Master’s Thesis

Research on Improvised Experiment Materials for Science Lesson in

Rwanda

M143326

N D I H O K U B WAY O K I Z I T O

Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation

Hiroshima University

March 2016
 Master’s Thesis

Research on Improvised Experiment Materials for Science Lesson in

Rwanda

Presented to

Graduate School of International Development and Cooperation (IDEC)

Hiroshima University

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of

Education

By

N D I H O K U B WAY O K I Z I T O

M143326

Program: “Improvement of Mathematics and Science Teacher Education”

Science education development major

Graduate School of International Development and Cooperation (IDEC)

Hiroshima University

Japan

2016
 Research on Improvised Experiment Materials for Science Lesson in Rwanda

Master’s Thesis

Written By

N D I H O K U B WAY O K I Z I T O

M143326

Accepted By the Board of Examiners of Education Development Department

Graduate School of International Development and Cooperation (IDEC),

Hiroshima University

On January 31st, 2016, and declared to have fulfillment the requirements of acquiring a

Master’s Degree in Science Education development.

Board of Examiners

……………………………………………………

Prof. Dr. SHIMIZU Kinya

……………………………………… ……………………………………….

(Prof. Dr. IKEDA Hideo) (Prof. Dr. BABA Takuya)

Graduate School of International Development and Cooperation Dean

……………………………………………

Prof. Dr. FUJIWARA Akimasa

March, 25th 2016

Abstract

Transforming Rwandan citizens into skilled human capital for socio-economic

development is the mission of Ministry of education (MINEDUC) in Rwanda. Since

twelve years basic education policy in 2012 was implemented, not only teachers but also

teaching materials became scarce. If science teachers are not enough, if science laboratory

is insufficient; the science lesson will face a problem since qualified teachers will not be

the first priority and science experiments and hands-on will go wrong and lack caretakers.

Because of lack of science apparatus, practical work becomes difficult to organize

(Oguniyi, 1977 and Ojo, 1981).

One of the answers to this challenge can be improvisation. Science improvisation is a

better way of learning by doing, where students are given the opportunity to hands-on and

cope with the cheap around materials wasted in their environment.

Teacher training colleges train teachers for the primary school. Since learning and

teaching method for better science lesson should focus not only on teachers but also

students, this research will target on teacher training colleges in Rwanda as source of

basic and delivering knowledge and skills in order to recommend future student-teachers

to conceive the modern classroom and learner centred as well as relating science to real

world.

This study is investigating the barriers encountered by Rwandan teacher training colleges

for better science lesson delivery, student’s misconceptions encountered in science

learning, and impact of improvised experiment materials.

Page I of 159
Surveys to heads of schools, students and teachers, were used to collect data in terms of

school situation, hands-on science activities, and barriers faced to science improvised

experiment. While physics test achievement on electrostatics unit was used to identify

students’ misconception prior to learning and measuring role or effectiveness of making

and use improvised hands-on materials over other teaching methods like blackboard-

chalk traditional teaching method.

The findings of this study are as follow:

Only five out of thirteen investigated schools have science laboratories, science activities

are done more in physics and through science clubs as well as borrowing materials from

other schools.

Teachers face challenges and barriers like time limitation, material scarcity and lack of

improvising skills in their everyday science teaching life. Some teachers improvise in

their teaching but others are not aware of improvisation. This is shown by the statistically

significant difference of .005 (p-value) between teachers teaching in schools having

science laboratories and teachers teaching in schools which do not have science

laboratories in favor of who teach in schools with laboratories.

After performing electrostatics test, students show misconceptions related to non-mastery

of content and confusion between electrostatics and magnetism.

Even if it depends on the type of test items, using multivariate analysis of variance, I

found that there is no statistically significant difference between teaching using

improvised materials or/and not. However using Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy domains,

item questions related to analysis have a statistically significant difference (p=.003< .05)

Page II of 159
when improvised experiment materials are used in science lesson than knowledge item

question related could do.

Science experiments help students to increase their self-confidence (Hofstein & Lunetta,

1982; Hofstein & Lunetta, 1996).

One reason to identify students’ misconceptions and remedy them is to empower and

increase the meaningful learning and contribute to students’ academic success (Aydin &

Balim, 2009). When to examine students’ misconceptions, it is a good opportunity to

teachers to know and be aware of what is going to students’ ideas, opinions and confusion

in order to help them when planning a lesson and teaching.

In conclusion, lack of laboratory should not be a challenge in this modern and digital

world. Through workshops organized by educational organizations, teachers can be

trained on how to create improvised materials since the lack of skills is core challenge,

and this will serve as motivation to teachers to use these improvised experiments as well

as save the environment.

Page III of 159

Acknowledgement

I would like to recognize all and everyone who participated in the completion of this

Master Thesis academically as well as social suitability.

First of all, I am deeply thankful to Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) for
care and instrumental support to enroll me in Hiroshima University, without this support
their Program: “Improvement of Mathematics and Science Teacher Education” should
not be completed.
Secondary, without directions, constructive ideas, and informational support I could not

fit in academic life; I highly express my gratitude to Professor SHIMIZU Kinya for his

critical and clear supervision. Without him, this research would not be called Master

Thesis.

My considerations, thirdly go to sub-supervisors Professor IKEDA Hideo and Professor

BABA Takuya for prolific advice, other graduate school of International Cooperation

Development professors such as HIRAKAWA Yukiko and KAWATA Keisuke for their

fruitful recommendations methodologically as well as university of Rwanda, college of

education lecturers; Doctor NKUNDABAKURA Phenéas and Doctor UWAMAHORO

Jean for their appraisal support.

Finally, my acknowledgements go to Miss HARUNA Nakazato as my academic tutor as

well as Miss MINERI Nakamoto for emotional support during two years living in Japan.

Page IV of 159
Dedication

I wish to dedicate this thesis research to my parents NSENGIYUMVA Edmond and

NAMAHORO Fortunée for your great love for my ambition. To TWASINGA Didas for

your push and backing, this thesis is dedicated.

Page V of 159
Table of Contents

Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... I

Acknowledgement ........................................................................................................................ IV

Dedication ..................................................................................................................................... V

List of figures ................................................................................................................................ X

List of Tables................................................................................................................................ XI

List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... XII

Chapter One ....................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

1.0 Background ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Statement of the problem .................................................................................................... 5

1.2 Study rationale..................................................................................................................... 7

1.3 Objective of the study ....................................................................................................... 10

1.4 Research questions ............................................................................................................ 11

1.5 Research hypotheses ......................................................................................................... 11

1.6 Significance of the study ................................................................................................... 13

1.7 Terminologies used in this research .................................................................................. 14

Chapter Two .............................................................................................................................. 17

Literature Review ...................................................................................................................... 17

2.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 17

2.1 Educational Policies, Reforms and Education System in Rwanda.................................... 19

Page VI of 159
 2.2 Science lesson in Rwanda ................................................................................................. 22

2.2.1 Curriculum in Rwanda ............................................................................................... 22

2.2.2 Teaching methods and Science teacher ...................................................................... 25

2.3 Misconceptions in science ................................................................................................. 29

2.4 Improvisation, Science Experiment and Teaching/Learning materials ............................. 30

2.4.1 Historical development............................................................................................... 30

2.4.2 Time allocation, cost effectiveness, and source of materials ..................................... 32

2.4.3 Teaching and Learning Materials ............................................................................... 33

2.4.4 Laboratory and hands-on activities ............................................................................ 35

2.4.5 Science improvised materials and Improvisation ....................................................... 38

2.5 Theory of Electrostatics .................................................................................................... 42

2.6 Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 51

Chapter Three .................................................................................................................. 52

Research Methodology ..................................................................................................... 52

3.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 52

3.1 Type of methodology ........................................................................................................ 52

3.2 Research instruments, intervention and sampling techniques ........................................... 54

3.3 Scope and target of the study ............................................................................................ 58

3.4 Framework and Research design....................................................................................... 60

3.5 Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 61

Chapter Four.................................................................................................................... 63

Page VII of 159

Data Analysis and Results ................................................................................................ 63

4. 1 Survey findings ................................................................................................................ 63

4. 1 .1 Students’ Questionnaire Results ............................................................................... 63

4. 1. 2 Teachers’ Questionnaire ........................................................................................... 63

4. 1. 3 Prencipals & DOS Interview .................................................................................... 65

4. 2 Test results ....................................................................................................................... 67

4. 3 Multivariate analysis of variance ..................................................................................... 73

4. 4 Misconception analysis .................................................................................................... 75

4. 5 Mean in test items and analysis of each item question ..................................................... 79

Chapter Five..................................................................................................................... 86

Discussion of Results ........................................................................................................ 86

5. 1 Workshop ......................................................................................................................... 86

5. 3 Teacher discussion ........................................................................................................... 90

5. 4 Student discussion ............................................................................................................ 95

5. 5 Principals and DOS discussion ........................................................................................ 96

5. 6 Test score and Student misconception ............................................................................. 98

5. 7 Research limitation......................................................................................................... 103

Chapter Six .................................................................................................................... 104

Conclusion & Recommendation ..................................................................................... 104

Bibliography .............................................................................................................................. 110

Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 1

Page VIII of 159

Appendix A ............................................................................................................................... 1

TTC INTEGRATED SCIENCE CURRICULUM versus IMPROVISED MATERIALS ....... 1

Appendix B ............................................................................................................................... 9

A PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON PLAN .............................................................................. 9

Appendix C ............................................................................................................................. 14

MANUAL EXPERIMENT WORKSHEET ........................................................................... 14

Appendix D ............................................................................................................................. 16

TEST ANSWERS ................................................................................................................... 16

Page IX of 159
List of figures

Figure 2.1 Conventional versus improvised material………………………..………….25

Figure 2.2 Lithium atomic model………………………………………………………42
Figure 2.3 Triboelectric series………………………………………………………….43
Figure 2.4 Charging by contact (conduction)…………………………………….….…45
Figure 2.5 Charging by induction through five steps..............................................…....47

Figure 2.6 Inverse square law………………………………………………………….48

Figure 3.1 Rwandan map showing TTCs locations by arrows…………….……..…….59
Figure 4.1 Distribution of science materials in 13 TTCs……………………………….64

Figure 4.2 Treatment groups alongside test score………………………….…………..75

Figure 4.3 Test score in knowledge item…………………………………………….…81

Figure 4.4 Test score in comprehension item..................................................................82

Figure 4.5 Test score in application item………………………………….………..…..83

Figure 4.6 Test score in analysis item………………………………………………….85

Page X of 159
List of Tables

Table 1.1 Secondary schools with science equipment in 2013…………………………..6

Table 2.1 Teacher training college integrated science curriculum………………………24
Table 3.1 Rwandan TTCs……………………………………………...………………..60

Table 4.1 Correspondence of item questions to Bloom’s taxonomy levels….....………..72

Table 4.2 Summarized lesson plan………………………………………………,,,,,….73

Table 4.3 Sample size….……………………………………………………………,…,,,…….73

Table 4.4 Mean and standard deviation between treatment groups……………,,……..73

Table 4.5 Analysis of significance difference………………………………………….74

Table 4.6 Misconceptions on Knowledge item …………………………………….….76

Table 4.7 Misconceptions on Knowledge item ………………………….…………………….77

Table 4.8 Misconceptions on Comprehension item ……………………….………….77

Table 4.9 Misconceptions on application item…………. …………………..…………78

Table 4.10 Misconceptions on Analysis item…………………………………………..78

Table 4.11 Misconceptions on Analysis item……………………………..……………79

Table 4.12 Mean of test items………………………………………………………….80

Table 4.13 Mean and standard deviation of knowledge item…………………………..80

Table 4.14 Significance difference in knowledge item…………………………………80

Table 4.15 Mean and standard deviation of comprehension item…………….……..…81

Table 4.16 Significance difference in comprehension item…………………………….82

Table 4.17 Mean and standard deviation of application item…………………………..83

Table 4.18 Significance difference in application item…………………………………83

Table 4.19 Mean and standard deviation of analysis item…………………..………….84

Table 4.20 Significance difference in analysis item……………………………………84

Page XI of 159
List of Abbreviations

DOS: Deputy of Studies

EFA: Education for All

GS: General Secondary

IIEP: International Institute for Education Planning

IPRC: Integrated Polytechnic Regional Centre

KIE: Kigali Institute of Education

MDG: Millennium development goals

MINEDUC: Ministry of Education

TTC: Teacher Training College

TVET: Technical and Vocational Education and Training

WDA: Workforce Development Authority

Page XII of 159

Page 1 of 159
Chapter One

Introduction
1.0 Background

Transforming Rwandan citizens into skilled human capital for socio-economic

development is the mission of Ministry of education in Rwanda (MINEDUC, 2013).

Ensuring equitable access to quality education focusing on combating illiteracy,

promotion of science and technology, critical thinking and positive values will support

this mission since the focus to achieve national goals is to reduce poverty and improve

the well-being of population through improving skills levels and facilitating economic

transformation (MINEDUC, 2013).

In a workshop held in Caribbean countries, Commonwealth Secretariat (1976)

emphasizes on the production of low-cost science teaching equipment and recommends

governments provide facilities for regular in-service training of teachers.

Improvisation is a better way of learning by doing, where students are given the

opportunity to hands-on and cope with the around materials in their environment.

A creative teacher will always better than the theoretical teacher as he/she demonstrates

and relates theory with the real world, students get motivation and develop their science

understanding themselves.

A study conducted by Nzeyimana in 2014 found that instructors’ role is information

presenter and evaluator. Oguniyi (1977) and Ojo (1981) said that because of lack of

science apparatus, practical work becomes difficult to organize.

Page 1 of 159
According to primary and secondary school curriculum development policy in its draft of

April 2003, Curriculum should support the acquisition of Scientific and ICT skills within

the context of local availability of equipment and infrastructure (MINEDUC, 2003).

Ministries of education all over the world have thus invested huge amounts of money to

import and provide secondary schools with costly and sophisticated laboratories

equipment. In the current context of limited resources for education, the providing of

those facilities is no longer affordable in many developing countries (Angus & Keith,

1992).

The idea of the use of what is freely and easily available natural resources is not new. In

1762, Rousseau in his book said education has to base on experiences and the senses,

rather than textbooks and academic knowledge (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Schmidt (1991) notes that in the reconstruction period after World War II, teachers in

Central European schools were forced through circumstances to draw on their experience

to construct appropriate teaching aids from locally available materials.

Ghana has embarked on a project aimed at encouraging teachers to build up their own

kits from improvised materials. This is a teachers' college initiative and student-teachers

are encouraged to produce their own equipment during training using improvisation ideas

provided in source books (Angus & Keith, 1992).

The Zim-Sci kits have been designed to meet the needs of rural day high schools which

often have no conventional laboratory facilities in Zimbabwe (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Page 2 of 159
Most science teachers perceive that laboratory activities are indispensable in teaching

science as it stimulates students' curiosity as well as developing their scientific skills

(Dillon, 2008).

In a study conducted in American public schools by Sandifer and Haines in 2009, reveals

that many science teachers perceived that hands-on activities are the best strategy for

effective science teaching and learning (Suleiman, 2013).

According to Piaget (1970), children learn preeminent through doing and dynamically

exploring their environment. Science should be taught in such a way that students are

occupied by suitable activities (Udosen & Ekukinam, 2013).

Constructivism posited the notion that learners create or construct new knowledge (Von

Glassersfeld, 1985). According to Richardson (2003), Nwike (2011), and Udosen &

Ekukinam (2013) learning should be seen as an adaptive and experimental process rather

than a knowledge transfers activity because learners access information through sense,

the construction of new knowledge comes from an interaction of new knowledge between

their existing knowledge and new experiences and ideas with which they come in contact

with the natural world and their culture.

In this age of Information and Communication Technology, teachers must be able to use

available local means to produce instructional and learning materials in schools (Daniel,

2001). Improvisation in science lesson is the main issue in science education which has

concerned a lot of contributions from science educators (Fatubarin, 2001).

As good as improvisation might be in teaching and learning, if learners are not taken part

in the process of improvisation its aim will not be successively achieved (Aina, 2013).

Page 3 of 159
When learners participate in improvisation process of instructional materials, it makes

them exposed to creativity, innovation, imagination and curiosity, which are essential to

science teaching and learning (Adeniran, 2006).

Learning science should start with hands on experiences that the pupils are familiar with

and not with abstract definitions of scientific concepts. Low cost apparatus from locally

available materials assume to enrich the capacity to observe, explain and do real science

in primary schools and increases the quality of learning (Sileshi, 2012).

Improvisational teaching is informed both by students’ interests and ideas and teachers’

deep understandings of curricular goals which are purposeful, but not fixed (Jurow &

Creighton, 2005).

The main purpose of science education is to improve students’ understandings of

scientific concepts. It is obviously known that students, who have been trained according

to teacher-centered traditional approach were incapable of assimilating their knowledge,

think critically and creatively, resulting in poor performance as well as developing

misconceptions (Acar & Tarhan, 2008; Felder, 1996; Herron, 1996; Nakhleh, 1992).

Hence, the traditional approach where teacher is an information-giver to passive students

seems outdated, and active learning methods requiring active participation of students

have been updated in order to support students to be more expressive in learning process

(Michael & Modell, 2003; (Sesen & Tarhan, 2010)

In science education, the addition of scientific literacy as a goal in school curriculum has

been found to be an effective way to enhancing scientific literate citizens, since the

mission of science education has been to prepare individuals who would develop a certain

Page 4 of 159
level of scientific understanding after their formal education in school. These literate

individuals would be able to apply their knowledge and skills acquired in science either

personal or socially relevant issues demanded such understanding (Wang & Schmidt,

2001; (Massango, 2015).

1.1 Statement of the problem

The poor performance of students in science in developing countries has the source not

only of teaching/learning methods used but also the ways of science practicals are

conducted (Ndirangu, Kathuri, and Mungai, 2003). Many types of research have been

done and put out the insufficiency of laboratories and the non-use of locally available

materials.

In the midst of the current economic challenges and foreign indebtedness in Africa, almost

many schools are left with little or no science learning. The major challenge to teach

science in developing countries takes the source from scarcity and cost of imported

materials, and the fact that many teachers from developing countries tend to wait for these

imported materials in order to teach remains challenge for science education in these

nations (Nkechi S. & DomNwachukwu, 2006).

Science equipment in Rwanda is scarce at a level of only 17% corresponding to 242 out

of 1 502 secondary schools have science laboratories (MINEDUC, 2014), the table below

shows ICT and science equipment distributed to these schools.

Page 5 of 159
 Schools Computers Internet Computer Science Science Science

with connection labs kit corner labs

Number 1,114 200 462 1,037 100 242

Percentage 76% 14% 32% 71% 7% 17%

Table 1.1 Secondary schools with science equipment in 2013

Improvisation in science requires a thorough background and understanding of the

scientific principles which equipment is designed to illustrate (Angus & Keith, 1992).

In Rwanda, students do not participate in the choice of the content taught and the teachers

dominate the activities in the classrooms, and the source of content is mainly from

lecturing (Nzeyimana, 2014).

Science course is one of the important courses that will help students cope with the

problems they encounter in daily life and understand nature (Eren, Bayrak, & Benzer,

2015). By science literacy, one of the most important goals of science course, individuals

have to understand the nature of science and scientific knowledge, based on basic

principles, concepts, laws and theories of science, they have to develop problem-solving

and be able to use scientific methods (Kenar and Balcı, 2012).

In 1984, the Department of Education in Papua New Guinea under a loan agreement with

the World Bank imported science kits for biology, chemistry, physics, geology and

assorted science. According to Agnus & Keith (1992), however, there are several lessons

to be learned from the Papua New Guinea experience with importing science kits: the
Page 6 of 159
imported secondary science kits are more suitable for science-for-continuation rather than

science-for-all; there have been delays due to the failure of overseas companies to supply

components on time; the cost of the kits increased each year; a newly established schools

initially do not need all of the materials in the kit; special 'start-up' kits for early grades

would have been a better strategy.

