TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE i
APPROVAL PAGE ii
CERTIFICATION iii
DEDICATION iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v
TABLE OF CONTENTS vi
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF APPENDIXES xi
ABSTRACT xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
Background of the Study 1
Statement of the Problem 9
Purpose of the Study 10
Significance of the Study 11
Research Questions 12
Hypotheses 13
Scope of the Study 13
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 15
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 15
Concept of Poultry 15
Teaching Approaches in Agricultural Science 18
Fieldtrips Approaches in Agricultural Science 19
Land Laboratory Activities in Agricultural Science 22
Academic Achievement 26
Interest in Agricultural Science 28
Gender and academic achievement 29
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 32
Brunner’s Theory of Instruction 32
Gagn’s Theory of Instruction 33
Related Empirical Studies 34
SUMMARY OF THE LITERATURE REVIEWED 48
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 50
Design of the Study 50
Area of the Study 50
Population for the Study 51
Sample and Sampling Technique 51
Instrument for Data Collection 52
Validation of the Instrument 52
Reliability of the Instrument 53
Method of Data Collection 54
Method of Data Analysis 57
CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA 58
Results of the Study 58
Findings of the Study 67
Discussion of the Findings 69
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 75
Re-statement of the Problem 75
Summary of Procedure used 77
Major findings of the Study 78
Conclusion 80
Implication of the Study 80
Recommendations 81
Suggestions for further study 82
REFERENCES 83
LIST OF TABLES
- Mean of Pretest and Post Achievement Scores of Students Taught Poultry Production using Fieldtrip and those taught using Land Laboratory Activities 58
- Mean of Male and Female Students taught Poultry using Fieldtrip and those taught using Land Laboratory activities 61
- Mean of Pre-test and Post-test students taught Poultry Production using Fieldtrip and those taught Land Laboratory activities 62
- Mean of Pre-test and Post-test Interest Scores of male and Female Students’ taught poultry production using field trip and land laboratory activities 63
- Mean Interaction Effect of Fieldtrip, Land Laboratory Activities and Gender on Students Achievement in Poultry Production 64
- Mean Interaction Effect of Field Trip, Land Laboratory Activities and Gender on Students’ Interest in Poultry Production 65
- Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of the Mean Achievement Scores of Students and Interaction Effect of the Treatment and Gender of Students taught Poultry Production using Fieldtrip and Land Laboratory activities 66
- Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of the Significant Difference in the Mean Interest Scores of Students’ and Interaction Effects of the Treatments and Gender of Students taught Poultry Production using Fieldtrip and Land Laboratory activities 68
List of Figures
Conceptual Framework of Study Variables 31
LIST OF APPENDICES
A1: WAEC Results of 2008 – 2014 and Chief Examiner’s Report 91
A2: The West African examination council executive Summary of entries and Chief examiners reports on the West African senior school certificate examination (WASCE) For the years 2010-2012 92
B1: Population and sample of Schools and Students in Nsukka Education Zone 101
B2: Schools in Nsukka Local Government Area Sampled for the Study 103
C1: Poultry Production Achievement Test Item (PPAT) Developed Based on Simpson’s Psychomotor Domain for Pretest 104
C2: Poultry Production Achievement Test (PPAT) for Post Test 116
D1: Marking Scheme for Poultry Production Test for Pre-Test 128
D2: Marking Scheme for PPAT for Post Test 129
E: Table of Specifications 130
F: Poultry Production Interest Inventory 132
G: Lesson Plan on Field Trip 135
H: Lesson Plan on Laboratory Approach 151
I: Agricultural Science Curriculum 167
J1: Analysis of Data Collection 172
J2: Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Test 178
K1: Result of Reliability Testing 179
K2: Eta-Squared 181
L: Summary of the outcome of the interaction of the researcher and teachers of Agricultural Science during May/ June 2015 WAEC marking Exercise on the Efficacy of field trip and land laboratory activities in teaching Agricultural science. 184
Abstract
This study was
designed to determine the effects of fieldtrip and land laboratory activities on
students’ achievement and interest in poultry production in Senior Secondary Schools
in Nsukka Local government Area, Enugu State. Six research questions were
answered while six null hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance.
The study adopted a quasi-experimental design and was carried out in Nsukka, Enugu
State. The population of the study was 1,671 senior Secondary School two students
in Nsukka Local Government Area. The sample for the study was 104 students
offering agricultural science in senior secondary school II, made up of 50
males and 54 females and is selected using simple random sampling technique.
