participated on a workshop on the
implementations of active learning, which is presented by SOS and Pedagogy department of
Haramaya University, so the teacher is familiar with both programs (LM and CL). The total
periods allotted to cover, the portion was 28 periods and during each period the researcher
technically supported the teacher and controlled all activity. The contact times for each group
within a week were five periods (40 minutes each). The control group was given a lesson with
normal lecture as usual with some class works; whereas, treatment groups were given a lesson
with cooperative learning, where 10 to 15 minutes lecture were used to summarize the topic.
The remaining minutes were used for cooperative learning activities.

23
The main contents of the course to be learned by 12th grade students in the text are magnetic
field, magnetic force and electromagnetic induction. During implementation of CL, most of
the minutes in the period were used by learners’ discussion within group in doing practical
activities. In order to make the teaching process convenient to the level of students, firstly
essential points were determined regarding topics in magnetism. To this end, in the learning
session of experimental group the three (STAD, LTA and Jigsaw) techniques were used
where it was necessary. In STAD, students study with approximately five team members
following a teacher presentation. Students have taken quizzes individually to demonstrate
how much they have learned. The individual quiz scores are summed to form a team score,
and teams are rewarded for their performance.

Teams are made up of students with varying academic abilities. It is most appropriate for
teaching well-defined objectives with single right answers, such as specific locational
characteristics in geography and some map skills, knowledge of events in history, and
principles of economics or government ( Robert ,1990). On the other hand, for the control
group the same class periods were used for the experimental group. However, in the latter
(control group) case worksheets study and quiz were done individually.

LTA, a model involved students working in around five-member heterogeneous groups on

assignments. The groups hand in a single completed assignment and received praise and
rewards based on the group product. Where as in Jigsaw technique, students are assigned to
six member teams to work on academic task that has been broken down into sections. Each
team member was recommended to read his or her section. Next, members of different teams
who have studied the same sections meet in expert groups to discuss their sections. Then the
students return to their teams and take turns teaching their teammates about their sections.
Since the only way students can learn sections other than their own is to listen carefully to
their teammates, they are motivated to support and show interest in one another’s work.

24
b. Data Collection Procedure

Relevant data for the study were collected using multiple instruments. Both qualitative and
quantitative primary data were collected. As mentioned above based on the allotted periods,
the study was conducted for about six weeks. The overall procedures of the research involved:
Pre-test Administration: It was used to assess learners’ prior knowledge of magnetism.
Teacher made test questions were used (Appendix-I).
Post-test: was teacher-constructed test by consulting review of related literatures. The test
consisted of both multiple-choices and workout questions to measure students’ achievements.
(Appendix-II)
Instruction of Magnetism: While the control groups were instructed using lecture method
the treatment groups was taught using CL as described earlier.
Observations: During learning activity, observations were made using checklists for both
treatment and control groups. A group of physics teachers from the researcher’s colleague
prepared the questions and a panel discussions were made for the content validity.
Attitude Questionnaire: items developed by Martha Tapia (1996) were used with some
modification. The instrument consisted 16 questions that were designed to assess the students’
attitude towards physics (appendix-VI). The SATPQ comprised 16 items on five (5) rating
scale responses. The responses, Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Neutral (N), Disagree (D),
and Strongly Disagree (SD) were respectively assigned values of 5, 4,3,2,1 for positive
statements and in reverse order for negative statements. Cronbach Alpha was used to obtain
the reliability coefficient of the instrument and it was found to be 0.86. The respondents were
oriented to reason out their choice shortly. (Appendix Table VI and VII)
Interview: it was used to investigate the perception of the student about cooperative learning.
In this part, using seven open-ended items, students were asked to give their opinions
regarding CL. This instrument was administered to students after the program to get their
opinions about cooperative learning (Appendix-III).

25
3.7. Reliability and Validity

Reliability and validity are important aspects that a researcher should address if the results
and conclusions of a particular study are to be of any significance. Reliability relates to the
extent to which an instrument provides similar results every time it is administered to the
same sample at different times. Validity is the strength of conclusions, inferences or
propositions. Cook and Campbell (1979) define validity as the best available approximation
to the truth or falsity of a given inference, proposition or conclusion.

3.7.1. Reliability

The tests were piloted on 40 non-sample students to establish the reliability of the tests.
The reliability coefficient of the tests ( pre-test and post-test) was tested using KR20 formula
and the reliability coefficient was found to be 0.78 and 0.81respectively. According to Gable,
(1986) for an instrument to be considered internally consistent, scores obtained from its
administration should at least have an alpha value of .70.

3.7.2. Validity of the Test

A group of experienced physics teachers validated the contents of both tests. For obtaining
evidence about the content validity of this instrument, the PAT and SATPQ were checked by
three experienced secondary school physics teachers in terms of its format and content. They
agreed on the appropriateness of the language, and the difficulty level of the items.

3.8. Variables of the Study

A. Instructional strategies (CL and LM)

B. Performance (Pretest and Post test scores)
C. Attitude

26
3.8.1. Definition of variables

CL: An instructional strategy makes learners and stakeholders to engage in learning process.
LM: is an exposition of knowledge, facts, principle or other information, which a teacher
wishes to present to his pupils.
Pre-test score: it is the test result of learners before program were started to assess their prior
knowledge.
Post-test score: it is the test result after the treatment.
Attitude: is a positive, negative or predisposition toward physics. Is also deined as
somebody’s involvement with something that makes its progress or success.

3.8.2. Dependent variables

To investigate the effect of the two learning strategies (i.e. cooperative learning and lecture-
based learning) on learners’ achievement of magnetism, performance and attitude towards
physics were considered as dependent variables. There is a firm believe that learning
strategies can influence learners performance and attitude.

3.8.3. Independent variables

CL strategy and LM were independent variables. These variables were chosen to see their
effect on the dependent variables, based on literature review and discussions with professional
friends.

3.9. Methods of Data Analysis

The qualitative and quantitative data collected were coded, tabulated, analyzed, described and
interpreted. The data obtained from pre-test, post-tests were analyzed using the Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) of version 16 at α = 0.05 level of significance. It was
used to determine the frequencies, percent, mean, and t-value.

27
For the systematic classroom observation, each checklist point was observed for eleven
periods and the data collected during systematic classroom observation were analyzed using
frequency distribution method. There were four checklists observed for each interest and five
checklists for motivation.

The researcher described interest and motivation by using the total frequencies added for
each checklist (Appendix TablesVI and VII) for both control and experimental groups (Tables
4, and 5). Whereas students’ attitude towards physics questionnaire was analyzed, using
frequency distribution method and Mann-Whitney (u-test) tested its significance (Table 6).

3.10. Ethical Consideration

Research ethics refers to the type of agreement that the researcher enters into with his or her
research participants. The researcher has to seek the consent of those he/she is going to
interview, question, observe or take materials from. Moreover, he/she has to reach
agreements with them about the uses of the data, and how its analysis will be reported and
disseminated. According to Bell (2004), the conditions for ethical research in practice are
that all participants are offered the opportunity to remain anonymous, all information is
treated with strict confidentiality, interviewees have the opportunity to verify statements
when the research is in draft form and participants receive a copy of the final report. For this
study, ethical codes in terms of data collection, data analysis and diffusion of findings
are conformed.

In this regard, the researcher contacted the principals of the school personally in order
to seek their prior permission to administer the four research instruments. Adequate
information on the aims of the research, the procedures followed and the use of results
were given to each participant. The information from the participants was regarded as
confidential and anonymity assured. The participants were given full assurance that the
findings of the study would be used strictly for academic purposes and the taped
interviews and photos would eventually be destroyed.

28
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter presents the results obtained using the four research instruments vis-à-vis
performance test, questionnaires, interviews and classroom observations. The details of the
results are reported as follows.

4.1. Pretest and Posttest Results of Students in EG and CG

Under this topic, the APS (pre-test and post-test) results of Grade 12 students were analyzed
by using descriptive and inferential statistics as shown below.

4.1.1. Analysis of pre-test

Pretest examination was administered to investigate the background of the students on

magnetism in experimental and control groups. To check whether there is significant
differences in the background of the student in the two groups, t-test analysis at the
probability of α = 0.05 carried out using the pre test examination results.