1.2 Study rationale

Since 9YBE Policy in 2006, students P1 up to Senior 3 increased drastically, the number

of primary schools accommodating P1 to P6 has increased from 2,370 in 2007 to 2,543

in 2011 (MINEDUC, 2011) but schools buildings, teachers, facilities, and materials

scarcity remained a big challenge.

Udosen (2007) gives some example of improvised materials such as test tube holder using

a Y-shape fresh wood, magnifying glass using water into the empty bulb, concave and

convex mirrors using empty discarded insecticide cylindrical cans and temporary magnets

using a flex wire wound round 2 nails connected to the top and bottom of a dry touch light

battery.

Teachers have to create and use nearest materials to clarify the scientific theory and give

a chance to students to participate in science innovation.

There are many other examples illustrating the use of everyday materials in science

teaching (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Acids can be found in fruit and bases in household cleaners (White, 1988) and waste

agricultural products commonly found in developing countries (Eshiet, 1988) to supply

bases for chemistry lessons.

Page 7 of 159
According to Schmidt (1986), using a candle and a few other common materials, one can

carry out at least 25 illustrative experiments which inspire scientific thinking concerning

oxidation, reduction, heat and environmental protection.

Egg shells like the sea shells ordinary chicken egg shells contain a high quantity of pure

calcium carbonate compounds (CaCO). These are very common and readily available.

When crushed seas shells were used in qualitative analysis to identify the presence of

calcium trip xo-carbonate (IV) compounds (CaCO), the result of the test was more

noticeable and preferred to the imported processed CaCO (Nkechi S. & DomNwachukwu,

2006).

In action research conducted by Sileshi (2012), the following apparatus: Separator funnel,

beakers, stirrer, funnel, stand, test tube, test tube holder, test tube rack, Petri-dish,

evaporating dish, models, wash bottle, spatula, measuring cylinder were improvised in

Filtration, Distillation, Titration, Gas preparation, Heating, Burning, gas preparation, and

Hoffman electrolysis.

The estimation for fabricating fully equipped science laboratory in 1991 range from

$57,800 in Korea to about $107,800 in Botswana (Caillods; Göttelmann, 1991). However,

such luxury facilities are longer affordable in numerous developing countries and

unnecessary in the light of recent variations in science curricula and the implications for

science teaching methods (Angus & Keith, 1992).

According to cost effective, Sileshi (2012) compared improvised and manufactured

filtration apparatus and found that funnel, stand and extension clamp, stirrer, beaker, and

Page 8 of 159
filter paper cost about 5.35 Birr and 299.59 Birr 1 of improvised and manufactured

apparatus respectively. The efficiency of low-cost apparatus in regards to time, separation,

convenience, durability is about 98% compared to the factory manufactured one (Sileshi,

2012).

The fact that developing countries are facing economic constraints, they have to

emphasize on low-cost equipment in science education. Recent trends in curriculum

development provide sound educational reasons why low-cost equipment is appropriate

(Angus & Keith, 1992).

Hands-on science has been proposed as a means to increase student success in science

education. A set of theories has been proposed to explain how hands-on science benefits

student learning of science focusing on learning scientific knowledge and skills. It has

been justified such as improving lab techniques and motivation to learn (Shulman and

Tamir 1973).

Science educators identify two broad domains of scientific knowledge; content

knowledge and process skills (Glynn and Duit 1995; Lawson 1995). Content or

declarative knowledge includes facts, principles, conceptual models, theories and laws

which students are expected to understand and remember. Process skills (procedural

knowledge) are the techniques used in science, for example, observation, measurement,

and developing hypotheses, which students are to develop and master (Ruby, 2001). The

idea that hands-on science supports understanding of content knowledge is consistent

with developmental theory’s advancing successive stages of mental development through

which humans pass. The highest stage includes the ability to work with abstractions.

1 Birr is Ethiopian currency

Page 9 of 159
Before approaching this stage, people first pass through a stage in which thinking is

narrowed to concrete matters because interactions with the physical environment support

the mind’s passage through these stages (Piaget 1973, Gage and Berliner 1994, Lawson

1995). From these views, hands-on science help students move from the second stage to

the highest stage as it offers concrete illustrations of abstract ideas at a time when the

mind needs concrete representations for understanding (Ruby, 2001).

Hands-on activities generate links between pieces of knowledge so that information can

be referenced both by its abstract meaning as well as physical illustration improving

information retrieval (Gage and Berliner 1984; Udosen & Ekukinam, 2013).

1.3 Objective of the study

(Cossa & Uamusse, 2015) provide some aims of laboratory work among as: (a) gaining

practice of making observations and descriptions of objects, (b) promoting the method of

reasoning and logical thinking in problem-solving, (c) make science more interesting and

fun through current experiences, (d) elucidate theoretical work as a means of helping

understanding, (e) verify or clarify events and principles already taught in tutorials

explaining their relationship, (f) promoting the understanding of the scientific methods or

laboratory techniques, and (g) discover facts and come up with new principles as well as

providing students opportunities to practice necessary skills or procedures.

It is important to note that when teaching science relating theory to the real life, students

get interested and perform actively.

This study is exploring which level laboratory activities are done in science classroom,

whether cheap and available materials are fully used as alternative to conventional
Page 10 of 159
imported materials in science lesson and why teachers do not do experiment nor

improvise in their teaching activities in Rwanda, the present study will test effectiveness

of experiment material in science as well as revealing misconceptions encountered by

students learning science subjects.

Therefore, the specific objectives of this study is to determine:

a) Barriers encountered by teachers in science activities

b) Students’ misconceptions analysis on electrostatics unit

c) The effectiveness of improvisation in science lesson.

1.4 Research questions

The research questions related to study’s objectives are as follow:

1. What are barriers faced by science teachers in hands-on activities?

2. What misconceptions do students have in electrostatics unit?

3. Can improvised experiment contribute to science understanding?

1.5 Research hypotheses

Our analysis will focus on the testing of three hypotheses regarding the relationship of

science improvisation and student misconceptions.

Our first hypothesis is about the barriers faced by Rwandan teachers training colleges’

tutors. We hypothesize that teachers do not know about improvisation, it takes the time

to create experiment material, and teachers are not motivated to improvise; these points

Page 11 of 159
will be verified by questionnaire survey after the intervention of workshop on making

some improvised science equipment, and will be analyzed through qualitative means.

Our second hypothesis concerns the student achievement as a result of improvised hand-

on. We hypothesize that teaching science using improvised experiment materials is better

than chalk-blackboard. So here students engaged in more hands-on science will score

better on standardized tests than students who do not hands-on science, all other things

being equal like teaching methodology; problem-solving approach.

This hypothesis is delivered from the different theories of learning relevant to hands-on

science, all of which see a benefit in the provision of concrete examples of abstract

knowledge. These theories propose an especially important role for real-life illustrations

of content knowledge to aid students pass through the concrete stage to the abstract in the

development of their thinking, and to improve information retrieval by creating an

association between pieces of knowledge resulting to help students prevent or correct

disorganization of this knowledge (Ruby, 2001).

Using multivariate analysis, we will address additional factors that may be confounding

the relationship between improvised activities and test scores. As each type of test

measures achievement with a particular emphasis on a different domain, a Bloom

taxonomy cognitive domain will be used to specify item questions measuring knowledge

and skills from knowledge to evaluation domain levels.

A finding of a positive relationship between the improvised activities lesson and lecturing

lesson on both pretests and posttests would provide more robust evidence for the

relationship and impact of improvised materials in favor of treatment group. The rejection

of the null hypothesis (that there is no statistical significance between hands-on science

and test scores furthermore that there is no difference in scores between experimental

Page 12 of 159
group taught using improvised material and control group taught without these materials)

would provide evidence to favor the increased use of improvised hands-on science.

Conversely, a failure to reject the hypothesis would support the tempering of its use unless

supportive results were obtained regarding the roles of instructional approach or quality

on its relationship to achievement. Furthermore, misconceptions will be analyzed to see

why these experimental can’t provide efficiency.

The third hypothesis grows out of measuring student misconception using the two types

of tests; multivariate analysis of variance to test pretest basic misconceptions. And

independent t-test of posttest to reveal what kind of items improvised materials can

enhance its skills according to Bloom taxonomy cognitive domains.

Specifically, we hypothesize that students develop misconceptions from non-mastery of

the content, time of concentration and the abstract of the content which may refrain good

performance to show the effectiveness of hands-on materials.

1.6 Significance of the study

The evidence for the impact of practical activity on science achievement is inconsistent,

as reviews by Bredderman (1983). A recent study in Malaysia (Sharifah, 1991) found that

although generally teachers were adept at organizing practical work, they were less

competent in using the practical work as a learning experience.

In fact, many countries are beginning to recognize its importance, at least as judged by

the rhetoric of curriculum statements. It is the aims, content and implementation of

practical work in science that have to be reviewed, including the need to redesign science

rooms and science equipment to incorporate more of the materials from nature's

laboratory so that students have more opportunity to explore the properties of everyday

Page 13 of 159
materials and the scientific principles embedded in everyday phenomena (Angus & Keith,

1992).

The finding of this study would help in encouraging teachers working together with

students on the making and use of local available instructional materials instead of

imported and expensive ones.

The study will be of immeasurable value to educators, teachers, curriculum designers,

policy makers as well as those involves with teaching personnel training.

It will serve as an eye opener to teachers in solving the problem of the rote-learning

encounter by learners. Learners will become active and participants in instruction through

improvisation and accessibility of material for teaching and proper observation and

discovery of new ideas.

Learners will interact with the science equipment and materials around our environment.

Improvisation of materials helps bond gaps in contents, enrich existing curriculum and

replace teacher-centered instruction. Most of science materials and equipment are very

expensive in terms of importation, purchase and maintenance, therefore, their substitution

with locally produced, inexpensive but effective materials, so as to bring about a reduction

in educational cost are of the essence. Improvisation of materials is usually better suited

to the climatic conditions of the local environment (Udosen & Ekukinam, 2013).

1.7 Terminologies used in this research

Actually, there is the difference between local production and improvisation. Local

production is usually a matter of import substitution and is often a trial to meet the

demands of the whole school system. On the other hand, improvisation is generally a

Page 14 of 159
teacher-centered activity and its encouragement at workshops and in-service courses can

provide an important means of stimulating a more experimental approach to science

teaching. Improvised items produced at such workshops are intended to enable the teacher

to explain a particular scientific principle in his or her own way. The development of

high-level improvisation skills in teachers could obviate the need for the local production

of many items, and could also ultimately reduce the need for expensive imports (Angus

& Keith, 1992).

Material: substance from which something else is or can be made (Oxford advanced

learner’s dictionary)

Experiment: a scientific test done carefully in order to study what happens and to gain

new knowledge (Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary)

Laboratory resources: Tools and materials used to either perform an experiment or take

measurements and gather data (Lunetta, 2003; Meydan & Dogu, 2007) as cited by

(Suleiman, 2013).

Laboratory work or practical work in science lesson refers to classroom laboratory

activities that include teacher demonstrations, discussions, simulations, exercises,

observations or manipulations of real objects and materials by students and fieldwork

(Cossa & Uamusse, 2015).

Hands-on: doing (touching with your hands) something rather than learning about it from

books, lectures, etc. It is actively and personally involved in something such as

performing science experiment (merriam-webster.com).

Page 15 of 159
Improvisation: Improvisation is a state of creating action without pre-planning. This can

be when an individual or group is acting, dancing, singing, playing such as music

instruments, talking, creating artworks, problem-solving, or reacting in the moment and

in response to the stimulus of one's immediate environment and inner feelings (Wikipedia,

2010). This can result in the invention of new thought patterns, new practices, new

structures or symbols, and/or new ways to act (Wikipedia, 2010).

In science lesson, improvisation is making of instructional materials by teachers and

learners using locally accessible resources (Ndirangu, Kathuri, & Mungai, 2003). With

this, science teachers are able to conduct experiments and demonstrations at low cost

(Orwa and Underwood, 1986; Tsuma, 1998).

Low cost is a systematic way of constructing a piece of apparatus or designing an

experiment from locally available materials. Sileshi (2012) suggests some low cost

experiment steps to go ahead: (a) making a careful study of the conventional apparatus or

experiment, (b) thinking of some low cost substitute that may be available in the locality,

(c) designing the improvised apparatus or experiment, (d) putting the improvised

apparatus or experiment to test, (e) making further improvements in the improvised

apparatus keeping the test results in mind, (f) making use of the improvised apparatus in

the laboratory for demonstration or practical work.

Therefore, science improvisation in this study refers to creating and use cheap and locally

available materials in our environment and use them as teaching and learning laboratory

experiment.

Page 16 of 159
Chapter Two
Literature Review

2.0 Introduction

Rwanda, a small country in East-Africa has currently implemented 12Years Basic

Education following Millennium Development Goals on Education for All global policy.

The literacy rate among the Rwandan population aged 15 years and above reaches 68.3%

as a result of education for all and 84.6 % between 15-19 years children as a result of 12

years basic education (MINEDUC, 2014) yearbook reporting.

Among Rwandan education sector plans, (1) Developing a skilled and motivated teaching,

training and lecturing workforce, and (2) Strengthening education in science and

technology (MINEDUC, 2010) are prioritised.

In order to overcome and reflect the weakness in science curriculum, which does little to

contextualise learning but preserves a pure approach suggesting that science occurs in a

social vacuum; Ndirangu, Kathuri and Mungai (2003) argue that teachers should utilise

what is available locally to allow students to influence their local environment for their

own and community good, and learners should be able to appreciate the local relevance

of what they learn in school.

Since the 1960s, developing countries get on programs to support the development of

science education at secondary and higher education levels. A good result has been gotten

and the number of pupils and students enrolled in science courses has increased in many

countries. Nevertheless, expectations have seldom been met and lack of science-trained

personnel at higher and middle-levels continues to obstruct the socio-economic

Page 17 of 159
development of these countries. For instance, well trained and motivated science teachers

have continued in short supply, curriculum reforms have not been fully implemented

because of necessary resources scarcity and insufficient time for schools and teachers to

change their teaching methods. Lately, science education seems to have suffered from the

economic austerity resulting in a decrease in real terms of the resources allocated to

education (Angus & Keith, 1992).

The IIEP study on science provision and refers to the US $ costs in 1990 of providing a

physics laboratory with preparation room and equipment. The cost of providing a fully

equipped specialist science laboratory ranges from $19,250 (more handmade) in Chile to

$144,120 (more imported) in Botswana (Angus & Keith, 1992).

In the study of Cossa & Uamusse (2015) suggested that the teachers improved their

perceptions of the importance of using laboratory work to teach Biology and Chemistry

subjects after attending a training workshop. Teachers said for example that laboratory

work is a helpful means to teach science content as it familiarizes the students with the

practical component.

However, teachers indicated that due to the inappropriate conditions that vary from the

lack of satisfactory infrastructures, laboratory equipment and supplies, to devastating

classrooms, time allocated to laboratory sessions and pressure to finish the wide syllabus

make them unable to use different types of laboratory work to teach in their classes (Cossa

& Uamusse, 2015).

Page 18 of 159
2.1 Educational Policies, Reforms and Education System in Rwanda

Primary and secondary school curriculum development policy emphasizes on Learning

by Doing and Active rather than Passive Learning and the acquisition of Skills, whilst

recognizing the role of Knowledge, especially for further studies (MINEDUC, 2003).

Upon completion of the courses of Integrated Science in a Teacher Training College

(Science and Mathematics option), the student-teacher should be able to:

1. Teach Mathematics, Science and Elementary Technology (SET) at primary level;

2. Master basic scientific concepts and use them correctly in solving related problems;

(KIE, November 2011).

The Burden on Teachers is Increasingly High, which may Cause Deterioration of Quality

in Teaching (JICA, 2012).

In July 2003, the Education Sector Policy was issued. The global goal of the Government

of Rwanda is to reduce poverty and in turn to improve the well-being of its population.

Within the context of education, the aim is to combat ignorance and illiteracy.

 National development plans

In 2000, the Rwandan Government has issued a medium and long-term national plan, the

Vision 2020. The Vision 2020 sets its goal as for Rwanda to become a middle-income

country by 2020 by increasing the GDP per capita of 220 US$ in 2000 to 900 US$ in

2020.

The Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS) (2008-2012),

focuses more on medium and long-term national planning and economic growth.

Page 19 of 159
 Education act

The Constitution of Rwanda (2003) defines that “every person has the right to education”

in Rwanda. It is stipulated that primary education is compulsory, and it is free in public

schools. According to the Constitution, the State has the duty to take special measures to

facilitate the education of disabled people.

 Education policy objectives

1. To educate a free citizen who is liberated from all kinds of discrimination

2. To contribute to the promotion of a culture of peace, justice, tolerance, respect for

human rights, gender equality, solidarity and democracy

3. To dispense a holistic moral, intellectual, social, physical and professional education

4. To promote science and technology

5. To develop in the Rwandese citizen an autonomy of thought and patriotic spirit

6. To transform the Rwandese population into human capital for development

7. To eliminate all the causes and obstacles which can lead to disparity in education

(gender, disability, geographical or social group).

 Education system

From Belgium independence on 1st July 1962, Rwandan has run through many changes in

education in terms of structure, curriculum and education system. After independence, the

education system operated as six years of primary, six years of secondary and four years of higher

education with French as a medium of instruction. From 1978 to 1992 it was changed to eight

years of primary where last two years focused on vocational training and language of instruction

Page 20 of 159
shifted to Kinyarwanda (national language), six years of secondary and four years of higher

education (Nzeyimana, 2013). Currently, after three years of nursery education provided to 3-5

years aged kids, the education system has 6 + 6 (3+3) + 4 structure. Primary education is

compulsory within six-year coverage enrolled by six years old children. Secondary education

includes three years of the ordinary level and three years of advanced level enrolled by six years

old children. For upper secondary education (advanced level), there are three types of

schools both free and basic education: General Secondary (GS), Teacher Training College

(TTC), and Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET). Teacher training

colleges are in charge of training primary teachers and they are affiliated to/and under the

supervision of the university of Rwanda, college of education.

Free and compulsory education policy evolved from 2003/2004 Primary with six years

basic education, in 2006 /2007 nine years basic education (9YBE) were implemented

covering primary and lower secondary school. In 2012, twelve years basic education

(12YBE) were implemented to be free and compulsory education for all.

The higher learning is two years college and/or four years university bachelor degree. The

French language continued to be medium of instruction till 2006/2007, then English took

over from 2007 to present and it is used from primary four (upper primary) till university

since Kinyarwanda is used in lower primary school in order for pupils to develop the mind.

 Education sector plans

The EDPRS high-level objectives for education are to improve and increase:

1 Access to education for all

2. Quality education at all levels

Page 21 of 159
3. Equity in education at all levels

4. Effective and efficient education system

5. Science and technology and ICT in education

6. Promotion of positive values, critical thinking, Rwandan culture, peace, unity and

reconciliation

2.2 Science lesson in Rwanda

2.2.1 Curriculum in Rwanda

Science subjects include all three subjects of Physics, Chemistry and Biology taught in

secondary schools in Rwanda.

There has been a development towards greater emphasis on technology either as part of

science curricula or as a separate course of study. A shift occurred from rote learning to

enquiry activities and problem-solving, and from teacher-centered approaches to student-

centered approaches. Many curricula nowadays give emphasis to understanding and skills

in science rather than knowledge, or process rather than content(Angus & Keith, 1992).

Yoloye (1986) expresses concern about the relevance of educational content to national

development needs in Africa.