Instruments for data collection were a 53 – item multiple choice Poultry
Production Achievement Test (PPAT) and Poultry Production Interest Inventory
(PPII). The Lesson Plans, PPAT and PPII
were validated by five experts. The reliability of the PPAT was established
using Kuder Richardson 21 (K-R 21) Formular in which a coefficient of 0.85 was
obtained; while Cronbach Alpha method was used to determine the internal
consistency of the PPII in which a coefficient of 0.81 was obtained. The
experiment was carried out during the normal school hour following the school
timetable for senior classes. The duration of the experiment was seven weeks,.
The data collected for this study were analyzed using mean to answer the research
questions and analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) to test the null hypotheses at
0.05 level of significance. The study found out that land laboratory activities
increased students achievement in poultry production more than the field trip
activities. The study also found out that the mean difference in the
achievement of students taught poultry production using field trip and land
laboratory was 18.42 in favour of land laboratory. The study further found out
that field trip had more positive mean effect on male than female students’
achievement while land laboratory had more positive effect on female students
than field trip. The study found out that the mean difference in the interest
of students taught poultry production using field trip and land laboratory was
0.34 in favour of land laboratory. The study also found out that land
laboratory had more positive mean effect on both male and female students’
interest than field trip. The study found out that the interaction effect of
treatments and gender on students reduced male’s mean achievement in poultry
production but increased that of females. The study also found out that there
was a statistical significant difference in the mean achievement scores of
students taught poultry production using field trip and land laboratory.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
The success of any educational enterprise is determined by how well a teacher varies the instructional approaches and other intervening variables. Some of such teaching approaches include the use of project, demonstration among others. Wood and Gentile (2003) noted that many of the conventional approaches like lecture do not encourage creative thinking and collaborative participation of teachers and students. Teachers are therefore, more challenged to find effective ways of making teaching more effective in all the school subjects including agricultural science which in this study is the subject of investigation. Agricultural science is taught in senior secondary schools in Nigeria. The curriculum of agricultural science stipulated that for exposure and productive skill development of students, schools offering agricultural science should provide equipment and adequate farm space. In addition to having a farm, each school should keep at least two farm animals, one each from ruminants and non-ruminants (Nigerian Education Research and Development). (NERDC 2008). In Enugu State, Poultry rearing among other livestock enterprises is more popular among the communities and schools, which makes it appropriate for this study.
Poultry refers to all domesticated birds kept for eggs or meat production. Najime (2003) explained the term poultry as domesticated birds that people keep for the purpose of collecting eggs, meat or feathers. Poultry includes birds such as pigeons, doves or birds which are reared for their meat by man. Poultry has remained a major source of protein to man as its products contain the essential amino acids required by human body to synthesize protein. In the view of Banerja (2005), poultry production is a lucrative venture and requires little investment to start. The author further stated that poultry dropping is an excellent organic manure for enriching vegetable gardens, while crop like maize grains are used in preparing feeds which are fed to poultry in a symbiotic farming which enhances efficiency of farm resources to increase outputs. Ezeigbe (2010) reported that poultry production is a very important arm of livestock and enjoys high interest among livestock production farmers and the meat has high demand because of its nutritional facility. Poultry production plays vital roles in human nutrition and employment opportunity which could be in agro-allied industry, poultry marketing, and hatching operations, among others.
Poultry production can be classified into groups. According to Vest and Date (2002) poultry production are grouped into major categories, namely; Egg production and meat production. The author explained egg production as an enterprise which involves raising pullet chicks under good healthy environment to ensure maximum growth into laying hens. Meat production deals with raising broiler production. In the view of Obioha in Kaduna (2012), it is the act of raising chickens for meat production; for a period of usually six to seven weeks. The author stated that broilers are noted for fast growth, high feed conversion ratio with low level of activity. According to All Africa (2009) broilers are the basis for fast food outlets in Nigeria, as they are also noted to be less expensive and time demanding when compared with egg production, thus encouraging farmers to opt for broiler production. Due to the importance of poultry (broiler) in the society, it was recommended in the curriculum as non-ruminant, to be taught practically to determine students’ achievement. Achievement can be conceived to mean the attainment of stated objectives successfully by students. According to Bennet(2003) achievement is the extent to which the students acquired the pre-determined educational objectives. The Forum on Education and Technology (2009) stated that achievement is the attainment of articulated objectives by students, measured through a variety of instruments which results in excellence and the ability to thrive in the rapidly changing world. The author also stated that achievement is a measure of what students know or can do at the end of exposure to a particular curriculum content area. Achievement in this study is the measure in percentage of the extent to which students attained the stated objectives in poultry production when taught through either field trip or land laboratory. The scores obtained by each student is dependent on some factors one of which is interest.