Table 2: Comparison of EG and CG on pre-test results

Group N Mean SD MD t P df

CG 38 7.18 1.90 ± 0.02 0.055 0.96 74

EG 38 7.16 2.24

N=number of experimental and control group students, P= probability, SD= standard deviation, df=degree of
freedom, MD = mean difference, if significant at α = 0 .05 level

29
Based on the analyzed descriptive data, students’ knowledge about the topics was identified
from the pretest, which was administered before program implementation. Independent t-test
showed mean scores on the pre-test, and it was interpreted as follows: The mean score for the
experimental group was 7.16 (SD = 2.24) and 7.18 (SD= 1.90) for the control group at (t=
0.055, P = 0.96 > 0.05). This shows that students had no prior knowledge differences of basic
concepts on magnetism. Therefore, from this result it is possible to conclude that the groups
used in the study exhibited similar background knowledge on magnetism. The groups were
therefore suitable for the study in comparing cooperative and lecture-based learning on
learners attitudinal and performance change in magnetism.

4.1.2. Comparison of EG and CG on the post-test results

Differences in performance in the common topic tests between students that completed the
cooperative learning strategy (experimental group) and those who completed lecture method
(control group) were investigated by using t test. The t test (t = 4.49, P = 0.00 < 0.05)
confirmed that highly significant difference was observed between the experimental group
and control group students.

Table 2. Comparison of EG and CG on post-test results.

Group N Mean SD MD t P Df

Control 38 10.66 3.96 ±5.21 4.486 .00(**) 74

Experimental 38 15.87 5.97

N=number of experimental and control group students, P= probability, SD= standard deviation
MD=mean difference. It is significant at the α.05 level. df = degree of freedom, ** The mean
difference is significant at α = 0.05 level

The experimental group students scored better results on post-test than control group students
(Table 2). This result revealed that cooperative learning strategy is enhancing students’
academic achievement than lecture method. Johnson and Johnson (1988), have supported
similar results.
30
They found that cooperative has potential beneficiary in improving students’ achievement in
physics than competitive or individualistic learning. Similar results by Sungur et al. (2006), in
their research finding stated that students who received cooperative learning strategy could do
better, used relevant information in expressing and interpreting their ideas. This difference
may be due to positive interdependence, organizing and integrating ability of their knowledge
of the magnetism topics. As it is well known in lecture method, learners were provided with a
lot of information with less understanding in short period of time. Thus, learners will not
express or write their learning outcomes in a meaningful manner.

4.1.3. The mean gains of EG and CG students

The mean gain comparison was performed by taking the learning gains using lecture method
and cooperative learning strategy.
Table. 3. The mean gain of both CG and EG students

Group Mean The mean gain

Pre-test Post-test

Control 7.18 10.66 3.48

Experimental 7.16 15.87 8.71

The mean gain by the experimental group students was found to be greatly exceeded than
that of the control group students (Table 3). This signifies cooperative learning strategy helps
students to perform better than those in the group taught by lecture method. Graphically this
result is demonstrated as shown below.

31
Figure 1.The means gain for pretest and posttest for experimental and control group.
A mean gain is observed in both learning strategy (groups), but the mean difference of EG is
much greater than CG. In line with these Johnson et al., 1998 investigated that cooperative
learning instruction in a physical science course would improve achievement, enhance
attitude toward physical science. Hence, this result implies that cooperative learning strategy
increased students’ achievement than lecture method.

4.2. Systematic Classroom Observation using Checklist

Systematic classroom behaviors observations were conducted using the checklist formats of
(Appendix Tables IV and V). The item in the checklist measures the level of interest and
motivation in the classroom during both instructions. Such observations were carried out for
11 periods and the result was summarized using descriptive statistics as shown in Tables 4
and 5. The observation techniques were indicated in (Appendix Table IV and V).

32
4.2.1. Interest of learners

In the observation checklist, the first four items measure the interest of learners towards
physics. The main indicator of interest may be summarized as;
 Willing to attend physics class at any time
 Eager to ask and answer questions
 Engaged in the lesson
 Concerned towards cooperation in assisting one another to attain common goals
of learning
Table 4: Summarized frequency distribution of systematic classroom observation of
students interest towards the subject
No A F S R N
Groups
f % f % f % f % f %

Experimental 44 10 22.7 21 47.7 8 18.2 5 11.4 0 0

Control 44 - - 16 36.4 12 27.3 7 15.9 9 20.5

A= Always F =Frequently, S= Sometimes, R= rarely, N= not at all, f = total sum of frequencies of
each check points observed (Appendix Table IV)

One can see from Table 4 that in experimental groups 22.7% out of the total observed times
of the period under ‘Always’ column indicates that above 80% of the students demonstrated
interest towards learning. Whereas none of students in the control group demonstrated
‘Always’ interest towards learning. This depicts that cooperative learning strategy is
enjoyable and can arouse most learners’ interest than that of lecture method. Under
‘Frequently’ category, 47.7% of the total times observed 60% to 80% of the class students in
experimental groups and 36.4% showed interest willing to attend physics class at any time,
eager to ask and answer questions, engaged in the lesson, concerned towards cooperation in
assisting one another. This implies that lecture method can also catch learners’ interest to
moderate extent. Moreover under ‘sometimes’ category 18.18% of the total time 40% to 60%
of the class learners showed interest by the experimental groups towards learning.

33
While 27.27% of the observed time the CG demonstrated, interest by less number of students
for more times of the period, under ‘Some times’ category. Furthermore under ‘Rarely’
category 11.36% of EG and 15.91% of CG out of observed times, less number of students
20% to 40% of the class students in both groups showed interest for less time. Although,
under column ‘not at all’ 20.46%, of the total times observed, CG did not observe interest
behavior but regardless of the extent of interest, none 0% of the total observed times, students
of the EG failed to show interest towards learning. This result depicts that CL can create
relatively much interest in students than LM. In line with this Duch (1997) pointed out CL
prepares students to help each other, to think critically, and to find and use appropriate
learning outcomes. Furthermore, it will have positive effect on learners’ interest. A similar
research by Jonson (1990) also supports this result. He confirmed that those students who
learn with CL method; increase motivation, confidence and interest to the subject matters

4.2.2. Motivation behavior of learners

In the checklist indicators of motivation were summarized as;

 Excite to actively participate in group work, class discussion, etc
 Arouse to interact with classmate students
 Inspire to interact with teacher during his facilitating
 Stimulate to participate in dialogue debating between groups
 Students fulfill their work responsibility in the group

Table 5: Summarized frequency distribution of systematic classroom observation of

motivation behavior
No A F S R N
Groups
f % f % f % f % f %

Experimental 55 16 29.1 27 49.1 11 20 1 1.82 0 0

Control 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 9.1 50 90.0
A= Always F =Frequently, S= Sometimes, R= Rarely N= not at all, f = total sum of
frequencies of each check points observed (Appendix Tables V)

34
Table 5 clearly shows that 29.1% of the total times checked; above 80% of the total students
in experimental group always get motivated. To the contrary, none of the total times checked
the control groups were motivated perpetually. This indicates that cooperative learning
strategy can motivate learners to greater extent than lecture-based instruction. Again under
‘frequently’ category 49.1% of the times observed, 60% to 80% of the total students in
experimental groups were motivated for more times by more students than control group
students, who were not motivated 0% at all by 60% to 80% of the students. This is because
the problems and the mood of learning were provoking towards active participation.

Under ‘Sometimes’ column 20% by experimental group and none (0%) by control group
showed that 40% to 60% students motivated to an acceptable degree of motivation. This
depicts that, for less number of periods, less number of students in experimental groups were
motivated. To the contrary, for relatively high number of periods, the equivalent numbers of
students of control groups were still not motivated to an acceptable extent (sometimes).

From the total times checked, 1.82% of the times were observed under ‘Rarely’ category for
experimental groups and 9.09% for control group. Furthermore, experimental groups 0%
under ‘not at all’ category did mean that none of them failed to show motivation in all
periods; whereas 90.01% of the total times checked, control groups were not motivated. That
means, for most periods learners in control groups were not motivated. Generally, the table
indicates that most of the times learners were passive listeners in the lecture based instruction.

In line with this, Nichols and Miller (1994) reported that cooperative learning produced a
greater motivational effect on high school students studying algebra. Wang et al. (1993) also
found a strong correlation between motivation to learn and student achievement. Peterson and
Miller (2004) compared the experiences of college students during CL and large-group
instruction and found that the most consistent results of this study related to student
motivation, all aspects of which were more positive during cooperative learning. They found
that during CL students were more engaged.

