CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

This chapter describes the various method that was used for carrying out the study. The chapter is
organized under the following subheadings: research design, area of the study, population of the study,
sample and sampling techniques, instrument for data collection, validity of the instrument, reliability of
the instrument, method of data collection and method of data analysis.

Design of the Study

The design of the study is quasi experimental group design. Specifically, the equivalent control group
design. Ali(2011) stated that in the non-equivalent control group design, the treatment groups and the
comparison group were compared using pretest and posttest measures.

The design according to Ali(2012) is considered appropriate because it establishes a cause effect
relationship between the independent variable (strategies) and the dependent variables (performance).
This design was adopted because it was not possible to have a complete randomization of the subjects.
This, intact classes were used as experimental and control groups,since it is not possible to disrupt
existing classes in a school.

Below is the illustration of the design:

Group. Pretest. Treatment. Posttest

E1. Q1. X1. O2

E2. Q1. X2. O2

Where,

E1 and E2 represents experimental and control groups

O2 and O1 represents pretest and posttest observation in Physics performance test.

X1 and X2 represents treatment.

Area of the study

The study was carried out using the senior secondary School 11 hysics students in Rivers State.
According to National population commission 2006 the State has a population of 5,198,716 with a land
area of 11,077km2.The state is particularly noted for it's linguistic diversity with 28 indigenous languages
being said to be spoken in Rivers State. The land surface of Rivers State is divided into three zones
namely; freshwater swamps, mangrove swamps and coastal sand. The state had over 2,805 government
owned primary schools and 243 secondary Schools.The secondary schools are concentrated mainly in
Local Government headquarters towns and in Port Harcourt Local Government Area. The state is also a
host to several tertiary institutions which includes; University of Port Harcourt,Choba, Rivers State
University, Ignatius Ajuru University, Rumuolumeni, Elechi Amadi Polytechnics among others.The state is
divided into twenty three Local Government Areas with three senatorial districts. Two Local
Government Areas made the study namely obio akpor and Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni local government area.
The choice of these area is based on the fact that literature searched by the researcher revealed that
students performance in physics are low

Population of the study

The total population of this study consisted of

420 senior secondary two(SSll) physics students from three co_educational secondary schools located
strategically in the area of study

Three(3) schools from Urban area of obio-akpor Local Government Area and one (1) school from rural
area of Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni Local Government Area of Rivers State where considered for the study.
The schools are: Community Secondary School Olanada GRA Phase 2, Community Secondary School
Mgbosimini,in Obio-akpor Local Government Area, Government secondary school, Kerigani in
Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni local government area and Model girl secondary Rumueme in Obio-akpor Local
Government Area.

Population/Sample size Distribution

School/school type. Population. Sample size

CSS, Alanada (Urban). 108(co-educational schl. 55

CSS, Mgbosimini (Urban). 108(co-educational schl. 55

MGSS, Rumueme (Urban). 101(single sex school). 45

GSS Kerigani (Rural). 102(coeducational school) 45

Total. 420. 200

Sample and Sampling techniques

The sample for the study consists of two hundred (200) senior secondary two physics students. By
stratified random sampling, three 3 co-educational one 1, single sex schools located in the area of the
study were used for the study.

Instrument for Data Collection

The instrument used for data collection was physics performance Test (PPT) which was produced by the
researcher. The instrument has four options ranging from A,B,C,D in a way that only one of the option is
correct. It also consist of twenty multiple choice items. Immediately after the administration of the
instrument, the researcher scored it by giving each 0ption chosen one mark and any wrong option zero,
making a minimum of zero mark and a maximum of 20 marks. The topics that the instrument covers are
concept of scalar, concept of vectors, resolution and components of vectors, simple harmonic motion
(SHM), speed and acceleration ofsimple harmonic motion. The pre-test and post-test covered the
knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Of Bloom's taxonomy. The
instruments were divided into two sections, section A consist of bio-data of the students while section B
consist of 20 items multiple choice questions.

Validity of the instrument

The instrument used in the study was subjected to face and content validity. The physics performance
test (PPT) was validated by three experts, lecturer from the department of curriculum and instructional
technology and two other physics teachers from the selected schools for the purpose of appropriateness
of expressional standard, language, suitability, arrangement, sequencing and others. For the content
validity a test blue print was constructed and to validate for weighing of sub-topics in accordance with
the suggested instructional periods in the instructional objectives and frequency.

Reliability of the instrument

The instrument was subjected to trial testing from a school which was not part of the study. The trial
testing is to determine the clarity of the instruments, readability of the items as well as the time for the
test.Test-retest approach was used and the result of the test were calculated with the Pearson product
moment correlation. The reliability coefficient (r) of 0.79 was obtained thereby making it
reliable.According to Wali(2019) reported that 0.6 and above depicts that the instrument is reliable.

Control of Extraneous variables

Some measures were used to control undue influences of some Extraneous variables.

These measures are the following:

1. Experimental bias: The researcher did not do the actual teaching of both the experimental and control
groups. The teachers trained by the researcher as research assistant did the teaching.

2. Teacher variables: There was a training programme for all the four physics teachers co-operated as
research assistant. During the training the validated lesson plans were discussed between the research
assistants and the researcher.

They were also required to:

Know the purpose of the study master the physics concepts to be taught and tO strictly abide by the
working guide to scorer reliability.

Hawthorne Effect:In ordered to minimize students'fright. The researcher became temporary members
of staff of the schools where the research exercise was carried out, Two days were used to familiarize
with the students.
School variables: To minimize the effect of schools each were selected from the two inspectorate areas
in the zone.The schools were homogeneous with equal opportunities to same public facilities .

Experimental precaution: To maintain experimental precaution, the test was administered to all the
students in the sàmple schools at the same time by the teachers. The students were taught for the same
period of time with the same lesson plans.

Method of Data Administration and Collection

The sample size of 200 was drawn from three (3) co-educational and one (1) single sex government
secondary schools assigned to control group (100) and experimental group (100). Fifty-five(55) rural
students and one hundred and forty-five (145) Urban students constituted the sample for the study.The
three co-educational schools used in the study were shared into two grouped, group 1 was assigned
problem-based learning while group 2 was assigned to lecture method.

The regular physics teachers were used for the study in both experimental and control group. Before the
treatment began a week long training was given to the physics teachers of the experimental group on
how to use the problem-based learning strategy.

The physics teacher of the control group used the lecture method where as the experimental group
teachers was given lesson plan prepared by the researcher, while the researcher vet the lesson plan
prepared by the physics teacher in the control group. A pre-test was given to the two groups before the
actual treatment, to access their problem solving, critical thinking skills and also their prior knowledge
on the concepts. The scripts were marked the scores obtained before the actual treatment recorded,
after which, mean and standard