Active learning improves learners' understanding and remembering of information and

helps them to develop problem-solving and critical thinking skills. Kigali Institute of

education (2011) defines active learning as any activity that learners do in a classroom

other than passively listening to the teacher.

Page 22 of 159
The content of science experiment materials should reflect the particular orientation of

the science curriculum. For instance science kits designed for primary level are different

from those designed for secondary, and those designed for an environmental or

technological orientation are different from more traditional specialized science kits

(Angus & Keith, 1992), and these science kits will only be effective if they are closely

linked to curriculum development, textbook writing, and teacher training.

While there have been outward changes in curriculum orientation, science teaching in the

majority of classrooms in developing countries is still characterized by student

passiveness, teacher-centeredness, examination orientation and lip-service to a few

practical activities. For instance, Guyana Brophy and Dalgety (1981) report that what

were intended to be student-centered, laboratory-based activities were in practice teacher-

centered and textbook oriented. In Jordan and Malaysia, Kamariah et al (1988) report that

despite espousal of laboratory-based instruction in curriculum materials, teachers in both

countries continue to use didactic teaching methods.

The curriculum reforms have largely not been internalized by those responsible for the

delivery of science education. Many projects seem to have evaded the real issues and

consequences of reform, its long-term effect on teachers, students, and society (Angus &

Keith, 1992).

The flexibility of Rwandan curriculum allows improvised experiment materials to fit

content and improve science lesson where conventional experiment materials are scarce.

Page 23 of 159
 CONTENT IMPROVISED SOURCE
MATERIAL

5. ELECTRICITY AND -700 science

MAGNETISM experiments for
everyone by UNESCO
5.1 Electrostatics -Pencil spin and Ping-
5.1.1 Electrification by Pong ball -Low-cost equipment for
friction; contact and -Straw and balloon science and technology
induction that can bend water education, UNESCO
5.1.2 Distribution of charge -Cans can walk
on the surface of a conductor -Plastic cup capacitor -Amazing science tricks
5.1.3 Electric charge and -Pet bottle for kids and parents by
coulomb’s Law Electroscope Michio Goto
5.1.4 The concept of electric -Van de Graff
field generator -New UNESCO source
5.1.5 Electric intensity and book for science
lines of force: teaching, 1973
(i) Isolated charges
(ii) Unlike charges -WWW.youtube.com
(iii) Like charges -WWW.google.com
5.1.6 Electrostatic potential
5.1.7 Potential difference
5.1.8 Electric potential
energy
5.1.9 Relationship between
electrostatic field and
potential difference
5.1.10 Thunderstorm

Table 2.1 Teacher training college integrated science curriculum alongside improvised
experiment materials
The figure below is an example of conventional science equipment (A) and its improvised

counterpart (B). This simple handmade equipment is made from plastic pet bottle, metal

string, aluminum sheets, and plastic straw and can equally illustrate the same

phenomenon as industrial made one as the same figure in (C) presents.

Page 24 of 159
Figure 2.1 Conventional versus improvised material

Physics is a science subject that students habitually find very hard to approach, the reason

why they always have low achievement. According to Aina and Akintunde (2013) student

usually performed very poorly in physics at all level of education. One major reason for

this poor performance takes the source from the abstract nature of the physics (Adeyemo,

2010) that is why Oladejo, Olosunde, Ojebisi and Isola (2011) stressed that mastery of

physics concepts cannot be fully achieved without the use of instructional materials (Aina,

2013).

2.2.2 Teaching methods and Science teacher

According to constructivism, learning occurs by the construction of knowledge in the

mind of the learner (Celik, Onder, & Silay, 2011).

Social constructivists argue that teachers cannot transfer knowledge from their heads to

the students and that students construct their own knowledge through negotiation within

their social setting (McLaughlin, 2001). This theory implies that during the teaching and

learning process a teacher should be a facilitator, not an instructor. Therefore, the role of

the teacher is to provide scaffolding so that the students can accomplish the task which

Page 25 of 159
the students alone could otherwise not complete, thus helping the students through the

Zone of proximal development (Bransford, Cocking, & Brown, 2000). Thus in teaching

and learning science, teachers should provide a learning environment that will promote

students' understanding through meaningful peer and teacher interactions (Skamp, 2011).

In other words, this theory emphasizes student-centered approach and learning through

hands-on activities where students work collaboratively on developing their own

understanding (Suleiman, 2013), this is in line with Rwandan curriculum saying that

curriculum should support the acquisition of Scientific and ICT skills within the context

of local availability of equipment and infrastructure (MINEDUC, 2003).

In Kenya, performance in science subjects has been miserable. This poor performance is

partly blamed on the increasing school enrolment without a corresponding increase in

teaching resources (Ndirangu et al., 2003).

The problem-based learning is one of the most important applications to apply the theory

of constructivism in classroom environment since it is based on learning new information

by using the prior knowledge and skills, and eliminating the existing misleading by means

of individual and group work (Celik et al., 2011).

The teacher is expected to take on the role of facilitator rather than an importer of

scientific knowledge. However, there is considerable disparity between programmed

expectation and reality. Consequently, teachers should be encouraged to produce own

resources using locally available resources. This would explain into many science

teachers using local adaptations were likely to concretize scientific concepts and it will

further result in cheaper ways of implementing the curriculum (Ndirangu et al., 2003).

Page 26 of 159
Laboratory and field work aids the understanding of difficult concepts in the curriculum;

creates an opportunity for the testing of facts and theories in science. It is supposed that

learners may achieve more if they are given the opportunity to improvise materials on

what they have been taught in the classroom (Owolabi & Oginni, 2012). Experimentation

thus gives room for better attainment of lesson objectives, since it depends on the

availability of science equipment for proper understanding, development and application

(Ugwu, 2008; Owolabi & Oginni, 2012).

It is no excuse for any science teachers to hide under non-availability of funds as a basis

for not conducting practical in science teaching. Isaac Newton, Pythagoras of Simos,

Galilee Galileo and the rest pioneers in science started building themselves from items

around them to explain concepts that are still relevant to these days (Adeyemi, 1990;

2007) as cited by Owolabi and Oginni (2012).

Teachers, administrators, publishers and trade books all refer to the importance of hands-

on activities in science instruction. Descriptions of science education at all precollege

levels have shifted from vocabulary and text material to activities, inventions, and even

project-based Olympics (Flick, 1993).

One of the elementary aims of science education is to develop students who can carry out

enquiries and research to meet the needs of the current age, who can relate their daily

lives to the scientific situation, who can use scientific methods to solve the problems they

encounter in any area of everyday life, and who can have a scientific perception with

regard to the world around them (Tan and Temiz, 2003). Scientific research develops the

high-level thinking skill of students by asking questions, making an inquiry, solving

Page 27 of 159
problems and establishing communication (Cuevas, Lee, Hart & Deaktor, 2005;

(Aydoğdu, Buldur, & Kartal, 2013).

As is well known, laboratories play a central role in science education. Science educators

report that learning tends to be more effective thanks to the use of laboratories (Hofstein

& Lunetta, 1982). Many techniques are used in order to increase the effectiveness of

laboratory applications. In parallel with modern learning approaches, the techniques used

in laboratories have been transformed in recent years into high-level structured activities

based on open-ended research rather than teacher-centered ones (Hofstein & Mamlok-

Naaman, 2007) as cited by (Aydoğdu et al., 2013).

The critical distinction between hands-on science and conventional science is students’

hands-on activities in the classroom. Students’ involvement in hands-on activities exposes

them to vivid connections from abstract concepts to concrete examples and from scientific

principles to scientific applications, which contribute to students’ better understanding of

the scientific knowledge and their ability to solve problems using their scientific

knowledge. The quantity of hands-on activities in classroom captures this distinction

between hands-on science and conventional science instructional methods as well as the

degree to which hands-on activities are used. Thus, operationalizing hands-on science

using quantity is valid (Ruby, 2001).

Feinstein (2011) argues that the goal of educators should help students become competent

in science, realize how to recognize moments when scientific information would be

useful and enable them to locate it, integrate it with their own experiences, and reach an

information opinion or decision (Massango, 2015).

Page 28 of 159
2.3 Misconceptions in science

Determination of students’ misconceptions is very important in terms of choosing right

teaching methodologies and tools as well as preparing an effective curriculum (Seçken,

2010). Conceptual misunderstanding develops when students are taught scientific

information in a way that does not challenge them to confront paradoxes and conflicts

resulting from their own prejudiced notions and nonscientific beliefs (Seçken, 2010).

However, with increased use comes a natural diluting of the original idea that inspired

educators to shift their attention toward what students were doing with materials.

Teachers are now seeking to understand more clearly what students are learning as a result

of busy hands. This need is being expressed through the introduction of new terms such

as minds-on and heads-on science (Carin & Sund, 1989; Duckworth et al., 1990). These

terms imply the concern that children don't automatically understand the concepts

targeted by instruction just because they are actively engaged with manipulatives. The

shift in emphasis from recitation to physical interaction with materials is causing a change

in what we can accept as understanding or knowing (Flick, 1993).

Using open-ended concept test to identify the 5th and 6th-grade students’ misconceptions

on “Light and The Speed of Light” subject. The study points out that students have

misconceptions about some basic concepts on the light subject usually caused by students’

own daily experiences (Aydin & Balim, 2009).

Most of the researches exposed students to not understand the abstract concepts of heat,

light, electricity, magnetism which encounter in Science Education (Eylon & Ganiel,

1990; Welzel, 1998). Electrostatic induction which included electricity subject is difficult

Page 29 of 159
concept to learn in Science Education. According to Akdeniz and Bektaú (2000), most of

the students were not understand the related concepts of electricity (Çığrık & Ergül, 2009).

If we want to reach a substantial fraction of our students, we teachers are advised to pay

much attention to how students learn and respond to our teaching, and we must teach

physics as a scientific problem (Daniela et al., 2015). Cognitive studies focus on how

people understand and learn. What we are teaching is important, but it must be viewed in

the context of what our students learn. Physics, as a discipline, requires learners to employ

a variety of modalities and to translate from one to the other words, tables of numbers,

graphs, equations, diagrams, maps. Physics requires the ability to use mathematics and to

be able to go from the specific to the general and all the way back. This makes learning

Physics particularly difficult for many students, strengthen the latter (Redish, 1994 and

Daniela et al., 2015).

2.4 Improvisation, Science Experiment and Teaching/Learning materials

2.4.1 Historical development

In 1964, the Rangoon Arts and Science University in Burma started to make science

equipment for education. The curriculum reforms of the 1970s and efforts to promote

primary science received considerable international aid agency support in terms of one-

off supplies of kits, e.g. the UNICEF kits provided at primary level in Papua New Guinea

and the ODA kits supplied to Ghana. In 1980, UNESCO listed 21 developing countries

which had established school science equipment and low-cost production and

development units (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Page 30 of 159
In Africa, curriculum development projects such as the Science Education Programme

for Africa resulted in new demands for equipment which eventually led to the local

production of low-cost equipment and science kits. In 1968, Kenya established the

Industrial Arts Department within Kenya Science Teachers College and set up an

equipment production unit through workshops. In 1970, the Federal Ministry of

Education in Nigeria established a Science Equipment Centre in Lagos with

UNDP/UNESCO support until 1976. In Ethiopia, local production at the Educational

Materials and Distribution Agency started in 1977. Curriculum reform effort continued

in many countries in the 1980s but expansion in emerging countries such as Zimbabwe,

and post-war reconstruction efforts in Viet Nam made it imperative for countries to search

for low-cost production or procurement strategies (Angus & Keith, 1992).

The German Foundation for International Development, the Goethe Institute, and the

Commonwealth Secretariat have conducted regular workshops and seminars in many

developing countries aimed at developing skill in teachers in the production and use of

equipment from low-cost materials.

Some kits are entirely locally produced, others are imported; others consist of centrally

produced prototypes of equipment with a set of tools for teacher assembly. The key

feature seems to be that a science kit comprises a preselected collection of items designed

to illustrate particular scientific principles, usually linked to published curriculum

material, sometimes containing tools for assembly, and generally boxed in such a way as

to serve as a store cupboard for items in the classroom or home (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Most science kits provide a mixture of permanent, perishable and consumable items.

Permanent items such as microscopes, thermometers and electric meters have to be

Page 31 of 159
imported unless they can be obtained locally. Provided they are well-made and

maintained, permanent items can be expected to last three or four years. Perishable items

include items such as torch bulbs and microscope slides. These may or may not be

available locally and have to be regularly replaced. Many consumable items such as

candles, matches, razor blades can be obtained locally in urban areas, but chemicals would

have to be imported (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Like other many developing countries, in Mozambique laboratory work failed because of

poor practical skills of the teachers, time limitation to plan science activities and

experimental work and the system of examinations that gives more focus on theory and

less emphasis on practical work (Allsop, 1991; Woolnough, 1991). Additionally, due to

the limited funds, laboratory equipment and learning materials are in short supply (Cossa

& Uamusse, 2015).

2.4.2 Time allocation, cost effectiveness, and source of materials

Zymelman (1990) notes a general deficiency in the quality and quantity of laboratories,

equipment and books. He notes that lecturing takes up 50 per cent of the teachers' time

and where there is practical it takes up less than 20 percent of the time allocated for

science. The low ratio of science inspectors to teachers (less than 1:300) probably means

that there is little professional support for science teaching (Angus & Keith, 1992).

One estimate (Melton, 1972) of the basic facilities needed for the full factory production

of science equipment is shown below:

Hand tools

Page 32 of 159
Chisels, cutters, drills & borers, files, hammers, measuring aids, planes, pliers, saws,

screwdrivers, vices, wrenches and miscellaneous items such as safety goggles and

soldering equipment.

Machine tools

Band saw circular saw, drill press, grinder, metal lathe, buffing machine, oxy-acetylene

set, planer, wood lathe.

Raw materials

Adhesives, electric materials (bulbs, batteries), glass, plastics, nuts, bolts, screws, etc.,

wood, metals, paint materials.

Science material production requires materials such as plastic, glass, wood, metal and

chemicals. The costs and availability of these materials vary considerably from country-

to-country (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Metal is required for many kit components, especially in physics. Workshops require

metalworking facilities and, to increase attractiveness and durability, there is a further

need for buffing and electroplating equipment. For science kits in the tropics, there is an

important role for light-weight and non-corroding metals such as aluminum (Angus &

Keith, 1992).

2.4.3 Teaching and Learning Materials

Teaching materials are the resources a teacher uses to deliver instruction that can be books,

maps, wall charts, flip charts, flash cards, scientific models, kits, and toys. It is essential

for quality materials to be made available to the teachers and students in adequate

quantities to support the teaching and learning processes. With the help of teaching aids,

Page 33 of 159
teachers do not need much to explain a certain concept by using many words. Using

teaching aids such as a simple experiment, teachers can save a lot of time trying to explain

a certain phenomenon theoretically to students in order to make students get interest to

concentrate on their lesson and enable them to relate concrete things with abstract facts.

Students do research by using projector inquiry-discovery method, and draw a conclusion

and solve problems themselves (Massango, 2015).

Besides teacher qualifications and school facilities, another important determinant of

quality of education is the teaching and learning materials. It is essential for quality

materials to be made available to the teachers and students in adequate quantities to

support the teaching and learning processes (UNESCO, 2014).

Camuendro (2006) analyzed the impact of experiments in teaching chemistry using

alternative materials and locally available with the aim to contribute to the improvement

of the quality of education through the implementation of guidelines for achievable

experiments and results showed that the experiments have a positive impact on teaching

and learning process because in addition to raising the level of students' knowledge,

arouse great interest encouraging students to the reflection, which enables the formation

of curious personalities, creative and active. Hoguana, (2008) conducted a study with the

aim to identify the problems that affect the appropriate realization of laboratory practices

classes in general secondary education in Mozambique and suggested that in the absence

of laboratory equipment and lack of laboratories, the use of low cost materials to conduct

laboratory practical classes and to establish partnership with the technical institutions and

private sector. Regarding the limited hours load, the study suggests the harmonization of

laboratory practical classes and theoretical classes (Massango, 2015).

Page 34 of 159
The implications for practical activity in science is that it should reflect the everyday

experiences of teachers and students, that equipment should be low-cost and user-friendly,

and supported by teacher-training and examination reform. There are also alternative low-

cost approaches to practical work which can provide students with the process skills

involved in the planning and design of experiments, data collection, data analysis, and

prediction (Angus & Keith, 1992).

How hands on should be done

For the evaluation of hands-on science, alternative assessments may require the

combination of the performance of hands-on activities with written or oral means. The

performance section would allow the assessment of the hands-on skills while the written

or oral section would address other procedural skills of science (e.g., developing

hypotheses, recording data, and making conclusions based on results) as well as content

knowledge associated with the activities (Ruby, 2001).

Instructional materials are critical ingredients in science education without which

effective learning cannot take place. Increasing the amounts of these resources to improve

classroom learning the environment and consequently increase cognitive achievement of

students, has been recognized as an essential zone where intervention is necessary for

most developing countries (Lockheed and Verspoor, 1994; (Ndirangu et al., 2003).

2.4.4 Laboratory and hands-on activities

Laboratory experiences help students establish the accuracy of their beliefs as well as

providing them with direct experience with concepts. Laboratory work provides a training

ground in problem-solving. However, laboratory activity does not fulfil the various

Page 35 of 159
functions expected of it, except perhaps for the development of manipulative skill (Angus

& Keith, 1992).

The development of hand-experiments with everyday materials needs simple hand tools

and adequate supply of local materials; needs a review of practical work. Can be carried

out by anyone in a short time; can illustrate important science concepts but Impact relies

on the quality of experts chosen to lead workshops; and on the extent to which ideas can

be disseminated to reach a wider audience (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Science is an experimental subject, thus teaching and learning become more effective

when students are given the opportunity to develop their own idea through hands-on

activities (Garbett, 2011; Matthews, 1998). However, it has been found that in most of

the developing countries, many teachers do not engage their students in laboratory

activities due to inadequate laboratory materials (Female Education in Mathematics and

Science in Africa, 2010). The use of locally available materials in teaching and learning

science has become increasingly popular due to inadequate funds allocation to public

schools (Thomas & Israel, 2012).

This is because insufficient funds make it impossible to purchase enough laboratory

equipment for teaching and learning science; hence, in a situation where teachers depend

on industrial laboratory materials, they may not manage to teach science effectively.

Therefore, improvisation is suggested to provide teaching materials for one's locality

when there is a shortage or lack of the standard ones (Mboto & Udo, 2011). Thus, in order

to provide effective teaching and learning experiences, improvising the use of locally

available material may enable students to achieve desired scientific results in the

classroom.

Page 36 of 159
Tompson (2002) in Bhukuvhani, Kusure, Munodawafa and Sana (2010) believe that

improvisation is a pedagogical intervention strategy where teachers are being resourceful

in the making and using locally available materials to substitute conventional equipment

inadequacy or unavailability. Improvisation in teaching and learning science provides

opportunities for creativity and development of manipulative abilities (Limjuco, Glover,

& Mendez, 2011). Moreover, during improvisation scientific concepts are learned and

internalized easily by the students rather than proceeding with chalk and teacher talk

(Bhukuvhani et al.,(2010). This implies that students understand better when they are

engaged in hands-on activities. Moreover, the findings of the study of Bhukuvhani et al.

(2010) emphasized that the use of improvised apparatus in science teaching could be a

solution to the problem of inadequate laboratory equipment. All in all, the literature

reveals that in teaching and learning science with limited laboratory resources, the

materials that are available in our local environment can often serve the same purpose as

conventional laboratory equipment (Suleiman, 2013).