35
4.3. Post-Activity Interviews

The purpose of the interview was to ‘add on’ what had been established from qualitative and
quantitative study. As soon as completion of the program ( cooperative learning strategy) an
interview was conducted in order to investigate the students’ opinions about cooperative
learning behaviors, their activities in the classroom and to cross-check students` attitude
towards physics. The administered interview questions have seven items, which were
conducted for the experimental group at the end of the program. Ten subjects were selected
randomly from experimental group and the following questions were asked:
1. Do you think that Cooperative learning class was attractive?
2. Do you think that Cooperative learning class was democratic?
3. Do you think that Cooperative Learning class puts a lot of burden on the student?
4. Do you think that Cooperative learning class promotes dependency?
5. Do you think that Cooperative learning class consumes time?
6. Which method of instruction do you favor lecture or cooperative learning?
7. What is your general opinion about cooperative learning?

For each interview question the interviewees’ responses was interpreted as follows.
The first question “Do you think that cooperative learning class was attractive?” Most of the
interviewees nine of them acknowledged that it is very interesting method to learn physics
stating their reasons as follows. The majority of them said that teacher’s role in this method
are different from lecture method.

In the lecture approach, teacher taught the topic himself/herself for almost 40 minutes. During
this time, they actively attended for the maximum of 10-20 minutes, after that they felt
uninterested. On the other hand, in cooperative learning class most of the class time was
completed by discussion amongst learners and demonstrated practical activities. They also
said that, the teacher present topic of dialogue continually and gave them time to discuss on it.
Most students said that even when they insisted him for feedback, the teacher would give
them only clues that provoked them for more work.

36
They did not find this approach boring; rather thought provoking and made them less
dependent on the teacher. In line with this Johnson and Ahlgren (1976), cooperative learning
can sustain diverse outcomes as achievement, attitude, higher-level reasoning, and time on
task, transfer of learning, achievement motivation, friendships and reduction of prejudice,
self-esteem, and internalization of values. There may be no other instructional strategy that
simultaneously achieves such diverse outcomes. Through the careful process of coaching and
modeling, teachers empower students to become self-directed and independent learners,
capable of approaching the kinds of complex problems they will face as professionals. Only
one of them feels negative about cooperative learning.

The second interview question, “Do you think that cooperative learning is democratic in your
learning of physics? All interviewees ten of them responded that cooperative learning in
physics period helped them interact freely to each other, to understand the material better and
create the class more pleasant and enjoyable. In addition to this, they said that, it helped them
to learn more, to have more fun, and to create a conformable and non-fear fill environment for
learning physics. It also helped them to practice and to solve physics questions and develop
many skills such as learning how to work with one another. They also suggested that when
they were working in groups, discussing, having dialogues with each other about the given
material, it enables them to identify misconception, formulas and rules of the topics.

The third, fourth and fifth interview questions, “Do you think that Cooperative learning class
puts a lot of burden on the student, consume time and promote dependency?” For these
interview questions the respondent reacted about the disadvantage of cooperative learning
methods, seven of the respondents refuse the idea of question three whereas three of the
respondents claimed that CL puts a lot of burden on the students. Most of the respondents six
confirmed that when they are discussing much time is wasted and it is advantageous only for
low performance students while four rejected this idea. Moreover, for the fifth question most
of the interviewees nine rejected the idea of promoting dependency where as only 1student
reported that high-performed learners dominate him.

37
The sixth interview questions, “Which method of instruction do you favor? plasma, lecture or
cooperative learning” Just nine of the respondents reported that lecture integrated with
cooperative learning strategy were favorable learning strategy for physical science especially
for physics, furthermore they have also raised the benefit of plasma only on the demonstration
part.

The last interview questions, “What is your general opinion about cooperative learning?”
In general, most of the respondents have positive attitude towards cooperative learning. In
cooperative learning, they learned by dialog and peer teaching or guiding and also the
concepts were easily understood and rehearsed; thus, the general concepts of magnetism
could be remembered for longer period. They reported that the newly introduced program is
advantageous for low performance students. When he or she exposed himself in their group
setting, he or she may improve his or her learning. They also suggested that it shows the way
to work as a team and increases good relationships among members. Furthermore, students
indicated that the group activities and tests helped them understand the course material better.
In other words, cooperative learning is advantageous for mastering a given material. They
also gave further opinion that they develop self-confidence in doing problems and decrease
anxiety when taking tests.

In addition, they responded that the complex concepts or difficult problems are to become
easier when they learn physics by using cooperative learning. In conclusion, it was forwarded
that cooperative learning enhances teacher-student and student-student social interaction.
These interaction encouraged students to share their ideas, knowledge and concepts, connect
prior concepts with new ones and construct their knowledge effectively. Therefore, students
learn about physics concept easily. For this reason, it can be said that cooperative learning is
a better means for effecting teaching- learning than traditional learning method.

38
4.4. Students` Attitude towards Physics.

To assess the attitude of students towards physics, a questionnaire with 16 items was
administered from Martha (1996) with some modification and has five likert scales from
strongly disagree to strongly agree for both control and experimental groups. A frequency and
percentage distribution analysis were performed to compare learners’ attitudinal change using
concepts in magnetism and its significant is tested using Mann-Whitney (U-test) at a
probability level of α = 0.05. Moreover, the results of the two groups are discussed by
referring each attitude question as follows.

39
Table 6 Frequency distribution of students’ attitude towards physics for both groups.

No Group SA A N D SD U-test
f % f % f % f % f %
1 CG 2 5.3 5 13.2 13 34.2 9 23.7 9 23.7 .000(**)
EG 11 28.9 25 65.8 2 5.3 - - - -
2 CG 8 21.1 11 28.9 9 23.7 7 18.4 3 7.9 .000(**)
EG - - - - 6 15.8 6 15.8 26 68.4
3 CG 14 36.8 10 26.3 4 10.5 6 15.8 4 10.5 .006(**)
EG 3 7.9 2 5.3 9 23.7 7 18.4 17 44.7
4 CG 3 7.9 10 26.3 10 26.3 8 21.1 7 18.4 .000(**)
EG 12 31.6 10 26.3 9 23.7 6 15.8 1 2.6
5 CG 6 15.8 10 26.3 9 23.7 4 10.5 9 23.7 .014(**)
EG 21 55.3 15 39.5 1 2.6 - - 1 2.6
6 CG 4 10.5 8 21.1 9 23.7 8 21.1 9 23.7 .000(**)
EG 7 18.4 19 50.0 7 18.4 2 5.3 3 7.9
7 CG 16 42.1 8 21.1 4 10.5 5 13.2 5 13.2 .000(**)
EG 3 7.9 2 5.3 5 13.2 8 21.1 20 52.6
8 CG 15 39.5 9 23.7 6 15.8 4 10.5 4 10.5 001(**)
EG 2 5.3 8 21.1 8 21.1 7 18.4 13 34.2
9 CG 9 23.7 5 13.2 10 26.3 6 15.8 8 21.1 .005(**)
EG 18 47.4 11 28.9 4 10.5 2 5.3 3 7.9
10 CG 3 7.9 7 18.4 10 26.3 8 21.1 10 26.3 .019(**)
EG 11 28.9 11 28.9 8 21.1 3 7.9 5 13.2
11 CG 12 31.6 12 31.6 6 15.8 4 10.5 4 10.5 .012(**)
EG 6 15.8 6 15.8 6 15.8 8 21.1 12 31.6
12 CG 3 7.9 6 15.8 11 28.9 6 15.8 12 31.6 .000(**)
EG 17 44.7 10 26.3 7 18.4 1 2.6 3 7.9
13 CG 7 18.4 4 10.5 9 23.7 11 28.9 7 18.4 .000(**)
EG 15 39.5 12 31.6 6 15.8 3 7.9 2 5.3
14 CG 6 15.8 7 18.4 10 26.3 10 26.3 5 13.2 .398
EG 20 52.6 11 28.9 3 7.9 1 2.6 3 7.9
15 CG 20 52.6 11 28.9 3 7.9 1 2.6 3 7.9 .144
EG 7 18.4 10 26.3 4 10.5 9 23.7 8 21.1
16 CG 14 37.8 8 21.6 5 13.5 4 10.8 6 16.2 .001(**)
EG 6 15.8 4 10.5 7 18.4 10 26.3 11 28.9
SA=Strongly Agree, A=Agree , N=Neutral, D= Disagree, SD= Strongly Disagree and f=frequency
α = 0.05 level

40
As it can be seen from Table 6 for item 1, which says, “Physics is very interesting to me”
28.9% and 65.5% from experimental group, 5.3% and 13.2% from control group, responded
strongly agreed and agreed respectively. That means, 94.4% from experimental group are
highly interested to physics while only 18.5% from control group. 5.3% from experimental
group and 34.2% from control group showed neutral interest; whereas the majority of control
groups’ students 47.4% showed no interest in physics. This result was confirmed from the
second question, which is the reverse of the former one. Almost half of the control group 50%
revealed their dislike to the subject. So that the u-test confirmed that in both items there is
significant difference in attitude between the two groups at p = 0.00 < 0.05.