Interest is a persistent tendency to pay attention and enjoy some activities. Chukwu (2002) defined interest as emotionally oriented behavioral trait and vigour in tackling educational programmes, or other activities. In the submission of Typhoon International Corp (2004), interest is the attention with a sense of concern, lively sympathy or curiosity and the power to excite or hold such attention for a long period of time. A student that is interested in something pays attention or devotes time to it. Achievement has been observed to correlate with interest. According to Kpolovie (2010), positive interest correlate with high achievement while negative interest correlates with low achievement. However, achievement in a subject could stimulate positive interest, while low achievement produces dislike to learning task. Interest and achievement in agricultural science have been observed to be influenced by many factors. In the view of Egun (2007) students achievement and interest in agricultural science has been low as a result of factors such as; inadequate instructional materials, lack of agricultural laboratory and teaching approaches among others. Asiegbu (2015) stressed that a person’s successful achievement in any activity is based on his interest especially when field trip is included as a teaching approach. To arouse students’ interest and improve achievement of students in external examination in agricultural science, experts had variously recommended the use of field trips and land laboratory activities in the teaching of agricultural science (Osinem, 2008 and WAEC chief examiner’s report (2014).
Field trip is an out of classroom learning where students are guided by the teacher to an environment where objects of learning are observed in their natural setting. Kunloye (2002) defined field trip as an excursion taken outside the classroom for the purpose of making relevant observations and obtaining specific information. The author explained that a well-planned field trip affords the students the opportunity to become actively engaged in observing, collecting, classifying, studying relationships and manipulating objects. Jekeyinfa (2005) stated that field trip is usually planned to take students to places of interest and areas where relevant materials, information or knowledge is available for better teaching and learning of a particular subject matter. Agbulu and Weever (2011) described field trip as a short time out of classroom visits organized by the teacher for the students for a specific educational purpose. The authors noted that field trip gives first hand information as the students observe things and processes in their natural settings. Field trip in the context of this study refers to short visits arranged by the teacher of agricultural science to private poultry farms with the aim of providing first hand information in poultry (broiler) production in order to achieve the stated objectives in the curriculum. Offsted (2008) reported that when field trip activities are well planned and implemented, it significantly improves students’ personal, social and emotional development. However, it has been observed that many teachers have not appreciated the need to relate the topic they teach to day- to-day happenings in their surroundings. For instance, Anderson, Kiesd and Storksdieck (2006) on a survey of teaching and learning approaches in science education found out that a good percentage of teachers, (46%) have never used field trip as a teaching approach. Besides, all the recommendations for the use of field trip in teaching of students are based on personal views and not on empirical evidence. Another teaching approach recommended by experts Agbulu and Idu, 2008 and WAEC Chief Examiner’s report, (2014) in the teaching of agricultural science is land laboratory.
A laboratory as explained by Franklin (2008) is an instructional facility used by teachers to help students learn about science and how scientists investigate the world around them. Yaya (2011) defined laboratory as a room or a building specifically erected for demonstration of theoretical phenomenon in practical terms. Furthermore, the author described laboratory as a place where theoretical concepts and variables are practicalized to involve students in activities such as observing, counting, recording and carrying out field work. Laboratory activities according to Myers (2005) are learning experiences in which students interact with materials and or modes to observe and understand the nature of science and its underlying biological, physical and social components. In agricultural science, laboratory activities are carried out on the land as land laboratory and other indoor laboratory activities.
Land laboratory is a portion of land within the school where students are exposed to the practice of crop production, animal rearing among others. Land laboratory in the view of Ashiegbu (2015) is a selected plot of land in the school premises where students are taught the art and science of farming such as production of crops and husbandry of animals. The author emphasized that land laboratory is an instructional facility used in impacting students on the need to value what they could do or produce by themselves and for themselves. Osinem, (2008) explained that land laboratory is a sizeable farm outlined and established by the school, where students of agricultural science put theoretical knowledge into practice under the guidance of the teacher of agricultural science. This study is focused specifically on land laboratory activities where the teacher guides the students through the process of poultry farm. For effective instruction Osinem (2008) suggested the use of land laboratory in teaching and evaluation. Furthermore, the author reiterated that the statement which says that “what I hear I forget, but what I do I remember” applies to land laboratory activities.