In the study conducted by (Udosen & Ekukinam, 2013) to compare the performance of

pupils when taught with standardized and improvised equipment in the experimental

group, the t-test analysis in both cases has shown that there was no significant difference

in performance of pupils taught with standardized and those taught with improvised

equipment.

Students are engaged in hands-on science activities when they individually or in groups

are manipulating objects or events in the natural environment. Students should apply

various facets of their intelligence for the purpose of understanding a part of their natural

Page 37 of 159
environment to be able to hold accountable for their observations, inferences, and

conclusions (Flick, 1993).

A good hands-on science activity occurs when science activity involves instructional

interventions that engage and maintains student interest. It is one that uses materials which

foster student interactions with their environment. It involves procedures that highlight

important structural and functional features of materials as well as of the environment

under study (Flick, 1993).

The hands-on experiment and practical activities in Physics, improve students’ learning,

help practical skills development, problem-solving, analytical skills, and positive

attitudes towards science. Hands-on experiments offer students concrete experiences and

opportunities to confront misconceptions. There is no replacement for student’s hands-on

experience as far as instrumentation and physical processes are concerned (Daniela,

Popescu, Ioan, & Andrei, 2015).

2.4.5 Science improvised materials and Improvisation

Laboratory learning environment has an important role in Science teaching as it offers

students an environment different from the conventional classroom. Engaging students in

laboratory work will promote their understanding of scientific concepts, problem-solving

abilities, and attitudes towards science (Arzi, 2003). Consequently, prudently fashioned

laboratory activities with proper physical facilities and positive psychosocial aspects will

stimulate intellectual activities, increase social contacts, promote learning and students’

development as well as limit negative behaviors among students (Osman, Ahmad, &

Halim, 2011).

Page 38 of 159
In order to solve hands-on science education problem in schools and universities, James

Cybulski and others in 2014 developed a foldscope; a paper microscope based on

principles of origami and optical design at less than a dollar cost, self-assembled and

power supplied, easy to carry and hard to break made from compact disc and a high

resolution small ball lens at 2000X magnification.

As observed by Ibe-Bassey (2012), the issue of the design, development, production, use

and the integration of materials into lessons are something the teacher believes is for the

college and university. Teachers lack the instinct for improvisation of materials but often

rely on textbooks illustrations (Udosen & Ekukinam, 2013).

The importance of instructional media/materials cannot be underestimated. Instructional

media are a range of materials and equipment which make a visual impression on the

students, assist the teacher in his task, helping him increase his effectiveness in the

classroom. Media communicate information effectively, promote the acquisition and

longer retention of knowledge when they are systematically designed, reproduced, used

and evaluated. Improvisation means to select, create, make, substitute, and provide local

media and materials obtained within and outside the school environment in the absence

of the original ones (Udosen & Ekukinam, 2013).

Investigations done by Flanders (1970) and Johnson et al (1974), revealed that students

who were taught using improvised instructional media were properly evaluated made

significant gains in their studies. Johnson et al (1974) in Udosen (2007), for example,

studied three categories of science students, namely: (i) a group that learned science from

textbooks, (ii) a group that used textbooks and laboratory materials, and (iii) an activity-

centered group that dealt primarily with improvised instructional materials and laboratory

Page 39 of 159
equipment. They found out that all the groups with textbooks and laboratory materials

were relatively behind the group, which was activity-centered, and this group developed

the greatest positive attitudes toward learning. This may be as a result of being exposed

to an area of new knowledge with greater student-to-technology improvisation resources

contact (Udosen & Ekukinam, 2013).

Improvisation in teaching deals with making judgments about what to do with a piece of

material or equipment in the classroom to solve a scientific or technological problem

(Bajah, 1975; Balogun, 1982; Banjo, 1984). It means finding alternatives that would still

function as the unavailable ideal resource. Some writers in developing countries have

asserted that this process of improvisation should become part of the teacher education

programs.

Eniajeju (1983) defined improvisation as the act of using alternative materials and

resources to facilitate instruction whenever there is a lack or shortage of some specific

firsthand teaching aids. The goal is to help teachers learn to design and construct materials

and resources that would enhance their functions in the absence of the regular materials

(Nkechi S. & DomNwachukwu, 2006).

Importance of Improvisation

In summing up, improvisation serves the following purposes in the education system: it

reduces the money spent on the purchase of equipment in educational institutions, it

ensures the realization of lesson objectives, it gives opportunity to teacher to demonstrate

his creative skills as well as encourages students towards the development of creative

abilities, it strengthens enquiry, discovery and investigative method in sciences enabling

teacher to think of cheaper better and faster methods of making teaching-learning process

Page 40 of 159
easier for students, and it familiarize students with resources in their environment as well

as a way of environmental protection and recycling.

Experimental work in sciences always create a lasting picture in the memory of students

and discourage memorization of laws and theories rather apply them. Concrete

experiments help students see how the scientific concepts work in reality, particularly the

kinesthetic learners will benefit from carrying out the experiment themselves, Owolabi

(2003) suggested that students should be given opportunity to discover and invent things;

hence, the teachers should allow the students to acquire skills that will make them learn

on their own. It must be noted that learners achieved more when they are allowed to

manipulate apparatus rather than mere listen or observe teachers’ idea (Owolabi & Oginni,

2012).

Challenges of Improvisation

Improvisation help in forcing students to think critically about the scientific concepts,

however, there are many obstacles associated with the use of improvised materials.

Balogun (1982) explained the two influencing factors of improvisation as technical and

human factors; low degree of accuracy and precision affects some improvised materials

called technical factor while the human factors problems are attributed to skillfulness,

creativity, and competence. Owolabi (1999) identified some common errors that can

affect the accuracy in science practical results as, Environmental, Instrumental, Personal

and Experimental errors. Technical factors are problems associated with instrumental

errors which result from inevitable errors during the manufacturing process. The problem

of irregularity in measurement will result to low reliability of the instrument. Iwuzor

(2000) posited that the problem is more crucial at the secondary school levels and tertiary

Page 41 of 159
institutions wherever more sensitive experiments and observations are done. Personal

errors can also lead to a low degree of accuracy. Scientists referred to this as human factor.

These are problems associated with teachers’ professional competency, creative ability

and commitment. Once the teachers begin to understand the principle of improvisation,

they can begin to improvise their own tools, though a lot of teachers lack confidence in

their ability to design their own experiments (Owolabi & Oginni, 2012) citing Okebukola

(1998).

2.5 Theory of Electrostatics

 Atoms and electric charges

A charge is the property associated with matter due to which it produces and experiences

electrical and magnetic effects.

All materials are made of tiny particles called atoms. Atom has three types of particles;

positively charged (+), neutrons having no charge, and electrons negatively charged (-).

Protons and neutrons constitute the entire atomic mass in nucleus whereas electrons have

negligible mass and revolve around the nucleus. The figure bellow shows an atomic

model.

Figure 2.2 Lithium atomic model

Page 42 of 159
An atom is neutral since a number of electrons and protons is equal. So any object with

an equal number of protons and electrons is neutral (uncharged). Charges are created by

the transfer of electrons to or from one object to another, however, note that protons are

never transferred since they are bound to their nucleus and cannot be separated and moved

from their position, meaning that there not involved in producing electrostatic effects. For

instance, If you remove one or more electrons from an atom, that atom becomes positively

charged because there is more positive than negative charge, it is same as when you add

a new electron to the atom, that atom becomes negatively charged since it has an excess

of electrons than it had before.

Figure 2.3 Triboelectric series

Page 43 of 159
 Static electricity phenomenon, charging and discharging

A phenomenon is something you can observe or sense. Some electrostatic phenomena are

produced or observed when you rub for example a balloon against your clothes it sticks

to the wall. This balloon can bend a stream of water from the tap or pick up small pieces

of papers because rubbing it with cloth you are charging the balloon.

Static means stationary or standing still. Electrostatics is the study of the effects of

stationary charges on each other in their surroundings.

Electrostatic effects tend to be noticeable under dry conditions and on insulators like

plastics and glasses, rather than conductors like metals because electrons move quickly

through a metal conductor to discharge a charged object.

An object can be charged by different methods:

a) Charging by friction (rubbing)

In lightning, clouds are charged by friction. In friction when two objects are rubbed

together, electrons are moved from one object to another resulting in one object becomes

negatively charged and another positively charged. An example is when brushing dry hair

with a plastic brush. At starting point, both objects (dry hair and plastic brush) are neutral

since their atoms still have an equal number of protons and electrons each other. After

brushing, hair brush gains electrons becoming negatively charged, while hair loses

electrons staying with more protons and so becomes positive charged. The result is then

the two objects start to attract each other, and individual hair may move apart because of

the repulsion between similar charges (hairs are charged positively). According to why

such object is charged negatively or positively depends on their potential and can be

Page 44 of 159
checked from the triboelectric table. For instance, If the plastic brush is rubbed with silk,

it will become positively charged, because the silk has a higher affinity for electrons.

From this, since we have two types of charges; positive and negative, we state two laws

of electrostatics which are like charges repel and unlike charges attract each other.

b) Charging by contact (conduction)

If a neutral object is touched by a charged object, charging of the neutral object will take

place. Let use electroscope (apparatus with which the presence of electric charge on a

body is detected) in this case. For example, if an object has a defect of electrons (so that

it is positively charged) and touches a neutral object (electroscope), electrons will pass

from the electroscope to the rod leaving the gold leaves diverged due to repulsion. The

result is that the neutral electroscope becomes positively charged and the initially charged

rod acquires negative charges.

Figure 2.4 Charging by contact (conduction), neutral electroscope (A), positively charged

rod (B) and charged electroscope (C)

Page 45 of 159
Inversely, if the rod has an excess of electrons (so that it is negatively charged) and

touches on the electroscope, electrons will pass through the bar to the neutral object

(electroscope). The result is that the electroscope acquires a negative charge and the

initially charged object becomes less negative.

c) Charging by induction

In this case, the charged object doesn't touch the neutral object, it only gets close. That

causes a separation of charges. Then, another object touches the neutral object and

charging takes place.

Let consider the following steps using a neutral metallic ball and a negatively charged

rod:

1) A metallic ball is hanging on a line

Electrons can move freely inside the metal. The ball is initially neutral, as the number of

positive and negative charges is equal.

2) A negative rod approaches the ball so that the electrons move away from it (like

charges repel)

If afterward the rod is moved away, everything comes back to what it was before.

3) Now, a hand touches the ball, on the place where the electrons are concentrated

The human body is a conductor of electricity so that the electrons will flow to the hand.

If the hand is then removed, it will take these electrons away, leaving the ball charged

positively. However if a positive rod approaches the ball, so that the electrons move

Page 46 of 159
towards pushing positive charges near the hand side, the hand will transfer negative

charges from ground to the ball leaving it negatively charged.

Figure 2.5 Charging by induction through five steps

4) Now a smaller number of electrons remains at the ball. There are more positive than

negative charges so that it is positively charged

5) After the rod moves away, the few negative charges (electrons) left are redistributed

The ball is now charged by induction. The negative rod has not touched the ball so that

its charge remains exactly what it was after the hand moved away.

 Coulomb’s and Inverse Square Laws

Inverse relationships are common in nature. In electrostatics, “the electrical force between

two charged objects is inversely related to the distance of separation between the two

objects”. While increasing separation distance between objects decreases the force of

attraction or repulsion between the objects, decreasing the separation distance between

objects increases the force of attraction or repulsion between them.

Page 47 of 159
Figure 2.6 Inverse square law

This type of cause-effect relationship of the pattern of electrostatic force and distance is

characterized as an inverse square relationship. Careful observations show that the

electrostatic force between two point charges varies inversely with the square of the

distance of separation between the two charges. The factor by which the electrostatic force

is changed is the inverse of the square of the factor by which the separation distance is

changed. Thus, if the separation distance is doubled, then the electrostatic force is

decreased by a factor of four (2 raised to the second power). And if the separation distance

is tripled (increased by a factor of 3), then the electrostatic force is decreased by a factor

of nine.

The inverse square relationship between force and distance is expressed in the Coulomb's

law equation for electrostatic force. In the Coulomb's law was stated as “the electrostatic

force between two point charges is directly proportional to the product of the charges and

inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them” 𝐹 = 𝑘. 𝑄.𝑄′

𝑑2

The equation shows that the distance squared term is in the denominator of the equation,

opposite the force. This illustrates that force is inversely proportional to the square of the

distance. F 1
𝑑2

Page 48 of 159
The force is along the line connecting the charges and is attractive if the charges are

opposite, and repulsive if they are the same.

The proportionality constant k is electrostatic force constant and has approximately the

value of 9x109N.m2/C2. It is expressed in terms of the permittivity of free space 0.

Where 0= 1 =8.85x10-12C/N.m2

4𝜋𝑘

 Electric field and capacitor

The electric field is the region surrounding the charged body in which the effect of charge

is experienced is called electrostatic field and it is expressed as electric force per unit

charge. Electric field lines are characterized by that they do not intersect each other, they

never form closed loops, and they start at positive terminal and end at the negative

terminal.

Electric field intensity at any point in an electric field denoted by E is given by the force

experienced by a positive charge placed at that point: E=𝑉.

𝑑

Electric flux is the number of lines of force emanating from a positive charge is called

electric flux. Electric flux density measured in coulomb per meter square is defined as the

flux per unit cross-sectional area emanating normally from the surface.

Electric potential is the work done in bringing a unit positive charge from infinity to that

point against the electric field. Its unit is volts. Potential difference or voltage is the work

done in moving a unit positive charge within the electric field from a point of lower

potential to a point of higher potential.

Page 49 of 159
Electric field between two parallel plates if plates are apart and potential defference across

plates is v, then V = 𝑊 = E.d

𝑄

Where E = electric field strength in volts per meter, V = potential difference in Volts, Q

in coulomb, and d = distance apart in meters.

Capacitor or condenser consists of two parallel conducting plates separated by an

insulating material called dielectric: C=𝑄 and capacitance is defined as the ability of a
𝑉

capacitor to store electric energy in the form of static charge.

 Dangers and Applications of electrostatics

If enough charge builds up due to friction, then a spark will form. A spark is a charge

moving through the air, heating up the air seeing light and hearing the sound. The moving

charge is electric current which makes lightning be dangerous. Thunderstorm clouds have

air inside them rushing up and down. Air causes rain drops to collide and knock electrons

off each other. Bottom of the cloud becomes negatively charged, the ground becomes

positively charged (Static electricity). Both the cloud and ground send out so-called leader,

looking for a place to connect and equalize their charges. When they connect, massive

amounts of electricity move between cloud and ground, resulting a neutralization.

Doctors in hospitals can use an electric current trying to restart a patient’s heart if it stops

beating.

When cars and airplanes are refueled there is a risk of sparks. The friction of the fuel

moving down the pipe can cause a charge to build up. In order to reduce the risk of damage

in electronic devices, engineers wear special wristbands connected to a metal wire that

goes to the ground.

Page 50 of 159
In everyday life, electrostatics appears. Sometimes people feel small shock when they

touch a door handle, car door, or hear the crackle of sparks as you remove a piece of cloth

because of friction with the air.

2.6 Conclusion

In this chapter, I have presented the overview of Rwandan as well as other developing

countries’ science lesson as well as the intention to the curriculum. I have described the

teaching methods as well as teaching and learning materials used in teaching and learning

science. In addition, the literature reveals that in teaching and learning science with

limited laboratory resources, demonstration, and locally available materials may be used

to make meaningful learning. Furthermore, based on literature I discussed the possible

challenges that might be encountered in teaching and learning science with limited

laboratory resources. This includes the inability of teachers to conduct laboratory

activities, and limited laboratory resources, therefore, improvisation strategies including

significant testimonies and ways of doing were discussed too. In the next chapter, I will

explain the methodology used in the study of what are the experiences of science teachers

of teaching science with limited laboratory resources, as well as how to test improvised

experiment materials effectiveness over tradition method, how to reveal electrostatics

misconceptions will also be described.

Page 51 of 159
Chapter Three
Research Methodology

3.0 Introduction

Among the variables that past research has identified as linked to achievement, several

may also be linked to the level of hands-on science (Ruby, 2001). In this kind of research,

I will use survey and achievement test in order to answer research questions as aimed at

revealing barriers encountered by teachers, student’s misconceptions and impact of

improvised experiment materials for a science lesson in Rwanda among thirteen teacher

training colleges.

3.1 Type of methodology

This is practical research experimentally designed. Deferent to theoretical research

methodology, the practical approach consists of the empirical study of the subject under

research and predominantly consists of a hands-on approach. This involves first-hand

research in the form of questionnaires, surveys, interviews, observations and discussion

groups.

Deferent to quasi-experimental, experimental design involves the use of random

assignment to place participants in two groups: an experimental group which receives

intervention and another control group without any intervention.

There exist three type of experiment according to Çepni & Ayvacı (2006); Closed-ended,

Semi-open-ended, and Open-ended experiments.

Page 52 of 159
Closed-ended experiments are designed to prove something in such experiments,

teachers are central, both for the dissemination of knowledge and the organization of

methods (Kaptan, 1999).

In semi-open-ended experiments, problem and method may be presented to students

where the problem, results, and comments may be preserved, but purpose and method

may be unclear (Ergin, Şahin-Pekmez & Öngel-Erdal, 2005). In this method, the open

parts of the experiment are expected to be completed by the students (Yenice & Aktamış,

2004).

Open-ended experiments are designed in a way to allow students to discover and invent

(Ergin et al., 2005). This method allows students to choose experimental apparatus, to

acquire and interpret data in order to determine the results themselves. Therefore, with

the open-ended experiment method, students are expected to develop their psychomotor

abilities and such behaviors as thinking, deciding, making original implementations in

line with their conclusions, and making deductions in terms of the results obtained (Çepni

& Ayvacı, 2006; Aydoğdu et al., 2013).

The present study is using open-ended experiments as the instructor gives free expression

in experimental group where he provides materials from the environment like pet bottles,

aluminum foils, balloons, tissues, straws, strings, rubber band,…and worksheet to

students in order to create experiment materials like cup capacitor, electroscope. With the

guidance of the instructor, after students create materials, they go on and perform the

experiment as indicated or designed on the worksheet, finally, they record and present

their results from groups to in front of other groups, then the instructor will assist in

delivering conclusion.

Page 53 of 159
In this research, data will be described in two ways; qualitative and quantitative.
Qualitative research methods include describing in details specific situation using

research tools like interviews, surveys, and observations. It focuses on the gathering of

mainly verbal data rather than measurements. While quantitative research method

requires quantifiable data involving numerical and statistical explanations. Quantitative

analysis pivots on researchers understanding the assumptions inherent within different

statistical models. It generates numerical data or information that can be converted into

numbers. The presentation of data is through tables containing data in the form of

numbers and statistics.

When problem-posing was designed to focus only on the generation of problems without

the solutions, problem-solving prior to instruction resulted in better conceptual

understanding than problem-posing (Kapur, 2015).

Since PBL has shown positive influence on creative thinking, problem-solving, academic

achievement, attitude, scientific process (Taşoğlu & Bakaç, 2010), the Therefore purpose

of this paper is to test the effectiveness of improvised experiment materials versus lesson

without experiment on learning electrostatics. Using problem-solving teaching method,

two randomized controlled experimental studies are under consideration.

3.2 Research instruments, intervention and sampling techniques

Teachers and students are most often surveyed as to the overall amount or frequency of

hands-on work activities they have done in class (Ruby, 2001).

Page 54 of 159
In this research, we use survey alongside test scoring as instruments to collect data.

Survey includes questionnaires and interviews. Above all observation was used indirectly

to support these two.

The questionnaire was given to teachers and students while interviewing to TTC (teacher

training college) principals and/or deputies of studies (DOS).