For item 3 the analyses result was made for the question “I am always under a terrible anxiety
in physics class” It was obtained that about half 50% of control group students responded
always they approach physics as appalling (very badly). Whereas only (13.2%) of
experimental group supported this result. Equal number of respondents in both group (23.7%)
responded neutral while 63.1 % from experimental group and 26.3% of control group rejected
this idea or responded negatively. Moreover, the u-test shows a significant difference between
the two groups in terms of the level of strain in physics class.

The result obtained for item 4 revealed that more than half of the experimental group students
(57.9%) consider physics fascinating and fun. The percentage of students in control group
considering physics as fascinating and fun is about 34.2%, which is less than the average.
This is not surprising as the latter result conquers with the result obtained on item 1 and 2 for
control groups and are significantly different at p = .000 < 0.05.

Furthermore, The general mood towards physics was also assessed in item 5, a total of 94.8%
and 42.1% of experimental and control group students responded between “strongly agree”
and “agree” respectively. This implies that the experimental group showed positive felling
towards physics than do control group, the u-test also confirms this result at p = 0.014 < 0.05.

41
For item 6, which assessed students comfort level and thought-provoking of physics, majority
of students 68.4% of EG and 31.6% of CG replied in between “strongly agree” and “agree”
as they are comfortable with physics and at the same time it is stimulating them. 63.2% of
students from control group and only 26.4% of experimental group students approach Physics
with hesitation (Item 8). Moreover, 76.32% from experimental group and (36.84%) of control
group students responded that they really love physics (Item 9) for both items the u-test shows
as there were a significant difference between the two groups at p < 0.05.

Furthermore, 71.05% of experimental and only 28.9% of control group are replied that they
participated in physics discussions class and was pleasant (Item 13). In line with this, Johnson
and Johnson (1988) found that students with cooperative experiences are more able to
appreciate the perspective of others, are more positive about taking part in conversation, have
better-developed interaction skills, and have a more positive expectation about working with
others than students from competitive or individualistic settings.

th
Almost above ¾ (81.58%) of experimental group are motivated by the newly introduced
teaching learning process where as 13 students 34.2% of control group have good felling
towards teaching learning process (Item14). 31 students 81.58% form control group and 17
students’ 44.7% experimental group have claimed that they have anxiety of the subject matter
because of different factors (difficulty of the subject matter, lack of laboratory, unavailability
of reference books, teachers’ motivation, methodology etc.).Furthermore, the u-test at p =
0.398 > 0.05 and p = 0.144 > 0.05 confirmed that there were no significant differences in
attitude for item 14 and 15.

In general, from the above result, it can be concluded that students who are engaged with
cooperative learning have somewhat better positive attitude than lecture method and a
significant difference is obtained on each item except item 14 and 15 by Mann-Whitney test
(u-test), which is similar result to that of the post-test result. Johnson and Johnson (1989)
supported this result. They confirmed that, cooperative learning method promotes more
positive attitudes towards the instructional experience than traditional lecture methodologies.

42
 CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1. Summary

The poor performance and negative attitude of learners towards physics in preparatory level is
a call for improvement in delivery approach. An efficient and enjoyable ways of
communicating physics concepts is determinant for attitudinal and performance change. This
can be done by modifying the existing learning strategies or applying new strategies.
Ethiopian system of education has been criticized for its lecture methods of teaching. Thus, in
this study lecture method was compared with cooperative learning method to investigate in
which of the two methods of teaching learners develop a positive attitude and perform better
by using in magnetism concept.

For conducting the research, the randomly selected 76 students were ranked by using 11th
grade average mark and classified in to three strata according to the school benchmark. From
the ranked proportionality were calculated and stratified either students consequently 38
students were assigned randomly to control or treatment groups.

The study presented characteristics of CL, its features and application to learning magnetism
concepts by supplementing the lecture methods. The achievements of students’ taught by CL
indicated significant mean differences as compared to lecture method. From observation,
interview and questionnaires, learners’ attitudes towards physics while cooperative learning
were tangibly changed. This was crosschecked from posttest result. Learners were observed
more beneficial from learning magnetism by cooperative learning than lecture method.
Studies on cooperative learning indicates that it may particularly beneficial for lower ability
learners, partly because it does induce the active, inquiring, orderly approach to learning that
is likely a more natural part of the higher ability student’s approach to learning.

43
Furthermore, cooperative learning may become effective for high achievers too if they are
encouraged to periodically check their activity during the learning process. Opinions were
also forwarded that during learning by CL learners did feel responsibility not only for their
own learning but also for his/her group member.

5.2. Conclusion

From the comparative analysis between experimental group and control group students, there
were significant differences between groups on the measured variables. The finding of the
study revealed that the mean difference between the two groups were about ±5.21 (i.e.
experimental group students using cooperative learning performed better than lecture method)
and as the Mann-Whitney U-test showed that as there is a significant difference (p = 0.00 <
0.05) in attitude between the two group, where students who were taught with cooperative
learning showed positive attitude than those who were taught with lecture method). From this,
it is clear that the teaching- learning strategy if the main important factor for students’ attitude
towards physics and their academic achievement in physics. Thus, the finding leads to
conclude that it is suitable to teach physics with cooperative learning strategy and convey an
attitudinal and performance change than lecture method. Moreover, learners were not shy to
express their feeling, there was a positive interdependence among learners, and the classes
were democratic and had improved their achievement. Hence, they were benefited in learning
physics easily through cooperative learning methods.

44
5.3. Recommendation

According to the findings of the study, preparatory school students’ attitude and achievement
in physics was promising. Thus based on the study, the following recommendations are
forwarded for the concerned stakeholders.
1. To improve learners’ achievement and help them to develop positive attitude towards
physics, government and non government educational agencies should prepare
workshops, seminars and conferences to discuss on how to address better techniques of
teaching physics with newly innovated techniques of learning.
2. Teachers on the job should update themselves of the innovative techniques (like CL) on
how to popularize it in school. That would improve their students’ attitude and academic
achievement.
3. Teachers need to adapt CL as supplementary to lecture methods of teaching. That will
improve learners’ understanding of the subject.
4. Teachers should have good skills of coordinating and facilitating the classroom
activities.
5. CL class is democratic with teachers’ friendly involvement behavior in CL task
activities. This in turn encourage students easily communicate and ask questions freely.
Thus, teachers should create friendly relationship with their students.
6. Physics teachers shall be always ready to check their delivery approach from time to
time and search for better one in line with active learning strategy.
7. The school should arrange workshop to train teachers to use CL.
8. The school should have to include CL in teachers’ efficiency measuring checklist.
9. Further research should be done how to accommodate for large class size while using
CL in the Ethiopian context

45
 6. REFERENCES

Adsit, k.I., 2002. Lecturing with style. Grayson H. Walker Teaching Resource Center, the
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga.

Adesina, A.O. and A.O.Akinbobola, 2005. The attitude of students towards part-time degree
programme of the faculty of education, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife. Journal of
Research of Education, 2(1), 1-4.

Akinbobola, A.O., 2006. Effects of teaching methods and study habits on students;
achievement in senior secondary school physics, using a pictorial organizer. Unpublished
Ph.D dissertation, University of Uyo, Uyo, Nigeria.

Alao, E. A., 1990. A scale for measuring secondary school students’ attitude towards physics
Journal of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 26(2), 75-79.
`
Bell, J., 2004. Doing your research project: a guide for first-time researchers in education and
social science. UK: Open University Press.

Bless, C. and C. Higson-Smith, 1995. Fundamentals of social research methods: An African

Perspective. Juta and Co, Ltd.

Brubacher M., R. Payne and K.Rickett, 1990. Perspective on Small Group Learning. Theory
and Practice. Ontario: Rubicon Publishing Inc.

Carson, L., 1990. Cooperative learning in the home economics classroom. Journal of Home
Economics, 82(4), 31-41.

Chabay, R. and B. Sherwood, 2006.Restructuring the introductory electricity and magnetism

course, American Journal of Physics.

Christson M., 1994. Cooperative Learning in the EFL Classroom. In T.Kral (ed.). Teacher
Development: Making the Right Moves. Selected Articles from the English Teaching Forum.
1989-1993. Washington English Language Program Division.