As students are taught through land laboratory activities, they understand better the link between the brain and the hand in such activities, thereby making the auditory, visual, tactile and body motor functional. In the submission of Myers (2005) land laboratory activity is valuable as it provides students with the first hand experience and knowledge as they see, observe and feel objects, organisms or phenomena in their natural settings. Teachers of agricultural science in secondary schools are expected to use land laboratory and field trip to enhance students achievement and interest in poultry production. One related factor that may influence the achievement of students in the two learning activities (field trip and land laboratory) is gender issue. That is male and female may achieve differently when field trip or land laboratory is used in teaching the students. In the view of Eriba and Sesugh (2006), males achieve higher than females in sciences but Alkhateeb, (2001) and Omoniyi, (2006) found otherwise. Yet another group of scholars (Ilopuaife, 2001 and Eze, 2001) are of the view that achievement in science subjects are not influenced by gender.
Gender can be explained as biological classification of an individual into male and female. Bland (2003) explained gender as a set of characteristics distinguishing male and female particularly, in the cases of men and women which may vary from their social roles. In the submission of Enyi and Odoemenam (2010) gender is a term that describes the behaviours and attitudes expected of an individual on the basis of being either a male or female. Gender in relation to achievement has been an issue of concern to researchers in vocational and technical education. The issue of gender in relation to achievement has been a source of worry to researchers in vocational and technical education.
Bland (2003), reported that with respect to academic achievement and interest, there is a general observed pattern of females performing better than males in most subjects but less so in mathematics and other sciences. In agricultural science achievement, Ibitoye (2006), noted that there were claims of females performing higher or better than males in the subject while others agreed otherwise. The author concluded that there was no consensus on which gender performed higher that the other in agricultural science. However, according to Ogwo and Oranu (2006) academic achievement and interest can be improved in both boys and girls based on the instructional approach employed by a teacher. This, therefore, underscores the need to determine the extent to which gender as a variable influences students’ achievement and interest in poultry production using field trip and land laboratory.
In Enugu state, despite the stipulation of the curriculum to expose students to practical rearing of at least two animals prevalent in their environment, teachers still teach theoretically. To support the above claim, Ibrahim (2011), observed that teachers of agricultural science avoid the practical aspect of teaching and the use of instructional materials. The author further stated that during senior secondary school certificate agricultural science practical examination, students are required to only identify specimens provided during external examination. Students from farming communities with some learning experiences in agricultural activities including poultry are expected to practice and transfer some skills and knowledge to their families farms but are not given the opportunity to practice and study with live objects during normal classroom instructions. Orion and Holstein in Rahman and Spafford (2009) observed that this neglect to practical exposure seems to reflect students’ limited knowledge and understanding of outdoor education as an effective learning.
Considering the poor approach to the teaching of agricultural science, including poultry, it is not surprising that performance of students in the state over the years 2008-2014 were not encouraging. The number of students who had pass and failure which disqualifies them for further studies at the tertiary level in the area of agricultural science were not satisfactory. (see Appendix A1 page 91). Furthermore, the Chief Examiner’s report for the years in view (2008-2014) revealed that students’ performance in questions bothering on livestock production were among the area of weakness (Appendix A2 Page 92). The weakness of students in livestock production made the Chief Examiners to recommend that agricultural science be taught as practical oriented subject through field trip and laboratory activities (Appendix A2 Page 92).
Evidence on ground revealed that secondary school students who obtained credits in agricultural science in WAEC in Enugu State Secondary Schools find it difficult to apply what they have learnt in solving real life problems. Parents complain that their children cannot assist in their farm or establish their own farms because they lack the basic skills in the occupation (Onah, 2017). Consequently, the stipulations in the agricultural science curriculum are not achieved. The researcher’s concern over the situation on ground led to a preliminary investigation during the 2015 May/June WAEC marking exercise on the efficacy of field trip and land laboratory in the teaching and learning of Agricultural Science in secondary school (Apendix L, page 184). The result of the interaction revealed that the use of field trip and land laboratory as teaching approaches involve series of planning and preparations. More so, the use of field trip which require long distance visits to farms as recommended in the curriculum is very limited in approach as one or two visits to farms as carried out are not enough. Such approach according to the teachers cannot improve performance of students in examination. The teachers further indicated that the use of land laboratory alone cannot be effective as many teachers do not have farms for practicals. Hence, they resort to theoretical approach, abandoning the two. However, Ashiegbu (2015) submitted that these problems can be surmounted more easily, if the cost, interest and achievement in each of the approaches are determined as it is a question of “where there is a will, there is a way”. Furthermore the reseacher’s experiences as a teacher of Agricultural science over the years revealed that field trip can be incorporated into normal timetable lessons as short series of visits to the learning environment while the use of land laboratory in teaching the content of livestock could be embarked upon by the teachers when motivated, it therefore becomes necessary that empirical investigation be carried out to determine the difference in the performance of students when exposed to the two approaches for decision making.
Statement of the Problem