The first questionnaire was given to science teachers asking about science experiments

performance, available materials and difficulties in doing conventional experiments as

well as creating improvised materials. About nineteen science teachers participated in

filling this questionnaire, they were selected according to the author ability to reach

respective schools.

The second one is asking students about the hands-on situation in their school life; if they

perform experiments or not, availability of materials in their laboratories as well as

teachers practices in a science lesson. 196 year one students participated in this

questionnaire purposively selected according to four schools (TTC Rubengera, Save,

Muhanga, and Marimba); two having laboratories and other two without science

laboratories. The author chose year two students to answer this situational analysis

questionnaire because year ones are new to the school and year threes are busy preparing

national examination.

The third questionnaire was finally given to the same teachers after participating in a

workshop on making improvised experiment materials in order to reveal the difficulty of

improvisation. About ten teachers from science courses; physics, chemistry, biology

and/or integrated science distributed randomly and selected according to their availability.

Page 55 of 159
The interview was given to four principals and/or DOS had the purpose of viewing the

situational analysis of schools as well as motivational analysis towards teachers in terms

of science activities.

The test is the second instrument in this study. This was given to students in order to

calculate test score and show the impact of improvised experiment materials.

Physics achievement test results (PAT) were based on the lesson units, an achievement

test was administered to measure the performance objectives. The test had 6 open

questions. Bloom taxonomy of cognitive domain, in its six level of knowledge and skills,

was use in order to see which item question in the test can improve each level in terms of

science improvisation.

Thus, demonstrations in teaching and learning science may be used to supplement lecture

method of teaching. In teaching and learning science with limited laboratory resources,

demonstration helps students conceptualize the scientific concepts more effectively than

chalk and talk where students are challenged to connect theories to actual practice

(Kandjeo-Marenga, 2011).

After teachers and students express and outline the school situation in a science lesson,

the present research has successively delivered and supported with two interventions;

workshop and lesson.

About ten science teachers invited according to their availability, participated in science

workshop on making improvised experiment materials organized by author and held in

one of school among TTCs. TTC Muhanga was chosen since it was in the center of the

country and made everyone easy to reach. 8 hours of one day were covered by teachers

to create experiment materials guided by author who provided worksheet manuals and

Page 56 of 159
waste materials from around environment like aluminum cans, pet bottles, rubber bands,

strings, rubber balloons, alcohol, matches, plastic straws and many more. While working,

the author observed the working condition and gave an opportunity for a group of the

teacher to present their products in front of other. With the workshop, teachers will see

the importance of improvised experiment materials and claim difficulties, barriers, and

motivation.

About ninety-six year one students participated in lesson intervention, where researcher

taught two groups of students in two schools. Year one was purposively selected in the

fact that the content about electrostatics is taught in year one first semester according to

integrated science TTC curriculum. The fact that all TTCs in the academic year 2015 have

recruited only one science classroom each having no more than sixty students. So, since

the research should include control and experimental groups, two schools were chosen to

increase the student’s number. These two schools are similar in a way that all do not have

science laboratories which would be better for science lesson intervention and test

improvised materials. While schools were selected purposively, students in respective

groups were selected in randomly. Each of two schools has both control group and

experimental group. In each school, students are asked to stand up and come in front of

classroom mixing each other, then each and every one counts from one and gets one

number to the last student. They are divided into two groups according to even and odd

number, let say; students having odd number go to control while even number belong to

an experimental group or vice versa accordingly. After every student has his/her number

and group, the researcher went ahead and teach control group without experiment and

experimental group using improvised experiment materials about eight hours in one

month. The lesson is to deliver knowledge and skills. The post-test was given to all
Page 57 of 159
students before teaching in order to make sure that both groups are on the same level and

disclose basic misconceptions they have as the second objective suggests.

Teaching and learning science using an organized demonstration is useful for assisting

the learning of science and can be a good strategy for teaching and learning science with

limited laboratory resources (Suleiman, 2013).

The traditional approach refers to recipe learning which often engage the students in

learning passively or during the whole experiment without engaging any thinking but

follows the procedures given by teacher (Ibrahim, Surif, Hui, & Yaakub, 2014).

3.3 Scope and target of the study

Learning should start from the root and basic purposive sources. Since twelve years basic

education started in 2012 in Rwanda, not only resources like teaching and learning

materials became scarce but also teachers and quality of education have become issue and

challenge to improve. This research focuses on teacher training colleges (TTCs) as one

of three types of high secondary schools after general and vocational schools so that the

basic issue in science learning start from the fundamental knowledge delivers (teachers

and student-teachers). Teachers in TTCs have heavy duties since they train students who

will become primary teachers after three years. That is why these students have to learn

good science in order to reteach what they got in their schools. They will teach science

and demonstrate science activities. This research aims at proving the barriers and impact

of improvisation as well as misconceptions. Not only teachers and students in TTCs but

also indirectly encourage these students as well as other primary teachers to be able to

create and use improvised experiment materials.

Page 58 of 159
Figure 3.1 Rwandan map showing TTCs locations by arrows

Rwanda has sixteen teacher training colleges distributed in the whole country, but when

the research was conducted thirteen were active since three were implemented in

beginning of 2015. The present table presents schools covered this research distributed in

the country map as shown. Black arrows show the lesson and test sampling while gray

together with black covered student’s questionnaires.

Page 59 of 159
 Province District Name of TTC

North Bureau TTC Kirambo

Gicumbi TTC Byumba

South Gisagara TTC Save

Muhanga TTC Muhanga

Nyamagabe TTC Mbuga

Nyaruguru TTC Cyahinda

East Rwamagana TTC Bicumbi

Ngoma TTC Zaza

Nyagatare TTC Matimba

West Karongi TTC Rubengera

Ngororero TTC Muramba

Rubavu TTC Gacuba II

Rusizi TTC Mururu

Table 3.1 Rwandan TTCs

3.4 Framework and Research design

Basically, two population are mainly considered in this research; these are science

teachers and students from integrated science option, however, head of schools or head

of studies were contacted about school situation in terms of science laboratories science

activities and teachers motivation.

After getting information from teachers and students survey, they were given intervention

of workshop and lesson respectively in order to stimulate teachers about improvisation

Page 60 of 159
and deliver knowledge to students. Performance pre-test given to students prior to

intervention has to reveal their misconceptions.

After the intervention, a survey to the teacher after workshop and performance test to

students were given as the mean of verification.

After expression of barriers in science hands-on experiments from teachers, revealing

misconceptions and impact of improvised experiment materials from students,

improvisation will be recommended to teachers and to future primary teachers. The

government will be suggested to train teachers through a workshop on how to create and

use improvised materials in a science lesson.

This research is designed in a way that the first objective of hands-on and improvisation

barriers will be achieved as well as the first question to be answered by a survey of

teachers, students, and principals/DOS.

The second research objective of testing student’s misconceptions in order to answer

correspondent research question will be shown by pre-test.

Finally, post-test will answer the third question in order to test the impact of improvisation

through Bloom’s taxonomy cognitive domains.

3.5 Conclusion

To ensure reliability, classroom observation would be the desired method of measurement

but the high costs of this approach have constrained its use. For these reasons, most

studies of hands-on science have not been able to address the issue of instructional quality.

Small-scale experiments often compare hands-on science teaching versus other methods

(e.g., lecture or demonstration). As a result, they compare the quantity of hands-on science
Page 61 of 159
(some set amount in one classroom versus none in the other classrooms) rather than the

interaction of quantity and instructional approach (Ruby, 2001).

We can avoid many of the concerns for a possible spurious relationship between hands-

on science and student achievement by using multivariate analysis.

While students were working, the researcher observed all the groups and assessed their

performance by asking some guiding questions about the experiments. Student groups

were also encouraged to prepare laboratory reports for each experiment including the aim

of the experiment, a short explanation of the experimental procedure, results, evaluation

and discussion of the results by associated with various sample, response to the questions

in the laboratory worksheet, and conclusion.

Page 62 of 159
Chapter Four
Data Analysis and Results
4. 1 Survey findings

4. 1 .1 Students’ Questionnaire Results

When experiments are done, both teacher and students participate and are done in the

laboratory, classroom, outside and in science clubs respectively in terms of frequency.

More experiments are done in chemistry (50%), physics (30%) and biology (20%)

however in schools without a laboratory, materials are homemade by teachers and

students whereas in schools having a laboratory, materials are from laboratory and some

are homemade by teachers and students.

When students are asked the importance of experiment, why like or dislike experiment

and what is science improvisation, they tend to have same responses and no difference

between schools WITH LAB & WITHOUT LAB at t(18)=1.016, p<.05 when tcrit= 2.101

and p=.323 and they are all aware that in their future career, have to improvise since there

are no laboratory or sufficient science equipment in primary schools.

4. 1. 2 Teachers’ Questionnaire

Lack of science laboratories and insufficiency of equipment rates at 100% of all

respondents however 27.7% and 11.1% claim the oldness of materials and lack of

experiment performance skills respectively.

It is difficult to conduct experiment because (teachers said):

-No science laboratory at school (schools WITHOUT LAB, teachers claim)

Page 63 of 159
-No enough science equipment and science equipment are too old (MOVING LAB school

teachers).

Five schools have all full Physics, Chemistry, Biology laboratories, four have mobile

laboratories in the form of science kits with few old materials whereas four have neither

laboratory room nor kit.

Science equipment

Laboratory Science kit None

Figure 4.1 Distribution of science materials in 13 TTCs

99.7% of teachers are aware of improvisation and, at least, everyone among 18 teachers

has improvised once a time in a year, 9/11 from schools WITHOUT LAB and 4/7 WITH

LAB, teachers have improvised many times.

However claims are time limitation as one item material can be created between 30min

to 1day limitation of improvisation within scarcity of materials like chemicals, nervous

system, radiation, lightning… as well as the lack of skills.

The fact that Materials are scarce and apart from lack of improvisation skills, contents are

found different; therefore, there are some that are impossible to improvise, example are

Chemicals, Extracting metals, Nervous system, Radiation, Sub-elements of atoms,

Components of air because you can't get different gases, Lightning because it is difficult

to collect charge, as well as Dynamite.

Page 64 of 159
Using t-test, a significant difference of .005 occurs between teacher responses from

schools WITH LAB & WITHOUT LAB in terms of science experiment or/and

improvisation perception at t(2,14)=3.325, p=.05 when t-critical is 2.145.

A better way of collecting materials for improvisation is that teacher requests students to

bring possible materials and he brings what students cannot get. We believe that

improvisation can engage students highly participate in the classroom, motivate students

to like science, make science easy to learn, as well as develop the relationship between

science and the real world. As it is easy to find cheap and available materials in our

surrounding why can’t we do it! But no time. Integrate science curriculum supports

science activities and where we do not have enough material, we can improvise but again

no time because this curriculum is loaded (teachers reported).

4. 1. 3 Prencipals & DOS Interview

The interview was given to one principal (head of school) and two deputies of studies or

in charge of studies. I will present their talks and concerns down right here.

“TTC RUBENGERA has three laboratories full and well equipped; physics, chemistry

and biology” NDABAMENYE Innocent, deputy of studies of this TTC confirms that they

have everything in their laboratories, their teachers not only do science experiment but

also conduct improvisation at least once a week and they are highly motivated. When

asked how they motivate their future students who will go to primary school and count

with the problem of lack of laboratory, he said: “they will try to make their own materials

locally”, the curriculum requests teachers to use several and local made materials, he

added.

Page 65 of 159
Schmidt (1986) discusses some of the psychological barriers which can prevent teachers

employing the new methodologies and making more use of practical work. In his opinion,

based on extensive experience in workshops on the production of low-cost equipment,

the problem goes deeper than the mere availability of materials, which is often used as an

excuse for ignoring practical work. Inexperienced teachers fear the responsibility for

breakage of expensive-looking apparatus, fear the possibility of management problems

and unsettled classes in practical work and fear looking foolish when the experiment goes

awry. Reluctance to use equipment in tertiary institutions has also been noted. For

instance, Pulian (1991) reports on a vast quantity of neglected and rapidly deteriorating

physics equipment in a science teacher training institute in Africa (Angus & Keith, 1992).

We have ‘nothing’! Said by MUKABATESI Jeanne d’Arc, Principal of TTC

MUHANGA. She continues, in order to support science enhancement, we do not have

conferences, workshop, science clubs, however, we take our students to neighbor science

schools for laboratory performance like KAVUMU college and Groupe scholaire

SHYOGWE.

We do not have any laboratory nor empty room, we have a, however, small moving box

containing some too old materials like two small and four large optical microscopes, wing

scales, tubes,… from 1998 but no chemicals left, said by HAFASHIMANA Daniel,

deputy of studies TTC MATIMBA. “Experiments, when done, are performed in the

classroom from materials made by teachers and students, he added. When asked about

motivation not only to teachers but also to students, he continues: “ even if time is limited,

however, we have science club, and, therefore, I am sure these student-teachers should

Page 66 of 159
learn how they will use improvised science materials in their future career to conducting

experiment for better teaching to the kids”.

There are other constraints on the frequent and efficient use of science equipment in the

classroom. Among these is the requirement for storage space; effective procedures for

sharing equipment among many teachers with each teacher responsible for the care of

equipment and for tidying up after use; there are daunting bureaucratic procedures

involved in procuring imported apparatus and in replenishing existing stock (Angus &

Keith, 1992).

4. 2 Test results

 Test context

Several researchers in science education specify that students are better served by hands-

on activities which lead to higher-order cognitive skills (Hull, 2000; Hofstein & Lunetta,

2003; Hofstein, 2004; Bell, 2005). However, the resources available to perform these

suggested kinds of activities are very limited. Due to these factors, in some cases,

demonstration-laboratory is planned to allow students to make observations through

demonstration rather than through hands-on laboratory activities (McKee, Williamson, &

Ruebush, 2007).

The academic level of the class and the academic ability of the individual student are

related to both high test scores and higher levels of hands-on science (Ruby, 2001).

Memory problems can be reduced by making items very specific, covering longer time

periods to avoid respondents compressing time, and allowing respondents to review their

records. Motivation problems can be reduced by using less threatening questions,

allowing less specific answers, and using more anonymous methods in administration and
Page 67 of 159
recording. Problems of understanding can be reduced by using familiar words (Sudman

and Bradburn 1991; Rossi, Wright and Anderson 1983).

Relevant to my research, I used open test different to multiple choice test which cannot

cover the wide range of skills that should be evaluated. Multiple choice can only test

narrow content areas and skills especially short-term recall of facts and basic process

skills but cannot address the broader abilities of critical thinking, evaluation and problem

solving (Miller and Legy 1993; Ruby, 2001). Instead open test can let students explore

the ability of critical thinking, evaluation and problem solving.

Theoretically, it is expected that hands-on science should have a differential effect for

higher against lower ability students. However, research on the interaction of student

propensities and instructional methods has found that teaching methods often have

differential effects based on student ability (Cronbach and Snow 1981).

A deep approach is allied with an intention to understand an intrinsic interest in the

content to be learned (Baeten, Struyven, & Dochy, 2013). Students have to use deep

learning processes, for example relating ideas, using evidence and looking for meaning.

Oppositely, the intention behind a surface approach is an extrinsic motivation and fear of

failure. As a consequence, surface learning processes are limited to rote memorization

and a narrow syllabus-bound attitude (Biggs, Kember, & Leung, 2001; Entwistle &

McCune, 2004) as cited by Baeten, Struyven, & Dochy, (2013).

 Measurement Tool

Using statistical package for social sciences software, the test is measuring knowledge

and skills on electrostatics. In this research, the researcher determines the students’

Page 68 of 159
physics course achievements related to the Unit of “Electrostatics”. The test consists of 5

open-ended questions evaluated through Bloom's taxonomy cognitive domain of

knowledge dividing cognitive learning into six levels, from lower-level thinking skills

such as memorization to higher order thinking that involves the evaluation of information

(knowledge, understanding or comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and

evaluation). Question item 1 is subdivided into two, A and B. The test is marked and

scored according to misconception from blank space where students write nothing, the

wrong answer including misconceptions and correct answers.

Responses to these open-ended question were classified as no response and incorrect

when given information was not related (0 points), partially correct when insufficient

information is provided (5 points) and correct (10 points). Each of the answers was

evaluated by the researcher.

 Explaining variables

In this study, the impact of improvised materials that experimental group should show

over control group is taken as treatment (independent) variable while outcome

(dependent) variable will be tested score both from pre-test and post-test.

 Achievement test was given

1. A. State two laws of electrostatics

B. What is static electricity?

2. How can we test different charges? Describe using drawings.

3. Where can we use electrostatics? Give other examples that apply electrostatics.

Page 69 of 159
4. Interpret this situation

5. Charged rubber rods are placed near a neutral conducting sphere, causing a

redistribution of charge on the spheres. Which of the diagrams below shows the

appropriate distribution of charge on the spheres? List all that apply.

 Explaining Bloom’s Taxonomy of cognitive domain

Over forty years ago, Benjamin Bloom and several co-workers created a taxonomy of

educational objectives that continues to provide a useful structure for organizing learning

exercises and assessment experiences at all levels of education (Bloom et al. 1956;

Anderson and Sosniak, 1994; Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001). This is from knowledge

to evaluation as follow:

Knowledge

Answers to knowledge questions indicate if a student knows and can recall specific

information. Examples of questions that assess knowledge are some types of multiple

choice questions, true/false questions, definitions, matching questions, identification,

naming and listing.

Page 70 of 159
Comprehension

Responses to comprehension questions report information or observations. Students must

possess some basic knowledge of the subject to correctly answer comprehension

questions. Examples are: convert, summarize, classify, infer, compare, and explain

information.

Application

The application often involves applying rules or principles to new situations, using known

procedures to solve problems or demonstrating how to do something. Questions that ask

students to solve a problem using a known equation or to select a procedure to complete

a new task would be considered application questions.

Analysis

Answers to analysis questions may give directions, make commentaries, scrutinize data,

explain how something works, or distinguish fact from opinion. Students are expected to

find links between data and interpretations and to discover which material is relevant to

a task and which is extraneous. Example: diagram, illustrate, outline or subdivide would

be considered analysis questions.

Synthesis

Opposite to analysis of break information down into its constituent parts, synthesis

combines a series of parts into a greater whole. Example; students have to combine,

compile, create, devise, plan, or organize. Questions ask students to create multiple

hypotheses to explain a phenomenon, to develop a plan to solve a problem or to devise a

procedure to accomplish a task.

Page 71 of 159
Evaluation

Responses to evaluation questions make judgments about facts, data, opinions or research

results using evidence and scientific reasoning. Good answers require students to analyze

and synthesize information and clarify ideas. For example, students will value, judge,

criticize, justify, or support an idea or concept.

Bloom’s Taxonomy Question items number Learning Skill summary

Knowledge 1A&B Memorization and recall

Comprehension 2 Understanding

Application 3 Using knowledge

Analysis 4&5 Taking apart information
Synthesis Reorganizing information

Evaluation Making judgments

Table 4.1 Correspondence of item questions to Bloom’s taxonomy levels

 Explaining intervention

Lesson plan summarized showing intervention in both treatment groups; control and

experimental are here presented. The difference in these groups is that in the experimental

group, students were given local materials and they created experimental materials

according to worksheets and after they use them for experimenting. A detailed lesson plan

and worksheets are attached in appendices.

Page 72 of 159
Table 4.2 Summarized lesson plan

4. 3 Multivariate analysis of variance

The total number of students sat for both tests is 95 as presented in table 4.3 followed by

descriptive statistics table 4.4 below:

Table 4.3 Sample size

Table 4.4 Mean and standard deviation between treatment groups

Page 73 of 159
Analyzing tests data using SPSS in its function of general linear model, repeated measures,

multivariate analysis of variance between control and experimental groups shows off in

following table 4.5 and figure 4.1

Table 4.5 Analysis of significance difference

It is found that there is no statistically significant difference between control and

experimental groups. Computing on .05 alpha level the p-value is .84 which is greater

than .05 and critical F-value of 3.92 (from 93 degrees of freedom) which is far greater

than .041, therefore, we do not have evidence to reject the Null hypothesis (H0) saying

that the treatment groups have same performance in both tests (pre- and post-tests).