Cole, P. G. and K.S.C. Lorna, 1994. Teaching principles and practice, 2nd edn., MC
Pherson’s printing group.Australia.300-444.

Cook, T. D. and D. T. Campbell, 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design & Analysis

Issues for Field Settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Cozby, C.P., 2001. Methods in Behavioral Research, 7th edn., McGraw.Hill companies,Inc.
USA. 132-133.
46
Duch, J.B., 1997. Problem-based learning. Uni.of Delaware. http://www.udel.edu/pdl/.
Retrieved on August 23, 2008.

Dunn, J. W. and J. Barbanel, 2000. One Model for an Integrated Math/Physics Course
Focusing onElectricity and Magnetism and Related Calculus Topics. American. Journal of
Physics. 68,749–757.

Eagly, A. H. and S. Chaiken, 1993. The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, FL: Harcourt
Brace & Company.

Fantahun Aklog., 2007. Attitude of chemistry students towards chemistry. An M Ed. Thesis
submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Haramaya University.

Gable, K., 1986. Instrument Development in the Affective Domain. Boston: Kluwer-
Nijhoff.

Gagne, R.M., 1979. The conditions of learning (3rd Edition). New York: Holt Rinehart and
Winston.

Guisasola, J., J.M. Almud and J. L.Zubimendi, 2004. Difficulties in Learning the
Introductory Magnetic Field Theory in the First Years of University. Science Education. 88,
443–464.

Howey, S.C., 2008. Factors in Student Motivation, National Academic Advising Association

Ivowi, U.M.O., 1997. Redesigning school curricula in Nigeria. WCCI region 2 seminar,
NERDC conference center, Lagos. 2-21.

Iqbal, M., 2004. Effect of cooperative learning in the Secondary school student achievement
in mathematics. University of arid agriculture press, Californian.

Johnson, D.W. and A. Ahlgren, 1976. Relationship between attitudes about cooperation and
competition and attitudes toward schooling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(1), 92-
102.

Johnson, D.W. and R.T. Johnson, 1990. Social skills for successful group work. Educational
Leadership, 47(4), 29-23.

Johnson, R.T. and D.W. Johnson, 1988. Cooperative learning: Two heads learn better than
one. Transforming Education: Retrieved August 18, 2009 from: http://www.context.org
/ICLIB/IC18/Johnson.htm

Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson, and E.J. Holubec, 1986. Circles of learning: Cooperation
in classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

47
Johnson, D.W. and R.T. Johnson, 1994. Cooperative Learning in the Classroom. Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum.

Johnson, D.W.; R.T. Johnson and E.J. Holubec, 1993. Online.Cooperative Learning.
Available at http://www.co.operation. org/pages/c/.htm/.

Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson and K.A. Smith, 1998. Active Learning: Cooperation in the
College Classroom, 2nd ed., Interaction Book Company, Edina, MN.

Kagan, S., 1994. Cooperative Learning. San Clemente. CA: Kagan Publishers

Kizlik, B., 2009. Instructional method information. Education Information for New and
Future Teachers. Accessed from http://www.adprima.com/teachmeth.htm on july23,2009.

Lecture method: instructional methods techniques.htt:/www.tpub.com/content/advancement/

12045/css/12045_68.htm. Retrieved on 13-May-09.

Levine, W., 2009. Motivation: A simple formula to spark interest in kids and teens. Retrieved
on June23, 2009. http://www.motivationlogs.com/.

Matt.B., 2007. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070713054143AAMqip g

Retrieved on June 06, 2007

Marta, T., 1996 Attitude towards Mathematics inventory.

Mekonnen Gorfu, 2008. The effect of learning log on the academic performance. Ethiopian
Journal of Education and Science, 3(2): 2-3.

Mestre, J. P., R. J. Dufresne., W. J. Gerace., P. T Hardiman and J. S .Touger, 1993.

Promoting skilled problem-solving behavior among beginning physics students, Journal of
Research in Science Teaching 30, 303-317.

Nayak, A.K.U.K.S., 2005. Science education. Published by Ajay Verma, New Delhi.130-136.

Nichols, J.D. and R.B.Miller, 1994. Cooperative learning and student motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 167-178

O’Malley, J.M and A.U. Chamot, 2009. Learning strategies in second language acquisition.1.

Otis, H.K and H.J. Alex, 2006. Concept mapping in problem-based learning: a cautionary
tale. Journal of chemistry Education Research and Practice. http://www.rsc.org, retrieved on
sept10, 2008.

Robert E., 1990. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
48
Saarelainen, M., A. Laaksonen, and P.E. Hirvonen, 2007. Students’ Initial Knowledge of
Electric and Magnetic Fields—More Profound Explanations and Reasoning Models for
Undesired Conceptions. European Journal of Physics. 28, 51–60.

Sillitto, R. and L.M. MacKinnon, 2000. Going SPLAT! - Building a multimedia educational
resource for physics learners. Physics Education, 35(5), 325-331

Simpson, R. D. and J. S Oliver, 1990. A summary of major influences on attitude toward

and achievement in science among adolescent students. Science Education. 74 (1),
1-18

Slavin, R. E., 1980. Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315-342

Slavin, R.E., 1987. Examination of the effect of cooperative and Preventative torturing
in students’ achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 105

Slavin, R.E., 1990. Cooperative learning theory research and practice. England Cliff.
N.J.: Prentice Hal.

Slavin, R. and Cooper, 2000. Improving intergroup relations: Lessons learned from
cooperative learning programs. Journal of Social Issues, 56: 647-663.

Smithers, R., 2006. Physics in downward spiral as pupils think it is too difficult. UK: The
Guardian, September 10, 2009

Sungur ,S., C. Tekkaya , and Ö. Geban, 2006. Improving achievement through Cooperative
learning. Middle East Technical University, Turkey, 155-160.

Temechegn Engida, 2008. Active learning in chemistry. Lecture note. Haramaya University.
12-23,34-83.

Timberlake, K., 2009. Using student centered learning strategies in the chemistry classroom.
Retrieved on 20/5/09. http://www.karentimberlake.com/.

Tolla Gemeda, 2004. Motivational orientation, learning strategy and achievement: Among
secondary high schools students in North Shoa. AThesis Paper Presented at Addis Ababa
University, Ethiopia.1-12.

Törnkvist, S., K.A. Pettersson, and G. Tranströmer, 1993 Confusion by Representation: on

Student’s Comprehension of the Electric Field Concept. American. Journal of Physics. 61,
335–338.

Treer, P., 2006. Motivation. Retrieved on June24/09. http://www.d.umn.edu/kmc/student/loon

/acad/strat/motivate.html. UMD student Hand book. University of Minnesota Duluth.

49
Victorina, O.A., 2000. Principles and Strategies of teaching. Rex printing Company, iNC.233.
Wagaman, J., 2008. How to Motivate Your Students: Nine motivating ideas for teachers.
http://www.suite101.com/daily.cfm/2008-11-10. Education and Career

Wang, M., G. Haertel, and H. Walberg, 1993. Toward a knowledge base for school learning.
Review of Educational Research, 63(3), 249-294

Williams, C., M.Stanisstreet, K.Spall, E. Boyes and D. Dickson, 2003. Why aren't secondary
students interested in physics? Physics Education, 38 (4), 324-329

Woolnough, B.E., 1994. Why students choose physics, or reject it. Physics Education, 29(6),
368-374

50
 7. APPENDICES

7.1. Appendix-I : Pre-test

HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES COLLEGE OF NATURAL

AND COMPUTITIONAL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
The purpose of this examination is to collect information about grade 12 students’ previous
level of understanding of concepts in magnetism (magnetic field, magnetic force and
electromagnetic induction). The information to be obtained is going to be used only for
research undertaking. Therefore, your cooperation is highly valuable to complete the study.
Age____________________________________Sex____________________________
Thank you in advance!!
Time Allowed 1.50 hr
Direction: This paper consists of 25 multiple choices, 3 short answer and 4 work out problems
.Read each question carefully. Write the necessary steps clearly.
I. CHOOSE THE CORRECT ANSWER FOR THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS
1. A vertical wire carries a current straight up in a region where the magnetic field vector
points due north. What is the direction of the resulting force on this current?
a) Down c) East
b) North d) West
2. A wire carries a current of 10 A in a direction of 300 with respect to the direction of a 0.30-
T magnetic field. Find the magnitude of the magnetic force on a 0.50 m length of the wire.
a) 1.5 N c) 7.50 N
b) 6.0 N) d) 0.75 N
3) What is the force per meter on a straight wire carrying 5.0 A when it is placed in a
magnetic field of 0.80 T? The wire makes an angle of 30 0 with respect to the magnetic field
lines
a) 0.02 N c) 0.4 N
b) 0.04 N d) None