However, a very strong of .000 appears in relation to lesson intervention in both groups.

This means that whatever methods used, either experiment performed or not, students got

knowledge and skills from their basic to lesson content delivered after pretest (see table

4.5). Table 4.4 shows it too as long as figure 4.2 where the mean score was from 16.26 to

36.68 of pretest to posttest respectively in both treatment groups.

Figure 4.1 shows parallelism between these groups as horizontal axis labels pretest (1)

and posttest (2) as well as vertical axis scores along 0 to 50 scores.

Page 74 of 159
Figure 4.2 Treatment groups alongside test score

4. 4 Misconception analysis

After the instruction, post-test was applied to all groups to determine students’

understandings of the concepts and subjects related to the improvised hands-on. Where

we analyzed item questions to see which and what does favor each type of Blooms’ skill.

However, we analyzed misconceptions according to pretest in order to determine their

basic understanding, confusion, and misconception prior to intervention.

In the analysis we present question item number, following misconception and number

of cases including frequency (f) to show how many cases in each grouping of answers as

well as their respective percentages (%). Note that the correct answers and blank answers

where students write nothing are not included in the tables. The letter “n” means

Page 75 of 159
population, in this case, all treatment groups were put together because the objective of

this misconception analysis was not to grasp the difference in control/experiment groups

rather basic misconceptions students have before lesson intervention. Note that

misconception here means student explanations which are scientifically inconsistent with

knowledge.

The first item question was asking to state two laws of electrostatics, the following table

presents findings of misconceptions and confusion students have about these laws.

Question Misconceptions Students

number (n=98)

f %

1A Coulombs’ law (F=KQ1Q2/r2) 6 6.12

North and south poles attract each other, south and 8 8.16
south or north and north poles repel each other
Heat can pass through 3 ways: conduction, convection, 2 2.04
and radiation
Unlike charge gives light, like charge does not give 9 9.18
light
Same charges make attraction and different charges 1 1.02
make repulsion
Table 4.6 Misconceptions on Knowledge item “State two laws of electrostatics”

The next item question was asking the definition of electrostatics, the following table

presents findings of misconceptions and confusion students have about this definition.

Page 76 of 159
 Question number Misconceptions Students (n=98)

f %

1B It is capacity of heat and magnet 5 5.10

Electricity comes from duties 3 3.06

Study of electricity and how current works 50 51.02

Study of charge in motion 19 19.38

Table 4.7 Misconceptions on Knowledge item “What is static electricity?”

The second item question was asking students using drawings to test different charges,

the following table presents findings of misconceptions and confusion students have

about this comprehension related item question.

Question number Misconceptions Students (n=98)

f %

2 7 7.14

42 42.85

Table 4.8 Misconceptions on Comprehension item “How can we test different charges?
Describe using drawings.”
Page 77 of 159
The third item question was about use and application of electrostatics, the following table

presents findings of misconceptions and confusion students have about this application

related item question.

Question Misconceptions Students

number (n=98)
f %

3 Electrostatics is used in the house, Torch, Pulley 69 70.40

…
Table 4.9 Misconceptions on Application item “Where can we use electrostatics? Give
Other examples that apply electrostatics.”

The fourth item question was about the interpretation of different electrostatics graphs,

the following table presents findings of misconceptions and confusion students have

about this analysis related item question.

Question Misconceptions Students

number (n=98)
f %

4 This figure is a discharge then will change gold leaf 17 17.34

to be diverging

This situation is gold leaf electroscope 20 20.40

Table 4.10 Misconceptions on Analysis item “Interpret the situation”

The fifth item question was asking to list all images that are good in terms charge

distribution, the following table presents findings of misconceptions and confusion

students have about this analysis item question.

Page 78 of 159
 Question number Misconceptions Students (n=98)

f %

5 A, B, C, D, E 9 9.18

B and/or C and/or E 8 8.16

E 18 18.36

A or D +B,C or E 8 8.16

Table 4.11 Misconceptions on Analysis item “List all that apply”

4. 5 Mean in test items and analysis of each item question

Since both groups look like similar, the analysis of test items is to be under consideration

to see which questions seem to benefit each group. The statistically significant difference

will be calculated using post-test since this test shows different interventions given to

treatment groups.

Question # Mark score Mean

5items 50marks Control group Experimental group

PRE-TEST POST-TEST PRE-TEST POST-TEST

1A 5 3.02 4.06 2.40 2.91

1B 5 0.78 2.39 0.85 1.45

2 10 1.51 2.86 1.35 3.69

Page 79 of 159
 3 10 0.78 5.42 0.9 4.03

4 10 0.42 1.2 0.45 1.45

5 10 1.82 2.70 2.30 4.04

Table 4.12 Mean of test items

 Analysis of items 1A & B (KNOWLEDGE)

In knowledge item, the difference in mean is significant and the standard deviation is

wide enough as table 4.13 shows. From table 4.14 shows a strong statistical significant

difference of .003 within 95% difference interval in favor of control group taught

theoretically without experimentation.

Table 4.13 Mean and standard deviation of knowledge item

Table 4.14 Significance difference in knowledge item

Page 80 of 159
The following figure shows how to control group performed far well then the

experimental group in knowledge item in posttest from an independent sample test.

Figure 4.3 Test score in knowledge item

 Analysis of item 2 (COMPREHENSION)

Independent sample test shows no statistical significance (.084 is greater than .050, see

table 4.16) in comprehension item, therefore we do not have enough evidence to reject

the null hypothesis (equal mean in treatment groups). However figure 4.4 shows better

performance of the experimental group in this related comprehension item question.

Group Statistics

GROUPS N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

CONTROL GROUP 48 5.73 4.611 .666

POST TEST
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP 48 7.40 4.725 .682
Table 4.15 Mean and standard deviation of comprehension item

Page 81 of 159
Table 4.16 Significance difference in comprehension item

Figure 4.4 Test score in comprehension item

 Analysis of item 3 (APPLICATION)

Another non-significance is realized in application item where .237 instead of .05 as p-

value (see table 4.18). However control group seems to perform well as figure 4.5 displays.

Page 82 of 159
Group Statistics

GROUPS N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

CONTROL GROUP 48 10.83 7.171 1.035

POST TEST
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP 48 9.06 7.413 1.070
Table 4.17 Mean and standard deviation of application item

Table 4.18 Significance difference in application item

Figure 4.5 Test score in application item

Page 83 of 159
  Analysis of items 4 & 5 (ANALYSIS)

The analysis items 4 & 5 are statistically significant (.043) since the difference in

treatment groups is greater than .05 p-value in 95% difference interval (table 4.20). This

difference shows that experimental group performs well than the control group in analysis

items 4 & 5 according to figure 4.6.

Table 4.19 Mean and standard deviation of analysis item

Control group has 7.6 mean alongside its counterpart experimental group having 10.94

means. This shows how these groups are different and the score is scattered shown by the

standard deviation (see table 4.19).

Table 4.20 Significance difference in analysis item

The null hypothesis (H0) saying that groups mean are equal are rejected. Instead, there is

a significant difference in control and experimental groups in favor of experimental group

taught with hands-on improvised materials.

Page 84 of 159
Figure 4.6 Test score in analysis item

Page 85 of 159
Chapter Five
Discussion of Results

5. 1 Workshop

Teachers are motivated to create improvised materials and willing to explain their

working principle

It is easy to create some materials for electroscope, lungs model… but difficult to cup

capacitor, clip motor… it is also difficult to explain the phenomenon of created materials

for some teachers

Quality is particularly threatened where teachers or students produce equipment. Early

reports from Kenya indicated up to 80 percent loss in production of kits due to poor

quality control (Angus & Keith, 1992).

There is plenty of junk in throw-away developed societies but it may be scarcer in

developing countries. Also, as experience in Bangladesh, the Caribbean and India bears

out, the local production or improvisation of equipment from junk materials may create

new demands for such items with a consequent increase in costs (Commonwealth

Secretariat, 1982).

The durability of non-renewable resources also needs to be considered with a constant

search for quality improvement. Indeed, there is a need for a systematic approach to

quality control at all stages of production and assembly. There is a need for the kind of

flexibility and user-friendliness in design that is probably only possible with local

production.

Page 86 of 159
It is indeed important to avoid the kind of gender stereotyping common in many science

curriculum materials (Duncan, 1988). There is evidence from the United Kingdom studies

of low levels of female participation in practical work with boys 'monopolizing'

equipment in group work. In general, care should be taken in the design of illustrated

manuals (Angus & Keith, 1992).

There have been a few surveys on the impact of science kits on teacher attitudes. In Papua

New Guinea, primary teachers are taught to improvise at college but they still expect to

find the 'real thing', i.e. conventional science apparatus, when they get to schools. Two

issues emerge from these considerations. The first concerns the nature of low-cost

materials and the second concerns the training of teachers. The term 'low-cost' is often

associated with 'low value' and 'low prestige'. In the context of science kits, 'low-cost'

means using locally available resources and local technology wherever these are

appropriate. It does not imply low quality. If a science experiment requires high precision

calculation then a low-cost home-made pH meter may not be appropriate.

In many cases, teacher-produced improvised equipment is indeed low quality and

generally breaks down after a short time. It is important that low-cost items are finished

properly and subjected to the same rigorous quality control as other more costly items.

The use of low-cost equipment must not be seen as an attempt to provide a watered-down

science education. But this can only be achieved by convincing teachers and

administrators through the demonstration of low-cost equipment in action. With care and

attention to design, low-cost equipment can be used to enhance understanding of many

scientific principles in everyday contexts. There are many examples of low-cost

equipment in the literature which could easily be produced by commercial companies or

Page 87 of 159
at teacher workshops. Teachers trained to produce their own low-cost apparatus have been

found to develop a sense of ownership and an appreciation that such apparatus can be

more relevant and user-friendly than high-cost imports. There is a need to make teacher

educators more aware of the value of low-cost equipment so that they can impart

confidence in and enthusiasm for such equipment (Angus & Keith, 1992).

5. 2 Problem-solving approach

When taught properly, science more than any other subject can provide real opportunities

for developing problem-solving skills, the ability to reason and follow a logical pattern of

thought, and the capacity together, analyze and interpret information. Most curricula now

emphasize understanding, rather than knowledge; processes, rather than content; and

student-centered approaches, rather than teacher-centered ones. These approaches put

great emphasis on learning through discovery, Provision of science education in

secondary schools experimentation and practical work (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Time constraints may also contribute to a differential impact of hands-on science based

on student ability. Hands-on science requires more time to cover the same material than

other methods thereby reducing the time available to cover other material. Higher ability

students may be ready to cover more material more quickly using other methods besides

hands-on science, especially if they can grasp abstract concepts with a minimum of

concrete examples. If this is true, then when taught using hands-on science they will cover

less material in class and learn less (Ruby, 2001).

If we want our students not only to know “what scientists do?” but “how scientists do?”

and do science for themselves, our students should be able to observe, measure, compare,

classify, describe and evaluate. Everyone is born with the ability to be investigator;
Page 88 of 159
however, we all have to learn how to do it. Hence, if we base our teaching of science with

locally available, it will make learning by doing accessible, even when the conditions for

teaching are not favorable. It is believed that using locally available materials, most

primary school experimental lessons can be performed in a very short time, often with no

or low financial input and without long sessions of preparation (Sileshi, 2012).

The essence of science education is an involvement and understanding of the process of

science. Therefore, the effective use of the laboratory is a prerequisite in science

education, as science is an experimental, observational and laboratory oriented discipline.

The significance of laboratory activities can be understood according to Sileshi (2012) in

light of the following four broad roles: i) gaining basic laboratory skills, ii) developing

observational skills, iii) explaining a particular concept, and iv) having the best experience

of what science is all about.

Advantages and disadvantages

Both economic and educational advantages have been claimed for science kits. In a

similar vein, Warren, reporting from Bangladesh in the 1970s, sees a need for technology

to improve the living conditions of the majority who are poor, and, therefore, a need to

make science education attractive by providing practical experiences using cheap and

familiar materials.

A regional seminar on science equipment in Asia (UNESCO, 1973) reports that the main

consideration in developing a philosophy of school science equipment is the pedagogical

output which needs to go hand in hand with objectives and national goals (Angus & Keith,

1992).

Page 89 of 159
Furthermore, Wellington (1998) states that weakness of practical work in the laboratory

is(1) the noise confuse students, (2) practical work result goes wrong leaving mixed

message on students, (3) some students do not like practical work, (4) less effective group

work and (5) time-consuming. One way to avoid these weaknesses is by creating positive

learning environment (Osman et al., 2011).

5. 3 Teacher discussion

As Schmidt (1986) has observed, inexperienced teachers fear the responsibility for

breakage of expensive-looking apparatus, fear the possibility of management problems

and unsettled classes in practical work and fear to look foolish when the experiment goes

wrong. Many science educators believe that these problems can be overcome by helping

student teachers and teachers develop their own low-cost equipment from simple

materials. Such strategies promote user-friendliness by developing a sense of ownership

and environment-relatedness which is missing from expensive and alien imported

equipment (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Barriers

Besides presenting scientifically information, laboratory applications also help students

improve their skills of scientifically thinking, observation, creative thinking, comment on

situations, data collection & analysis and problem-solving (Ausubel, 1968).

At some schools however, according to Altun, Demirdağ, Feyzioğlu, Ateş, and

Çobanoğlu, (2009), laboratory applications of chemistry courses are missing because of

the following reasons: absence of chemistry labs (for example, 84% of the high schools

have none), sharing laboratory with physics, chemistry and biology courses, insecurity in

Page 90 of 159
labs because of dangerous chemicals (Yılmaz, 2005), crowded classrooms (Johnstone,

1989), lack of time, and materials, cost of equipment (Millar, 2004), and incapableness

of teachers using labs effectively and their negative attitudes towards laboratory

applications (Ekici et al., 2002).

It is widely reported that teachers often fail to collect even the simplest of materials for

science lessons despite the guidance provided in resource books. There seems to be no

incentive for doing so; teachers are in many cases underpaid, irregularly paid and

overworked (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Many inexperienced teachers fear that they or their students might break expensive

apparatus which will be difficult to replace, thus threatening the teacher's prestige in the

hierarchy of the school. In addition, there are fears that groups of students will be difficult

to manage, especially in large classes, causing disruption and a threat to teacher authority.

Teachers often lack the skills required for demonstration experiments and fail to use the

experiment to illustrate important concepts and stimulate questioning. Teachers can,

therefore, become concerned about losing face and looking foolish when the experiment

goes wrong, does not happen at all, or produces the wrong results. As Schmidt (1991) has

noted, there are rational and objectively verifiable reasons for continuing to teach through

lecturing and drilling rather than through experimental practice (Angus & Keith, 1992).

There are several reasons for the ineffectiveness of laboratory activities such as the

shortage of science teachers (Hakielimu, 2010; Ndibalema, 2012; URT, 2009); teachers'

low competence in laboratory experiments since they themselves learnt science through

alternative to practical during their schooling (Mabula, 2012); lack or limited laboratory

Page 91 of 159
equipment (Mkonongwa, 2012) and overcrowded class size (FEMSA, 2010) (Suleiman,

2013) reporting.

Teachers' perceptions influence how teaching and learning take place. In teaching and

learning science, Mansour (2009) and Sadifer and Haines (2009) studies reveal that

teachers have positive perceptions about laboratory activities since they contend that it

leads to students' engagement and active participation in the learning process (Suleiman,

2013).

Laboratory resources have a positive impact on teaching and learning science (Sunal,

Wright, & Sundberg, 2008). This is because it gives an opportunity to both teachers and

students to perform experiments and manipulate materials of science for developing

students' understanding and appreciation of science subjects. However, the laboratory

cannot be meaningful for teaching and learning science subjects if it is poorly facilitated

in terms of equipment (Dahar & Faize, 2011).

The availability of laboratory equipment and chemicals is one among the factors that

facilitates the process of teaching and learning science from both developed as well as

developing countries (Hanuscin, 2007; Hofstein & Lunetta, 2003).

Similarly, a study conducted in Nigeria by Olufunke (2012) indicates that practical work

both in the classroom and outdoors is an absolutely essential component of effective

science teaching. Another finding from a study conducted by Mabula (2012) in Tanzania

indicates that negative attitude of students towards science subjects is mainly caused by

poor methods of teaching employed by the science teachers where they mostly use

teacher-cantered approach (Suleiman, 2013).

Page 92 of 159
Many developing countries face challenges of limited resources for imparting effective

and efficient science education. In addition, the study conducted by Ottevanger, Feiter

and Van (2007) concluded that poorly resourced schools are one of the challenges for the

development of science in the SubSahara African countries.

Due to the shortage of equipment and chemicals, actual classroom practices are largely

dominated by teachers while students silently copy notes from the blackboard although

the curriculum emphasizes learner-centered education (Mabula, 2012). Many studies in

the area of science education support the notion, that hands-on activities and experiment-

based approach to teaching science are the preferred methods (Haury & Rillero, 1994;

Hull, 2000; Singer, Hilton, & Schweingruber, 2005). This helps students to develop the

basic skills necessary to handle the world's future scientific needs (Hofstein & Lunetta,

2003). Though, it may be difficult to obtain these benefits when science is taught with

limited laboratory resources. This is because meaningful learning is possible in the

laboratory if laboratories are well equipped and students could get chances to manipulate

equipment and materials in order to be able to build their knowledge of phenomena

(Shope, 2006) and related scientific concepts (Tobin, Kahle, & Fraser, 1990; Suleiman,

2013).

For instance, a study conducted in four countries; Cameron, Ghana, Tanzania, and

Uganda observed that in some secondary schools, availability of laboratory resources was

limited compared to the number of students per class (FEMSA, 2010). This situation may

limit teachers in the possibilities of organizing hands-on activities but even when they try,

limited resources may also obstruct opportunities for effective classroom interactions.

Additionally, teaching science with inadequate laboratory equipment limit interaction of

Page 93 of 159
students with equipment and amongst students especially when the class sizes are large

(Suleiman, 2013). It has been reported that limited laboratory resourced classrooms make

it difficult for students to concentrate on their activities (Carpenter, 2006).

Teachers view laboratory equipment as ideal tools for teaching science since these enable

teachers to engage students in hands-on activities. In the absence of adequate laboratory

resources, teachers were found to use strategies like group work and demonstration to

teach. However overcrowded classrooms and inadequate laboratory resources hamper

them to teach according to what they believe (Suleiman, 2013).

Improvisation serves to minimize educational costs. Regardless of this, many science

teachers are either unenthusiastic or incapable of improvising teaching materials for lack

of skills (Tsuma, 1998). Nonetheless, this behavior on the part of the teachers is

comprehensible. They need to be compensated for the extra time they would need to

expend in order to motivate them to produce teaching materials (Ndirangu et al., 2003).

However apart from heavy curriculum to complete at the end of academic year, in

developing country classroom is clouded making teachers very busy to take care each and

every student as well as class managing.

Motivation is needed in schools to enable teachers to feel concerned. Teachers who did

not prepare to teach help at all gave such reasons as their schools being too weak

financially to afford even a manila paper. They also indicated that there was no motivation

to produce teacher-made learning materials in their schools (Ndirangu et al., 2003).