51
4) At a particular instant, an electron moves eastward at speed V in a uniform magnetic field
that is directed straight downward. The magnetic force that acts on it is
a) Zero. c) Directed to the south
b) Directed upward. d) None of the above
5) A charged particle moves with a constant speed through a region where a uniform magnetic
field is present. If the magnetic field points straight upward, the magnetic force acting on this
particle will be maximum when the particle moves
a) Straight upward. c) Upward at an angle of 600 above the horizontal
b) Straight downward d) None of the above.
6) A proton travels at a speed of 8.0X107 m/s through a 10T magnetic field. What is the
magnitude of the magnetic force, which acts on the proton if the angle between the proton's
velocity and the magnetic field vector is 300?
a) 6.0X10-14 N c) 2.0X10-12 N e) None
b) 9.0X10-14 N d) 7.0X10-12 N
7) A proton has a speed of 3.0X106 m/s in a direction perpendicular to a uniform magnetic
field, and the proton moves in a circle of radius 0.20 m. What is the magnitude of the
magnetic field?
a) 0.080 T c) 0.16 T
b) 0.24 T d) 0.32 T
8) Which of the following is correct?
a) When a current carrying wire is in your right hand, thumb in the direction of the
magnetic field lines, your fingers point in the direction of the current.
b) When a current carrying wire is in your left hand, thumb in the direction of the
magnetic field lines, your fingers point in the direction of the current.
c) When a current carrying wire is in your right hand, thumb in direction of the current
your fingers point in the direction of the magnetic field lines.
d) When a current carrying wire is in your left hand, thumb pointing in the direction
of the current, your fingers point in the direction of the magnetic field lines.
9) How much current must flow for 1.0X10-3 T of magnetic field to be present 1.0 cm from a
wire? a)50 A c) 9.2 A
b) 16 A d) 25A
52
10).A long straight wire carries current toward the east. A proton moves toward the east
alongside and just south of the wire. What is the direction of the force on the proton?
a) North c).south
b) Down d).None
11. Two long parallel wires carry currents of 5.0 A and 8.0 A in the same direction. The
wires are separated by 0.30 m. Find the magnetic force per unit length between the two
wires.
a) 2.7X10-5 N attractive c) 7.2X10-5 N attractive
b) 2.7X10-5 ) repulsive d.7.2X10-5 N repulsive
12) Two long parallel wires carry equal currents. The magnitude of the force between the
wires is F. The current in each wire is now doubled. What is the magnitude of the new
force between the two wires?
a.4F c) 3F
b. F/4 d) F/2
13) A charged particle is observed traveling in a circular path in a uniform magnetic field. If
the particle had been traveling twice as fast, the radius of the circular path would be
a) Twice the original radius. c) Four times the original radius.
b) One-half the original radius. d) one-fourth the original radius.
14) In a mass spectrometer, a single-charged particle (charge e) has a speed of 1.0X106 m/s
and enters a uniform magnetic field of 0.20 T. The radius of the circular orbit is 0.020 m.
What is the mass of the particle?
a) 1.7X10-27 kg c) 6.4X10-28 kg
b) 3.1X10-31 kg d) 3.2X10-28 kg
15)If the magnetic flux in a circular loop of 800 turns and radius 10cm varies uniformly from
0.4T to 0.7T in 2 times of1 minute, then what is the induce emf in the coil?
a) 5.024V c) 1.265 V
b) 4.025V d) None

53
16)300 turns of 2 copper wires are wound on a wooden cylinder of radius 0.2m. If the
magnetic field through the coil is changed at a uniform rate from a value of 0.2T to 09T in 0.2
sec, what will be the emf between the two ends?
a) 42v c) 40.5v
b) 24v d) None
17) Two long parallel wires carry currents of 10 A in opposite directions. They are separated
by 40 cm. What is the magnetic field in the plane of the wires at a point that is 20 cm from
one wire and 60 cm from the other?
a. 3.3X10-6 T c) 3.3X 10-5 T
b. 6.7X10-5 T d) 4.5X 10-5 T
18) A long solenoid is wound with 600 turns per meter and the current in its windings is
increasing at a rate of 40A\s. If the cross-sectional area of the solenoid is 8cm2, what will be
the rate of change of magnetic flux?
a) 6Wb/s c) 8Wb/s
b) 12Wb/s d) None of the above
19)A conductor of length 40cm2 is moving perpendicular to a magnetic field of 0.5T with a
velocity of 20m/sec, is connected to an external resistance 0f 4Ώ. Find the charge flow in 2
seconds. a) 4coulombs c) 3 coulombs
b) 2coulombs d) None
20) A coil of wire has a mutual inductance of 1.8H changes its current at a rate of 8A/s,
compute the induced emf of the coil.
a) 14.4v c) -14.4v
b) 4.14v d) None
21) What is the energy stored in a 40mH inductor at the instant when the current is 4A
a) 0.23J c) 2.3J
b) 0.32J d) 3.2J
22) A 40mHself-inductor carries a current of 5A. If the energy is stored in a 40cm2 of air
what is the magnetic fielding if the core is air field?
a) 0.56T c) 5.62T
b) 0.96T d) 9.65T

54
23) A long solenoid is wound with 500 turns per meter and the current in its windings is
increasing at a rate of 20A/s. If the cross-sectional area of the solenoid is 5cm2, what will be
the rate of change of magnetic flux?
a) 628x10-3Wb/s c) 6.28x10-3wb/s
b) 6.28x10-4 Wb/s d) 3.14 x10-3wb/s
24) One of the following does not determine magnetic flux?
a. Magnitude of magnetic field c) change in area
b) Orientation area d) none
25) A generator having 500 turns has an area of 200 cm2 and rotates in a magnetic field
of 20T. How fast the coil must be rotating to produce a maximum emf of 4v
a) 0.02rad/s c) 0.06 rad/s
b) 0.04rad/s d) none
II WRITE THECORRECT ANSWER
26) State faradays law and Lenz’s law.
27) What do mean by mutual inductance?
28) Motional emf is also called______________________________________

III SHOW ALL THE NECESSARY STEPS FOR THE FOLLOWING PROBLEM
29) In an air core solenoids the magnetic field is B, what will be the magnetic field when a
material of magnetic permeability is introduced in the solenoids?
30) A wire of length carrying a current of Io placed perpendicular to a circular magnetic field
of magnitude Bo experience a force Fo. If the length of the wire is reduced by half and the
magnetic field increased by three fold, find the current I in the new wire the force acting it has
the same magnitude, Fo.
31) A square of loop 10cm on a side is placed in a uniform magnetic field of 0.2T pointing
along the x-axis. Calculate the maximum flux through the loop and state the orientation of the
loop that gives the maximum flux.
32) An electron is moving at right angle to a 0.5T magnetic field at a speed of 1.6x105m/s. If
the mass of electron is about 9x10-31kg
a) Calculate the force act on the particle
b) Calculate the acceleration of electron experience because of this force.

55
7.2. Appendix-II: Post-test

HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES COLLEGE OF NATURAL

AND COMPUTITIONAL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
Time Allowed 1.50hr
Age___________________ Sex___________________
Direction: This paper consists of 27 multiple choice, 2 objectives and 3 work out problems
.Read each question carefully. Write the correct answer.
II. CHOOSE THE CORRECT ANSWER FOR THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS
1. A wire, 50 cm long, lies along the x-axis and carries a current of 0.50 A in the positive x
direction in a magnetic field, B = (0.003 ˆj +0.01kˆ)T .What is the force on the wire.
a) ( -2.5 x10-3 ˆ j + 0.75x 10 -3 k)ˆ N c) (75x 10-3j -2.5 x10 ˆk) N
b) (0.75x 10-3 j +2.5 x10-3 ˆk)N d)None
2. Circular loop of radius 5 cm is placed in a uniform magnetic field of magnitude 0.03 T.
A current of 1 A flow in the loop. What is the maximum magnetic torque that can be
exerted on the loop?
a). (2.4 x 104 Nm c) 2.4 x 10-4 Nm
b) 4 x 10-4 Nm d) 3.5 x 10-5 Nm
3. Two parallel conductors a distance 10 cm apart. Currents are in the same direction. I1=5 A
and I2 = 10 A. Then what is the force per unit length between the conductors?
a) 2 x 104 N/m c) 10 x 10-4 Nm
b) b) 10-4 N/m d) 10-5 Nm
4) What is the force per meter on a straight wire carrying 5.0 A when it is placed in a
magnetic field of 0.80 T? The wire makes an angle of 300with respect to the magnetic field
lines
a) 0.02 N c) 0.4 N
b) 0.04 N d) None
5) At a particular instant, an electron moves eastward at speed V in a uniform magnetic
field that is directed straight downward. The magnetic force that acts on it is
a) Zero. b) Directed to the south c) Directed upward d) Directed to west