Furthermore, the safety measures while conducting laboratory experiments are very

important. A study conducted in Nigeria by Ijaiya (2000) reveals that laboratory activities

with limited resources are a major contributing factor to the safety problems in most
Page 94 of 159
secondary schools in Nigeria. In teaching 16 science with limited laboratory equipment,

the possibility of an accident is very high because it forces many students to be crowded

around a single set of apparatus. Apparently, the teacher might decide that the best safety

measure is not to engage students in laboratory activities during the teaching process

(Suleiman, 2013).

5. 4 Student discussion

Mabula (2012), in an attempt to find out the reasons for the high rate of students' failure

in science, noted that many students claimed that the massive failure in science results

was contributed to by the teaching styles. He further added that nearly all science teachers

used lecture method in teaching and most of the practical aspects of these subjects were

taught theoretically (Suleiman, 2013).

Similar findings were revealed by FEMSA (2010) that the great shortage of science

teachers at the secondary schools level contributes to teachers being shared by a large

number of students which puts a heavy workload on the teachers. Teaching science with

limited laboratory resources teachers might experience difficulties especially when they

want to engage their students in hands-on activities (Suleiman, 2013).

Based on my experience as a physics teacher I have observed that students in the control

group are motivated to learn and ask many questions for their curiosity. This is because

from primary school, teacher-centered is not new and they fit in this methodology no

matter what. Same like control, experimental group were also motivated to learn but most

of the creation of materials and performing the experiment, they were excited and waited

curiously to see the result however they still had difficulty to interpret results and connect

Page 95 of 159
to theory learned. This was because all their minds were concentrated on observing the

experiment, it may take the time to recover and line up what they observed to theoretical

concepts.

5. 5 Principals and DOS discussion

Schmidt (1986) discusses some of the psychological barriers which can prevent teachers

employing the new methodologies and making more use of practical work. In his opinion,

based on extensive experience in workshops on the production of low-cost equipment,

the problem goes deeper than the mere availability of materials, which is often used as an

excuse for ignoring practical work.

NDABAMENYE Innocent, deputy of studies of this Rubengera said that their teachers

not only do science experiment but also conduct improvisation at least once a week and

they are highly motivated. When asked how they motivate their future students who will

go to primary school and count with the problem of lack of laboratory, he said: “they will

try to make their own materials locally”, the curriculum requests teachers to use several

and local made materials, he added.

In order to support science enhancement, (Principal of TTC MUHANGA arguing) we do

not have conferences, workshop, and science clubs, however, we take our students to

neighbor science schools for laboratory activities.

Inexperienced teachers fear the responsibility for breakage of expensive-looking

apparatus, fear the possibility of management problems and unsettled classes in practical

work and fear looking foolish when the experiment goes awry. Reluctance to use

equipment in tertiary institutions has also been noted. For instance, Pulían (1991) reports

Page 96 of 159
on a vast quantity of neglected and rapidly deteriorating physics equipment in a science

teacher training institute in Africa (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Having small moving box containing some too old materials like two small and four large

optical microscopes, wing scales, tubes… from 1998 and no chemicals left (from TTC

Matimba but having science clubs, can motivate students to oversee the natural world.

The teaching of science through the performing arts involves a combination of visual,

auditory and kinaesthetic learning. Of course, science can always be learned through

seeing, hearing and doing but when engaging with science concepts through performing

arts, it can involve both fine and gross motor skills. This is joined with the assimilation

of the concept, subsequent cognitive conflict and possible accommodation of the concept

through interpretation and presentation through the performing arts (Overton &

Chatzichristodoulou, 2010).

There are other constraints on the frequent and efficient use of science equipment in the

classroom. “We have nothing even no empty room” (TTC Matimba DOS claims). Among

these constraints is the requirement for storage space; effective procedures for sharing

equipment among many teachers with each teacher responsible for the care of equipment

and for tidying up after use; there are daunting bureaucratic procedures involved in

procuring imported apparatus and in replenishing existing stock (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Laboratory activities is the basic method of teaching and learning science (Chiappetta,

2006; Mansour, 2009; Woodley, 2009); however in Tanzania, Suleiman (2013), it is

widely acknowledged that, science teachers in most community secondary schools, face

challenges in engaging their students in effective science teaching and learning

(Hakielimu, 2011).

Page 97 of 159
5. 6 Test score and Student misconception

A small-scale study found that 5th grade students using a strongly hands-on curriculum

had a mean score of a hands-on test one-half standard deviation higher than those using a

textbook based curriculum but this result may be confounded since the student with the

hands-on curriculum also scored higher on a cognitive ability test (Baxter, Shavelson,

Goldman and Pine, 1992), as cited by Ruby (2001).

The theoretical rationales given for the impact of hands-on science on student

achievement have not gone unquestioned. Critics argue that hands-on science may reduce

student achievement as well as improve it. Whereas proponents argue that hands-on

science helps students visualize abstract ideas, opponents argue that it has the ability to

confuse as well as clarify (Wellington 1998; Hodson 1996; Atkinson 1990; Resnick and

Klopfer 1989). Hands-on science also offers students additional opportunities not to learn

as they may be busy doing activities but not thinking about the topic (Ruby, 2001).

Additionally, some research has shown that students may not link hands-on activities to

written activities concerning the topic being studied (Wellington 1998; Hodson 1996;

Atkinson 1990; Resnick and Klopfer 1989).

It is advisable however that teachers cannot expect big improvements in experimenting

skills after practicing just a few experiments. Instead, students need multiple chances to

improve these skills in different contexts (Padilla, 1990; Lati, Supasorn, & Promarak,

2012).

Students often have no clear purpose in the laboratory and perceive laboratory sessions

as isolated events (Tasker, 1981). According to White (1988), laboratory work may not

achieve the aims expected from it precisely because the laboratories themselves are
Page 98 of 159
inappropriate. They seem divorced from the materials and experiences that students

encounter in their daily lives. If a substantial proportion of laboratory investigations used

common materials instead of things never encountered elsewhere it might be possible for

them to achieve the various functions expected of them (Angus & Keith, 1992).

A t-test statistical analysis revealed that there is no significant difference in the post-test

performance between classes exposed to improvised science equipment and those with

standard equipment indicating that pupils benefited equally from both types of equipment

with a calculated score of 1.34 below the t-critical 2.92 (Udosen & Ekukinam, 2013).

Aiming at inquiry science activity, the result failed to support the effectiveness of hands-

on science teaching (Shimizu, 2004).

Laboratory experiments helped students to increase their self-confidence (Hofstein &

Lunetta, 1982; Hofstein & Lunetta, 1996). In conclusion, according to the results of the

study, application of laboratory works developed based on constructivism had a great role

in increasing students’ learning achievements and developing students’ positive attitudes

towards chemistry laboratory, in contrast to traditional teacher-centered approach (Tarhan

& Sesen, 2010).

Using classroom observation in data collection (Ruby, 2001), the International

Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) carried out its

Classroom Environmental Study which included an examination in six countries of how

science classroom factors affected achievement scores. No country showed a positive

significant correlation (five countries had non-significant results and one had a negative

significant correlation) between the amount of lab work and gains from a pre-test to a

post-test (Anderson, Ryan and Shapiro 1989).

Page 99 of 159
One reason to identify students’ misconceptions and remedy them is to empower and

increase the meaningful learning and contribute to students’ academic success (Aydin &

Balim, 2009).

Not only the present study but also other studies have been provided some results on

student misconceptions not even only in electrostatics rather in other units. For instance,

Sözen and Bolat (2011) using the data from the analysis of quantitative and qualitative

questions they found that students have misconceptions related to sound transmission.

In the study of (Kartal, Öztürk, & Yalvaç, 2011), 75% of students have chosen incorrect

answers in heat and temperature test because they think that heats of substances become

equal rather than their temperature as a consequence of heat flow.

However, active learning material based on constructivism increased students’ learning

achievements in Acids and Bases lesson prevents students’ misconception in a high

proportion in disparity to traditional teacher-centered approach, and helps to develop

students’ positive attitudes towards the lesson (Sesen & Tarhan, 2010).

In the present study, we analyzed misconceptions according to pretest in order to

determine their basic understanding, confusion, and misconception prior to intervention.

In the first item question aiming to determine misconceptions of students about

electrostatics which is constituted by stating two laws of electrostatics, 6.12% of students

state the Coulombs’ law instead of electrostatics’ law which is “the electrical force

between two charged objects that should be direct proportional to the product of the

quantity of charge on the objects and inverse proportional to the square of the separation

distance between two objects”. 8.16% of students state the magnetism’s law instead of

electrostatics’ law which is stated as north and south poles attract each other, south and
Page 100 of 159
south or north and north poles repel each other. 2.04% and 9.18 of students consider

electrostatics ‘law as ways of heat transmission and light respectively (see table 4.6). And

1.02% provide opposite answer ‘Same charges make attraction and different charges

make repulsion’.

The common misconception to state a law in this item is that; students confuse

electrostatic law with other laws like coulomb’s law and magnetism. This may be caused

by non-mastery of content or they do not know the difference between those laws.

Opposite answer may be caused by mistake or simply that students do not know what is

the meaning is charge directions.

Taking a look at question item 1B presented in table 4.7 about electrostatics definition,

most of the students (59.16%) do not know what is static electricity because they provide

unclear definition like: ‘Study of electricity and how current works’.

Not only describing unclear definition but also Instead of ‘study of electric charges at

rest’, students tend to misunderstand and give opposite definition ‘study of charges in

motion’ (19.38%).

When the misconceptions in table 4.8 are analyzed; it can be seen that 7.14% of the

students got confusion in describing magnetism poles instead of electric charges using

graphs in order to test different charges. This may be caused by non-mastery of content

(correct answer is provided in appendix D). 42.85% of students provide unrelated

information. This is caused by the fact that they use frequent examples in their

environment like cell batteries where they see symbols of positive (+) and negative (–)

charges.

Page 101 of 159

According to Turgut et al (2011), the most of the misconceptions are originated from

students’ experiences of daily life. The commonality of the misconceptions across

different cultures and people suggest that outside effects such as instructional practices,

textbooks and the excessive reliance on daily language are taken as possible sources of

misunderstandings (Harrison, Grayson & Treagust, 1999; Küçük, Çepni & Gökdere,

2005).

As a result, of analysis of drawings and multiple choice questions, not only this study but

also (Sözen & Bolat, 2011) found that students had several misconceptions related to

sound transmission. Students do not notice that sound is heard by reflection and the

particles in the medium transfer energy by vibrating while the sound is being transmitted

they just thought that matter moves in the direction of the sound transmitted (Sözen &

Bolat, 2011).

“Where can we use electrostatics? Give other examples that apply electrostatics.” The

misconceptions related to this item question asking electrostatic applications are

presented in table 4.9 and they are as follow; most of the students (70.40%) write

nonsense answers like ‘electrostatics is used in the house’. This is because the learning

style of tradition method where they are used to learn in, is just only the concepts and no

discussion of the role of what they learn in school and no hands-on activities to see really

how to apply those concepts.

Most of the students (47.95%) leave a blank space (write down “I don’t know” as an

explanation or gave no explanations at all). The most of the answers (37.75%) are

incomplete or not relevant to question respectively such as “The figure is a discharge then

will change gold leaf to be diverging” or “This situation is gold leaf electroscope”. This

Page 102 of 159

may be caused by the difficulty of the item which does not fit their level. Another reason

may be like they are not used to this kind of question such as ‘interpretation’ (see table

4.10).

The last item question asking to list all images that show good charge distribution, the

table 4.11 presents misconceptions and confusion that students have about this analytical

question. Apart from writing nothing, students are misunderstanding charges distribution.

Diagram E shows entire negative distribution and this never happens, 18.36% of students

confuse neutral charges with blank space. 9.18% of students answer all letters as correct;

they do not understand at all while others mix the correct and wrong letters since only A

& D should be selected as right charge distribution after that charged rubber rods are

placed near a neutral conducting sphere.

5. 7 Research limitation

In this study same lesson plan for control & experimental groups has been used. When a

Cronbach’s alpha is calculated based on standardized items, within limited and few item

questions, the test had the low reliability of .40 and does not fill bloom’ s taxonomy, it

lacks synthesis and evaluation as mentioned earlier, and use video watching in control

group raised chance in test performance. Paired-samples t-test results indicate that video-

based experiments have a significant effect on students’ achievement at distance physics

course (Yilmaz & Ince, 2012).

The variable that should be controlled by the comparison of experimental and control

conditions is the time-on-task, which was found to be less for the control condition

because the projection of a video or the demonstration of an experiment from an expert

took less time than an experiment done by the students (Zacharia & Olympiou, 2011).

Page 103 of 159

Chapter Six
Conclusion & Recommendation

There are only five out of 13TTCs having science laboratories in Rwanda, therefore, an

alternative way of managing this scarcity in science learning is improvisation, however,

teachers encounter many problems including time limitation, scarcity of some materials

and lack of skills.

There is the strong significant difference in pretest and posttest when both control and

experimental group are taught a new content. However, there is no significant difference

between these groups in both tests when the experimental group gets intervention of

improvised experiment.

Does it show ‘improvised hands on’ are weak?

No! It depends on skills to develop. Using Bloom’s taxonomy, the knowledge item

questions seem to be well performed by control group taught using blackboard-chalk

whereas experimental group shows a better performance in analytical item questions and

it was observed that they are motivated in creativity and use of improvised materials.

Studying in schools having laboratory or no, does not make a significant difference

between students’ perception of the importance of science experiment and improvisation,

however, it does exist among teachers.

As long as learners get active when creating and using improvised materials, as long as

teachers are aware of the importance of using locally available materials like hands-on

materials, improvisation will solve the problem of rote-learning. The curriculum

Page 104 of 159

designers, policy makers as well as those involve in teaching personnel should motivate

and train teachers to improvise through workshops.

Society has a great need not only for a few technically trained people but for a large group

of individuals who understand science (Daniela et al., 2015).

Efforts should be made to encourage local production in cases where the number of

schools and the demand for equipment merits this (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Proposals for the local production of equipment can be very appealing when there is some

assurance that the locally-made product will be less costly than the imported commodity.

For instance, the Science Equipment Production Unit in Kenya estimated an 80 percent

saving on the local production of a 3-d kinetics kit. The local production certainly has

political appeal in that it can encourage self-reliance, independence and promotes local

industry (Angus & Keith, 1992).

While student science kits could be locally produced to illustrate hand experiments,

teachers could be trained in improvisation skills and provided with tools and materials to

construct their own demonstration kits from prototype designs (Angus & Keith, 1992).

There is a role for technical colleges and vocational institutions in the production and

assembly of components but there needs to be a clear definition of roles and

responsibilities so that the priority training needs of these institutions can be met (Angus

& Keith, 1992).

Storage in schools

There have been reports of theft and misuse of apparatus both by teachers and students.

For instance, in Zimbabwe, there were reports of misuse by school staff, with clocks, 60

Page 105 of 159

Distribution, replenishment, storage and repair cassette players and batteries regularly

disappearing. There are reports of donor-supplied mahogany containers being used to

store kits in Tanzania which ended up in the hands of local artisan carvers. It is sometimes

not possible to store kits in the classroom and so they are stored in the Headmaster's office.

All of this implies a need for regular contact between schools, equipment production

centers and in-service training personnel (Angus & Keith, 1992).

Training provision

There is wide variation in the pattern of provision. Workshops and seminars have been

conducted for student-teachers, teachers, teacher 76 Teacher training educators,

inspectors, technicians, local administrators and equipment development staff.

Workshops have varied in length from 1 day to about 3 weeks, with most being short 3-

5 day duration. Training is provided by a variety of personnel such as equipment

production unit staff, teachers' college lecturers, curriculum developers, international

experts in low-cost and improvised equipment, science resource center tutors (Angus &

Keith, 1992).

I recommend teachers in TTC as well as lecturers in universities, colleges of education

to make students used to create materials.

Rubengera laboratories are not used fully, a lot of dust on materials and even students are

not different in terms of experiment perception.

The importance of teacher training in the use of science equipment has been stressed in

many seminars and workshops on local production.

“Clearly, local production of science equipment should be much more concerned with the

issue of teacher development than with the idea of saving money and foreign currency,
Page 106 of 159
even if one adopts the priorities of the financiers rather than those of educators.”

(Commonwealth secretariat, 82:18).

In some cases, there have been attempts to provide in-service by means of radio, television

and video. There are possibilities for cost-reduction through sharing of expensive

equipment or by using video recordings of expensive equipment in action and by

considering alternatives to practical work. Teacher educators should be involved in

science kit development projects from the beginning. Teachers need to be psychologically

prepared to improvise as well as to have the necessary practical skills to do so. It is

important not to attempt to develop improvisation skills in a vacuum: skills must be

related to developing particular concepts in science with the resources normally available

in a minimally-equipped school. Student-teachers can be trained to develop their own kits

but may need to supplement these with more traditional science apparatus and local

materials (Angus & Keith, 1992).

The National Curriculum Development Centre (NCDC ) in Uganda is responsible for the

development of low-cost teaching aids and the training of teachers in their production

(Angus & Keith, 1992) so in Rwanda too, NCDC or WDA can take this task.

From above experience around the world mostly in developing countries, I finally highly

recommend teaching personnel and education organizations as well to give duty of one

institution to be in charge of science improvised experiment materials development and

production in this procedure:

First of all Ministry of education ahead assigns the science and technology department in

this ministry, IRST, university of Rwanda, or college of technology and college of

education for research and development (R&D) in order to study affordability, possibility,

Page 107 of 159

and reliability of improvisation productivity. After viewing these researchers and seeing

the directions, the same ministry will assign private designers and artists who will work

hand in hand with the university of Rwanda-college of education, teacher development

management and national curriculum development center among departments in Rwanda

education board in order to observe, draw, design as well as making manuals together.

Finally, after getting these designs and working manuals, the ministry will assign one

among potential institution for development and creation of these materials starting with

prototype production in order to test improvised with the conventional material in terms

of security, budget, and usefulness. These institutions are as follow:

a) Workforce development force; since this institution is in charge of vocational

training, it is easy to take action for improvised experiment materials since their

daily work deals with wood, metal, electric as well as electronic materials.

b) Integrated polytechnic regional center (IPRC); since they are distributed in the

whole country, plus they study technical courses, they can do this duty locally to

help nearby primary and secondary school.

c) University of Rwanda-college of education; since this college is in charge of

developing teachers it can also hold this duty using student, teachers and hiring

carpenters and others technicians to work together for the production of these

materials.

d) New institution; here ministry can come up a new institution only for research and

development, manufacturing and production as well as the distribution of locally

improvised science experiment material with providing them subsidies. Indirectly

this institution will work with science clubs and resources centers in schools for

training and workshop in the creation and or use of these materials.

Page 108 of 159
After some time, looking the vision, the private sector will take this duty. However, the

ministry should have a committee of experts and science teachers for periodical

evaluation working hand in hand with Rwanda standards board.

Page 109 of 159

Bibliography

Adeniran, M.A. (2006). Strategies and utilization of improvised Biology Instructional

materials and students’ achievement and attitude in Ekiti secondary school, Nigeria.
International Journal of Research in Education. 3(2), 91-96

Adeyemo, S.A. (2010). Teaching/ learning physics in Nigerian secondary school: The
curriculum transformation, issues, problems, and prospects. International Journal of Educational
Research and Technology, 1(1),99-111

Aigbomian, D.O. (1994). Student’s perception of technical words in the learning of physics.
Studies in Education 2 (1): 86-92

Aina, J.K. & Akintunde, Z.T. (2013). Analysis of gender performance in physics colleges of
education, Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(6). ISSN 2222-288X.

Aina, Kola Jacob. (2013). Instructional Materials and Improvisation in Physics Class:
Implications for Teaching and Learning. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in
Education (IOSR-JRME), 2(5), PP 38-42.