56
6) A charged particle moves with a constant speed through a region where a uniform magnetic
field is present. If the magnetic field point’s straight upward, the magnetic force acting on
this particle will be maximum when the particle moves
a) Straight upward c) Straight downward
b) Upward at an angle of 600 above the horizontal d) None.
7) A proton travels at a speed of 8.0X107 m/s through a 10T magnetic field. What is the
magnitude of the magnetic force which acts on the proton if the angle between the proton's
velocity and the magnetic field vector is 300?
a) 6.0X10-14 N c) 9.0X10-14 N
b) 2.0X10-12 N d) 7.0X10-12 N e) None
8). Three particles of equal mass follow the paths numbered 1,2 and 3, through a uniform
magnetic field directed out of the page. What can you say about their charges?

a) +ve,-ve and neutral respectively c) Neutral respectively +ve, and –ve

b) –ve, +ve and neutral respectively d) none
9) Which of the following is correct?
a) When a current carrying wire is in your right hand, thumb in the direction of the magnetic
field lines, your fingers point in the direction of the current.
b) When a current carrying wire is in your left hand, thumb in the direction of the magnetic field
lines, your fingers point in the direction of the current.
c) When a current carrying wire is in your right hand, thumb in direction of the current, your
fingers point in the direction of the magnetic field lines.
d) When a current carrying wire is in your left hand, thumb pointing in the direction of the
current, your fingers point in the direction of the magnetic field lines.

57
10) How much current must flow for 1.0X10-3 T of magnetic field to be present?
1.0 cm from a wire?
a) 50 A c) 16 A
b) 9.2 A d) 25A
11). A long straight wire carries current toward the east. A proton moves toward the east along
side and just south of the wire. What is the direction of the force on the proton?
a) south c).North
b).Down d).None
12. Two long parallel wires carry currents of 5.0 A and 8.0 A in the same direction. The wires
are separated by 0.30 m. Find the magnetic force per unit length between the two wires.
a) 2.7X10-5 N attractive c) 2.7X10-5 N repulsive
b) 7.2X10-5 N attractive d.7.2X10-5 N repulsive
13) Two long parallel wires carry equal currents. The magnitude of the force between the wires
is F. The current in each wire is now doubled. What is the magnitude of the new force
between the two wires?
a) 4/F c) F/4
b) 3F d) F/2 e) none
14) A charged particle is observed traveling in a circular path in a uniform magnetic field.
If the particle had been traveling twice as fast, the radius of the circular path would be
a) Twice the original radius. c) Four times the original radius.
b) One-half the original radius. d) one-fourth the original radius.
15) In a mass spectrometer, a single-charged particle (charge e) has a speed of 1.0X106 m/s
and enters a uniform magnetic field of 0.20 T. The radius of the circular orbit is 0.020 m.
What is the mass of the particle?
a) 1.7X10-27 kg c) 3.1X10-31 kg
b) 6.4X10-28 kg d) 3.2X10-28 kg
16) If the magnetic flux in a circular loop of 800 turns and radius 10cm varies uniformly from
0.4T to 0.7T in 2 times of1 minute, then what is the induce emf in the coil?
a) 5.024V c) 1.265 V
b) 4.025V d) None

58
 17) 300 turns of copper wires are wound on a wooden cylinder of radius 0.2m. If the magnetic
field through the coil is changed at a uniform rate from a value of 0.2T to 09T in 0.2 sec,
what will be the emf between the two ends?
a) 42v c) 24v
b) 40.5v d) None
18) Two long parallel wires carry currents of 10 A in opposite directions. They are separated
by 40 cm. What is the magnetic field in the plane of the wires at a point that is 20 cm from
one wire and 60 cm from the other?
a) 3.3X10-6 T c) 6.7X10-5 T
b) 3.3X 10-5 T d) 4.5X 10-5 T
19) A long solenoid is wound with 600 turns per meter and the current in its windings is
increasing at a rate of 40A\s. If the cross-sectional area of the solenoid is 8cm2, what will be
the rate of change of magnetic flux?
a) 9Wb/s c) 12Wb/s
b) 8Wb/s d) None of the above
20) A conductor of length 40cm2 is moving perpendicular to a magnetic field of 0.5T with a
velocity of 20m/sec, is connected to an external resistance 0f 4Ώ. Find the charge flow in 2
seconds. a) 4coulombs c) 5 coulombs
b) 2coulombs d) none
21) A coil of wire has a mutual inductance of 1.8H changes its current at a rate of 8A/s,
compute the induced emf of the coil.
a) 14.4v c) 4.14v
b) -14.4v d) None
22) What is the energy stored in a 40mH inductor at the instant when the current is 4A
a) 0.23J c) 0.32J
b) 2.3J d) 3.2J
23) A 40mHself-inductor carries a current of 5A. If the energy is stored in a 40cm2
of air what is the magnetic fielding if the core is air field?
a) 0.56T c) 0.96T
b) 5.62T d) 9.65T

59
 24) A long solenoid is wound with 500 turns per meter and the current in its windings
is increasing at a rate of 20A/s. If the cross-sectional area of the solenoid is 5cm2,
what will be the rate of change of magnetic flux?
a) 6.28x10-4 Wb/s c) 6,28x10-3Wb/s
b) 3.14 x10-3wb/s d) 6.28x10-3wb/s
25) Calculate the induced emf in a solenoid containing 300 turns if the length of
the solenoid is 25 cm and the cross -sectional area is 4 cm 2 when the current is decreasing
at a rate of 50.0 A/s.
a) 9.05 mV c) 9.05Mv
b) 9.02V d) None of the above
26). A circuits consist of a source, an inductor and a resistor. What is the energy stored when
the current through the circuit is steady?
L = 0.5H

E=10 V

R= 10Ώ
a) 25J c) 0.25J
b) 2.5J d) 0.025J
27) A generator having 500 turns has an area of 200 cm2 and rotates in a magnetic field
of 20T. How fast the coil must be rotating to produce a maximum emf of 4v
a) 0.02rad/s c) 0.04rad/s
b) 0.06 rad/s d) none

II WRITE THECORRECT ANSWER

28) What do mean by mutual inductance? It is the ratio of flux linkage with coil N2 to the
current in the primary coil.
29) Motional emf is also called________________

60
 III SHOW ALL THE NECESSARY STEPS FOR THE FOLLOWING PROBLEM

30) A particle with a charge q =2 µ C enters a magnetic field of magnitude B =1.5 T with a
velocity with magnitude v =1000 m/s. The angle between the velocity of the particle and
magnetic field is 30 °. What is the magnitude of the force (F B) on the
Charged particle

31) A wire of length carrying a current of Io placed perpendicular to a circular magnetic

field of magnitude Bo experience a force Fo. If the length of the wire is reduced by half and
the magnetic field increased by three fold, find the current I in the new wire the force acting it
has the same magnitude, Fo.

32) A squire of loop 10cm on a side is placed in a uniform magnetic field of 0.2T pointing
along the x- axis. Calculate the maximum flux through the loop and state the orientation of the
loop that give the maximum flux.

61
Appendix-III

Interview Questions for Treatment group

1. Do you think that Cooperative Learning class was attractive?
2. Do you think that Cooperative Learning class was democrat?
3. Do you think that Cooperative Learning class puts a lot of burden on the student?
4. Do you think that Cooperative Learning class promotes dependency?
5. Do you think that Cooperative Learning class consumes time?
6. Which method of instruction do you favor plasma, lecture or cooperative learning?
7. What is your general opinion about cooperative learning?

62
Appendix Table-I Pre and post test results

Pre test result (32%) Posttest result (32%)

SN CG EG SN CG EG
1 7 7 1 17 16
2 6 5 2 9 14
3 6 9 3 16 13
4 7 11 4 10 25
5 9 5 5 12 19
6 11 7 6 3 17
7 5 5 7 8 26
8 11 4 8 15 25
9 8 11 9 6 24
10 7 8 10 13 14
11 8 10 11 9 22
12 10 8 12 10 11
13 7 7 13 8 25
14 9 9 14 9 25
15 6 9 15 4 12
16 8 5 16 8 10
17 9 6 17 8 23
18 3 3 18 8 14
19 7 7 19 14 16
20 9 3 20 13 20
21 8 8 21 11 21
22 3 12 22 12 21
23 7 9 23 3 18
24 8 5 24 9 19
25 10 7 25 6 7
26 6 7 26 7 6
27 6 9 27 17 10
28 6 5 28 15 10
29 8 8 29 9 8
30 8 6 30 16 16
31 7 8 31 14 12
32 6 10 32 16 8
33 9 6 33 13 12
34 7 5 34 18 7
35 5 4 35 10 13
36 6 9 36 9 18
37 4 7 37 12 9
38 6 8 38 8 17

63
Appendix Table-II. Independent t-tests to determine mean difference pre-test

Group N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Pre-test CG 38 7.18 1.901 .308
EG 38 7.16 2.236 .363
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. (2- 95% Confidence
tailed) Interval of the
F Sig. t df Difference
Lower Upper
Pre-test Equal variance 1.364 .247 .055 74 .956 -.922 .975
assumed
Equal variance .055 72.129 .956 -.922 .975
not assumed

**Significant at 0.05 level (two-tailed)

Appendix Table-III. Independent t-tests to determine mean difference of post-test

Group N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Posttest CG 38 10.66 3.961 .643

EG 38 15.87 5.965 .968
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. 95% Confidence
(2- Interval of the
F Sig. t df tailed) Difference
Lower Upper

Post-test Equal variance 8.083 .006 4.486 74 .000(**) -7.525 -2.896

assumed
Equal variances .376 104.33 .000(**) -7.531 -2.890
not assumed

64
 Appendix Table-IV. Systematic classroom observation techniques of interest towards
physics

SN Check list points:- A F S R N

fE fC fE fC fE fC fE fC fE fC
1 Willing to attend physics 0 0 // /// 0 0 0 0
classes at any time //// ///
Interest behaviors

2 Eager to ask and answer 0 0 // // / / 0 0

questions // /// /
3 Engaged in the lesson 0 0 0 // /// 0 0
/ /
4 Concerned toward 0 0 0 / / 0 / 0
cooperation in assisting one ///
another sharing ideas one
observed

/
another to attain common goal
of learning

Total tallies

10 0 21 16 8 12 5 7 0 9

A= Always, F= Frequently, S= sometimes, R =Rarely, N= not at all, fE and fc frequency of

experimental groups and frequency of control groups observed behaviors within 11 periods
respectively.

65
Appendix Table V. Systematic Classroom Observation Techniques of Motivation
Behaviors and Result

SN Check list points:- A F S R N

fE fC fE fC fE fC fE fC fE fC
5 Excite to actively participate in 0 0 / 0 0 0
motivational behaviors

group work , class discussion ,etc.

/
6 Arouse to interact with class mate 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
students

/ /
7 Inspired to interact with teacher / 0 / 0 / 0
during his facilitating //// 0

8 Stimulated to participate in dia- // 0 / 0 0 /// 0

observed

logue debating between groups / 0 // //

/

9 The student fulfill their work / 0 / 0 0 / / 0

responsibility in the group
///
Total tallies
16 0 27 0 11 0 1 5 0 50

A= Always, F= Frequently, S= sometimes, R =Rarely, N= not at all, fE and fc frequency of

experimental groups and frequency of control groups observed behaviors within 11 periods
respectively.

Adapted from community college survey of student engagement of 2006 and Innovative
science teaching for physical science teachers (2002) by Radha

66
 Appendix Table VI. Attitude scale for treatment group

Neutr
Stron

Stron
agree

disag
Agre

Agre

Dis-
gly

gly
al
e
Items F % F % F % F % F %
Physics is very interesting to me 11 28.9 25 65.8 2. 5.3
I don’t like physics and I am afraid to 6 15.8 6 15.8 26 68.4
take it
I am always under a terrible straining
3 7.9 2 5.3 9 23.7 7 18.4 17 44.7
Physics class
Physics fascinating and fun 12 31.6 10 26.3 9 23.7 6 15.8 1 2.6
In general, I have good feeling
21 55.3 15 39.5 1 2.6 1 2.6
toward Physics
I am comfortable with Physics and at
7 18.4 19 50.0 7 18.4 2 5.3 3 7.9
the same time it is stimulating
Physics makes me uncomfortable,
3 7.9 2 5.3 5 13.2 8 21.1 20 52.6
restless, irritable, and impatient
I approach Physics with hesitation 2 5.3 8 21.1 8 21.1 7 18.4 13 34.2
I really love Physics 18 47.4 11 28.9 4 10.5 2 5.3 3 7.9
I have enjoyed studying Physics 11 28.9 11 28.9 8 21.1 3 7.9 5 13.2
It makes me nervous to even think
6 15.8 6 15.8 6 15.8 8 21.1 12 31.6
about doing or probe Physics
I feel definite positive reaction to
17 44.7 10 26.3 7 18.4 1 2.6 3 7.9
Physics
I participate in physics discussions
15 39.5 12 31.6 6 15.8 3 7.9 2 5.3
often, and it is enjoyable
The teaching learning Process 20 52.63 11 28.9 3 7.9 1 2.6 3 7.9
motivated me
Physics is one of my most feel fear 7 18.4
10 26.3 4 10.5 9 23.7 8 21.1
Subject
I am always confused in my physics 6 15.8 4 10.5 7 18.4 10 26.3 11 28.9
class.

67
Appendix Table VII. Attitude scale for control group
5 4 3 2 1
Items F % F % F % F % F %
Physics is very interesting to me 2 5.3 5 13.2 13 34.2 9 23.7 9 23.7
I don’t like physics and I am
8 21.1 11 28.9 9 23.7 7 18.4 3 7.9
afraid to take it
I am always under a terrible
14 36.8 10 26.3 4 10.5 6 15.8 4 10.5
straining Physics class
Physics fascinating and fun 3 7.9 10 26.3 10 26.3 8 21.1 7 18.4
In general, I have good feeling
6 15.8 10 26.3 9 23.7 4 10.5 9 23.7
toward Physics
I am comfortable with Physics and
4 10.5 8 21.1 9 23.7 8 21.1 9 23.7
at the same time it is stimulating
Physics makes me uncomfortable,
16 42.1 8 21.1 4 10.5 5 13.2 5 13.2
restless, irritable, and impatient
I approach Physics with hesitation 15 39.5 9 23.7 6 15.8 4 10.5 4 10.5
I really love Physics 9 23.7 5 13.2 10 26.3 6 15.8 8 21.1
I have enjoyed studying Physics 3 7.9 7 18.4 10 26.3 8 21.1 10 26.3
It makes me nervous to even think
12 31.6 12 31.6 6 15.8 4 10.5 4 10.5
about doing or probe Physics
I feel definite positive reaction to
3 7.9 6 15.8 11 28.9 6 15.8 12 31.6
Physics
I participate in physics discussions
7 18.4 4 10.5 9 23.7 11 28.9 7 18.4
often, and it is enjoyable
The teaching learning Process
6 15.8 7 18.4 10 26.3 10 26.3 5 13.2
motivated me
Physics is one of my most feel 20 52.63 11 28.9 3 7.9 1 2.6 3 28.9
fear Subject
I am always confused in my 14 37.8 8 21.6 5 13.5 4 10.8 6 16.2
physics class.

68
 Appendix Table VIII Mann-Whitney U-test Statistics of Students Attitude

Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude Attitude
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
U-test 164.000 153.000 466.000 292.500 493.000 246.500 294.500 396.000 458.000 501.000 485.000 300.000 379.000 642.500 585.000 397.000
1041.00 1120.00 1326.00 1138.00
905.000 894.000 1.207E3 1.034E3 1.234E3 987.500 1.036E3 1.137E3 1.199E3 1242.000 1226.000 1383.50
0 0 0 0
-6.052 -6.142 -2.724 -4.559 -2.459 -5.142 -4.573 -3.459 -2.838 -2.348 -2.516 -4.495 -3.653 -.845 -1.461 -3.458
Asymp
.
.000 .000 .006 .000 .014 .000 .000 .001 .005 .019 .012 .000 .000 .398 .144 .001
Sig. (2-
tailed)
U-Test signific. at P=0.05

69
Appendix figure 1. When students were engaging in cooperaive learning

Appendix figure 2 when the teacher was facilitating the teaching learning process

70
Appendix figure 3 Sample photo when the teacher was giving a clue for the student

Appendix figure 4. Sample photos when students were presenting what they have
discussed
71
Appendix figure 5. When students were attending a dialogue

72