Aiyelabegan, T, A (2003). Effect of physics practical on students' academic performance in senior

school certificate examination in Kwara state. Lafiagi Journal of Science Education. 1&2, 34

Akanbi, A.O. (2003). An investigation into students’ performance in senior secondary school
physics. Journal of Teacher education trends 1(1), 58-64

Akdeniz, A. R., Bektaú, U., & Yi÷it, N. (2000). The 8th-grade students’ levels of understanding
of the introductory physics concepts. Hacettepe Üniversitesi E÷itim Fakültesi Dergisi. No. 19, Sf.
5-14

Allsop, T. (1991). Practical science in low-income countries. In B.E. Woolnough (Ed.), Practical
science: The role and reality of practical work in school science. (pp. 31-40). The UK, Milton
Keynes: Open University Press.

Altun, Eralp, Demirdağ, Barış, Feyzioğlu, Burak, Ateş, Alev, & Çobanoğlu, İlker. (2009).
Developing an interactive virtual chemistry laboratory enriched with constructivist
learning activities for secondary schools. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1),
1895-1898. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.333

Page 110 of 159

Anderson, L.W., and Krathwohl, D.R., 2001, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and
Assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

Anderson, L.W., and Sosniak, L.A., 1994, Bloom’s Taxonomy: A forty-year retrospective.
National Society for the Study of Education.

Angus, R. Ross, & Keith, M. Lewin. (1992). Science kits in developing countries: an appraisal of
potential. International Journal of Educational Development.

Arzi, H. (2003). Enhancing science education laboratory environment: More than the wall,
benches, and widgets. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International Handbook of Science
Education (pp 595-608). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers

Ausubel, D.(1968). Educational Psychology. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York.

Aydin, Güliz, & Balim, Ali Günay. (2009). Students’ Misconceptions About The Unit “The
Systems in Our Body”. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 2258-2263. doi:

10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.397

Aydoğdu, Bülent, Buldur, Serkan, & Kartal, Sebahattin. (2013). The Effect of Open-ended
Science Experiments based on Scenarios on the Science Process Skills of the Pre-Service
Teachers. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1162-1168. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.008

Baeten, Marlies, Struyven, Katrien, & Dochy, Filip. (2013). Student-centred teaching methods:
Can they optimize students’ approaches to learning in professional higher education?
Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39(1), 14-22. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2012.11.001

Bajah, S.T. (1975). Teaching science with limited resources. Science education at the crossroads
in Nigeria. Address presented at the 25th Annual Conference of Science and Technology
Association of Nigeria (STAN), Calabar, Nigeria.

Balogun TA (1982) Improvisation of Science Teaching Equipment. J. Sci. Teach. Assoc. of

Niger. 20 (2):130-137

Banjo, M.O. (1984). The use of locally available materials for chemistry teaching in Nigerian
second - primary schools. Unpublished manuscript.

Basic education sector analysis report (2012). Rwanda - japan international cooperation
agency (JICA) international development center of japan inc. (IDCJ) august 2012

Page 111 of 159

Bell, P. (2005). The school science laboratory: Considerations of learning, technology, and
scientific practice. National Academies Board on Science Education, High School Labs Study
Committee. Retrieved from http://www7.nationalacademies.org/

Bhukuvhani, C., Kusure, L., Munodawafa, V., & Sana, A. (2010). Pre-service Teachers' use of
improvised and virtual laboratory experimentation in Science teaching. International Journal of
Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT), 6(4),
2738.

Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The revised two-factor study process
questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 133–149.

Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., and Krathwohl, D.R., 1956,
Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. David McKay.

Bodner, G. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. Journal of Chemical

Education, 76, 124-128.

Bransford, J., Cocking, R. R., & Brown, A. L. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience,
and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Bredderman, T. 1983. "Effects of activity-based elementary science on student outcomes: a

quantitative synthesis". In Review of educational research, 53, pp.499-51

Camuendo, A.P.L.A. (2006). Impacto das experiencias laboratoriais na aprendizagem dos alunos
no ensino de quimica. http://www.sapientia.pucsp.br/tde_busca/arquivo.php?codArquivo=3562.

Carin, A. A., & Sund, R. B. (1989). Teaching science through discover' (6th ed.). Columbus, OH:
Merrill Publishing Co.

Carpenter, J. M. (2006). Effective teaching methods for large classes. Journal of Family &
Consumer Sciences Education, 24(2), 1323.

Celik, Pinar, Onder, Fatih, & Silay, Ilhan. (2011). The effects of problem-based learning on the
students’ success in physics course. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28, 656-
660. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.124

Çepni, S. & Ayvacı, H.Ş. (2006). Laboratuvar destekli fen ve teknoloji öğretimi. S. Çepni (Ed.).
Kuramdan uygulamaya fen ve teknoloji öğretimi içinde (pp:158-188). Ankara: Pegema yayıncılık,
5. Baskı.

Page 112 of 159

Çığrık, Ersen, & Ergül, Remziye. (2009). The investigation of the effect of simulation-based
teaching on the student achievement and attitude in electrostatic induction. Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 2470-2474. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.434

Cossa, Eugénia Flora Rosa, & Uamusse, Amália Alexandre. (2015). Effects of an In-service
Program in Biology and Chemistry Teachers’ Perception of the Role of Laboratory Work.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 167, 152-160. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.656

Cuevas, P., Lee, O., Hart, J., & Deaktor, R. (2005). Improving science inquiry with elementary
students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(3), 337–357.

Dahar, M. A., & Faize, F. A. (2011). Effect of the availability and the use of science laboratories
on the academic achievement of students in Punjab (Pakistan). European Journal of Scientific
Research, 51(2), 193202.

Daniel, I.Y (2001, September). Improvisation and use of instructional materials in science
teaching, A paper presented at NCCE/UNESCO Workshop For train the trainers'
workshop.

Daniela, Cziprok Claudia, Popescu, F. F., Ioan, Pop Alexandru, & Andrei, Variu. (2015).
Conceptual Maps and Integrated Experiments for Teaching/Learning Physics of Photonic
Devices. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 512-518. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.284

Dillon, J. (2008). A Review of the research on practical work in school science. King's
College, London, 19.

Duckworth, E., Easley, J., Hawkins, D., & Henriques, A. (1990). Science education: A minds-on
approach for the elementary years. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Ekici, F. M., Ekici, E. and Taúkın, S. (2002). Fen Laboratuarlarının øçinde Bulundu÷u Durum.
V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik E÷itimi Kongresi, September 16-18, 2002.

Eniajeyu, A. (1 983). Improvisation in integrated science: A practical demonstration. Annual

conference proceeding of the 24th Science and Technology Association of Nigeria. Calabar, Cross
River State Nigeria.

Entwistle, N., & McCune, V. (2004). The conceptual basis of study strategy inventories.
Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 315–345.

Page 113 of 159

Ergin, Ö., Şahin-Pekmez, E., & Öngel-Erdal, S. (2005). Kuramdan uygulamaya deney yoluyla
fen öğretimi. İzmir: Dinazor Kitapevi

Eshiet, I. T. (1996). Improvisation in science teaching. Abak: Belpot (Nig) Co., pg. 15-
52.

Eylon, S. B., & Ganiel, U. (1990). Macro-micro relationships: the missing link between
electrostatics and electrodynamics in students' reasoning. International Journal of Science
Education, Vol. 12, No. 1

Farr Darling, Linda, Erickson, Gaalen, Clarke, Anthony (Eds.) Collective Improvisation
in a Teacher Education Community 2007, XVII, 253 p.
Fatubarin, A (2001). The challenge of improvisation in science teaching in the present
day Nigeria. Journal of committee of Provosts of colleges of Education, Nigeria. 1 (1),92.

Feinstein, N. (2011). Salvaging science literacy. Science Education, 95: 57-74.

FEMSA, (2010). Resources and facilities for teaching and learning mathematics and science in
schools. Nairobi. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/

Flick, Lawrence B. (1993). The Meanings of Hands-On Science. Journal of science teacher
education, 4(1), 1-8.

Haielimu. (2010). Hakielimu annual report. Hakielimu Tanzania. Retrieved from

http://www.hakielimu.org/ Hakielimu. (2010). How can community make education better for
their children?: A research reports on the role of community in improving education.

Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). The use of specialized laboratory facilities for science in elementary
schools: A call for research - Springer. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 19(2), 59 64.

Harrison, A. G., Grayson, D. J. & Treagust, D. F. (1999). Investigating a grade 11 student’s

evolving conceptions of heat and temperature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1),
55-87.

Haury, D. L., & Rillero, P. (1994). Perspectives of hands-on science teaching. USA: ERIC
Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.

Hofstein, A. & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2007). The laboratory in science education: the state of the
art. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8 (2), 105-107.

Page 114 of 159

Hofstein, A. (2004). The laboratory in chemistry education: Thirty years experience with
developments, implementation and research. Educational research to the practice of chemistry
education, 5(3), 247264.

Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2003). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the
Twenty-First Century. Wiley Periodicals, Inc, 52(2), 2854. doi:10.1002/sce.10106

Hogan, P. I. ( 2008). Identificação dos problems das aulas práticas laboratories no Ensino
Secundário Geral da zona Sul de Moçambique.

http://thesecondprinciple.com/instructional-design/types-of-curriculum/
http://wiki.scienceamusante.net/images/d/d2/Electroscope-charge.gif
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/estatics/Lesson-1/Polarization
http://www.slideshare.net/bushc/electrostatics-2404018?qid=ca539ab0-2a2b-467f-92fa-
a68ecd776015&v=qf1&b=&from_search=7

http://www.videojug.com/film/how-to-make-an-ocean-in-a-bottle?channel=two-point-
four&sourcelink=autoforward&playlist-urlname=how-to-make-plasticine-2

Hull, D. (2000). Teaching science contextually: The cornerstone of tech prep. Center for
occupational research and development, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.cord.org/

Ibe-Bassey, G. S. (2012). Educational technology: The teaching-learning process and the falling
standard of education in Nigeria. 35th Inaugural lecture series of the University of Uyo.

Ibrahim, Nor Hasniza, Surif, Johari, Hui, Khew Pei, & Yaakub, Safiah. (2014). “Typical”
Teaching Method Applied in Chemistry Experiment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 116, 4946-4954. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1054

Ijaiya, Y. (2000). Effects of overcrowded classrooms on teacher-students interactions. Ilorin

Journal of Education, 19, 111.

Iwuozor C (2000) Enriching Science Education through Improvisation. Science Teachers

Association of Nigeria 41st Annual Conference Proceedings. Pp. 45-48.

James Cybulski, James Clements and Manu Prakash. (2014). Foldscope: origami –based
paper microscope. 318 campus drive, Stanford, CA 94305

Page 115 of 159

Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1974). “Instructional good structure, cooperatives, comparative
or individualistic. Review of Educational Research, 44(2), 213-240.

Johnstone, J.M. (1989). Teacher Perceptions of Changes in Teaching When They Have a Small
Class or an Aide, Peabody Journal of Education, 67 (1), 106-122.

Jurow, A. Susan, & Creighton, Laura. (2005). Improvisational science discourse: Teaching
science in two K-1 classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 16(3), 275-297. doi:
10.1016/j.linged.2006.02.002

Kamariah, H.; Rubbia, A.; Torner, A.; Zurub, A . 1988. "Jordanian and Malaysian science
teacher's prominent perceived professional needs: a comparison". In Journal of Research in
Science Teaching 25(7), pp.573-58

Kaptan, F. (1999). Fen Tbilisi öğretimi. Milli Eğitim Basımevi: Ankara.

Kapur, Manu. (2015). The preparatory effects of problem-solving versus problem-posing on

learning from instruction. Learning and Instruction, 39, 23-31. doi:
10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.05.004

Kartal, Tezcan, Öztürk, Nurhan, & Yalvaç, H. Gamze. (2011). Misconceptions of science teacher
candidates about heat and temperature. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15,
2758-2763. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.184

Kigali Institute of Education Teacher (2011). Integrated Science Curriculum Of Teacher Training
Colleges, Option: Science And Mathematics. KIE, November 2011.

Kigali Institute of Education Teacher (KIE, November 2011). Teacher Training Colleges,
Appendices for Science Teaching Methodology Curriculum, Option: Science and Mathematics.
Kigali Rwanda.

Küçük, M., Çepni, S. & Gökdere, M. (2005). Turkish primary school students’ alternative
conceptions about work, power, and energy. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 3(2),
22-29.

Lati, Wichai, Supasorn, Saksri, & Promarak, Vinich. (2012). Enhancement of Learning
Achievement and Integrated Science Process Skills Using Science Inquiry Learning
Activities of Chemical Reaction Rates. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46,
4471-4475. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.279

Page 116 of 159

Limjuco, R. P., Glover, F. G., & Mendez, I. M. (2011). Low-cost venturi meter: Understanding
Bernoulli's equation through a demonstration. University of the Immaculate Conception Journal,
17(2), 8594.

Lockheed, M.E., Verspoor, A.M., 1994. Improving Primary Education in Developing Countries.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Mabula, N. (2012). Promoting science subject choice for secondary school students in Tanzania:
Challenges and opportunities. Academic Research International, 3(3), 234245.

Mansour, N. (2009). Science teachers' beliefs and practices: Issues, implications, and research
agenda. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(1), 2548.

Massango, Herieta. (2015). An Analysis of Mozambican High School Physics Textbooks and
Development of Teaching Materials on Electrical Oscillations for Promoting Scientific
Literacy. Master's Thesis. Faculty of Education. Hiroshima University. Hiroshima, Japan.

Mboto, F. A., & Udo, N. N. (2011). Effects of improvised materials on students' achievement and
retention of the concept of radioactivity. An International Multi-Disciplinary Journal, Ethiopia,
5(1), 342353.

McKee, E., Williamson, V. M., & Ruebush, L. E. (2007). Effects of a demonstration laboratory
on student learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(5), 395400.
doi:10.1007/s10956-007-9064-4

Melton, R.H. 1972. Elementary economic experiments in physics. Vol. 1-4. CEDO, British
Council.

Millar, R. (2004).The role of practical work in the teaching and learning of science. High School
Science Laboratories: Role and Vision, National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC, June 3-
4, 2004.

MINEDUC, (2012). Education Statistics.

(http://www.mineduc.gov.rw/IMG/pdf/2011_Jan_2012.pdf )
MINEDUC, (September 2014). 2013 Education Statistical Yearbook. The government of Rwanda.

Ministry of Education (MINEDUC) (2010b) Education Sector Strategic Plan (ESSP)

2010 – 2015.

Page 117 of 159

Mkonongwa, P. (2012). Quality education in Tanzanian context a paper presented to the African
federation of the head of schools' conference Mlimani City. Ministry of Education and Vocational
Training, Tanzanian. Retrieved from http://www.acp2012.or.tz

Nakhleh, M. B. & Krajcik, J. S. (1994). Influence on levels of information as presented

by different technologies on students' understanding of acid, base, and pH concepts.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching,31, 1077-1096

Ndibalema, P. (2012). Expansion of secondary education in Tanzania: Policy, practices, trends

and implications of quality education. Munich, GRIN Publishing GmbH, 19(8), 28.
doi:10.3239/9783656179078

Ndirangu, M., Kathuri, N. J., & Mungai, C. (2003). Improvisation as a strategy for providing
science teaching resources: an experience from Kenya. International Journal of
Educational Development, 23(1), 75-84. doi: 10.1016/s0738-0593(01)00054-2

Nkechi S., DomNwachukwu, & DomNwachukwu, Chinaka S. (2006). The Effectiveness of

Substituting Locally Available Materials in Teaching Chemistry in Nigeria: A Case for
Science Education in Developing Countries School Science and Mathematics 106(7),
296-305.

Nwike, M. C. & Chukwudum, E. O. (2011). Effect of computer-assisted instruction (CAI)

on students’ achievement in secondary school agricultural science. Journal of Education
Media & Technology (JEMT) Nigeria, 15(2), 13b.

Nzeyimana, J.C. (2014). Analysis of teaching approaches used in teaching ‘science and
elementary technology’ in Rwanda: the case of Kayonza district. Hiroshima University,
Japan

Ogunniyi, M.B. (1977). Status of practical work in ten selected secondary school of
Kwara State. Journal of STAN 16 (1) 36-41.
Ojo, Z.O. (1981).Status of Physics Practical works in Kwara, Oyo and the Ogun States of
Nigeria. Unpublished Bachelor’s research project, Department of CSET, University of
Ilorin, Ilorin
Okebukola P (1998) Trends in Tertiary Education in Nigeria. The State of Education in Nigeria
(UNESCO) Lagos Office Nigeria(84-102)

Page 118 of 159

Oladejo, M.A, Olosunde,G.R, Ojebisi,A.O & Isola,O.M. (2011). Instructional materials and
students’ academic achievement in physics: some policy implications. European Journal of
Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(1), ISSN 2220-9425

Olufunke, B. T. (2012). Effect of availability and utilization of physics laboratory equipment on

students' academic achievement in senior secondary school physics. World Journal of Education,
2(5). doi:10.5430/wje.v2n5p1

Orwa, W.O., Underwood, M., 1986. Science Education. Kenyatta University, Nairobi.

Osman, Kamisah, Ahmad, Che Nidzam Che, & Halim, Lilia. (2011). Students’ Perception of the
Physical and Psychosocial Science Laboratory Environment in Malaysia: Comparison
across Subject and School Location. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15,
1650-1655. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.347

Ottevanger, W., Feiter, L., & Van, J. (2007). The TEAMS project in Tanzania: From intervention
to capacity building. CICE Hiroshima University, Journal of international cooperation in
Education, 8(1), 111123.

Overton, David T., & Chatzichristodoulou, Maria. (2010). The teaching of science through the
performing arts. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3871-3875. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.607

Owolabi O.T (2003) Design and Validation of Error Correcting Instructional Package (ECIP) for
Secondary School Practical, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria

Owolabi OT (1999) Prevalent of errors in Physics Practical among Prescience Students of College
of Education in Nigeria. Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation 3 (2):9-15

Owolabi, Olabode Thomas, & Oginni, Omoniyi Israel. (2012). Improvisation of science
equipment in Nigerian schools. Universal Journal of Education and General Studies 1(3),
pp. 044-048.

Pullan, M. 1991. Report to higher education group re - visit UDSM. Tanzania

Redish, E.F. (1994). The Implications of Cognitive Studies for Teaching Physics, American
Journal of Physics, 62(6), 796-803.

Report of a Commonwealth Regional Seminal/Workshop, low-cost science equipment,

Nassau, Bahamas, 16-26 November 1976

Page 119 of 159

Rossi, P. H., J. D. Wright, & A.B. Anderson (eds.), Handbook of Survey Research, New
York: Academic Press, 1983.

Ruby, Allen. (2001). Hands-on Science and Student Achievement. RAND Corporation.

Rwanda, ministry of education, science, technology and scientific research (MINEDUC)

primary and secondary school curriculum development policy Draft: April 2003
Sandifer, C., & Haines, S. (2009). Elementary teacher perceptions of hands-on science teaching
in an urban school system: The greater educational context and associated outcomes. Research in
higher education Journal, 2(3), 117.

Schmidt, H. J. (1991). A label as a hidden persuader: chemists' neutralization concept.

International Journal of Science Education, 13, 459- 472. School science. The National
Academies Press; Washington, D.C. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/

Seçken, Nilgün. (2010). Identifying Student's Misconceptions about SALT. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 234-245. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.004

Sesen, Burcin Acar, & Tarhan, Leman. (2010). Promoting active learning in high school
chemistry: learning achievement and attitude. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,
2(2), 2625-2630. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.384

Sharif ah, Maimunoh. 1991. Science education provision, in general, secondary schools in
Malaysia. A preliminary report on an on-going research. Mimeo . IIEP

Shimizu, K., (2004). The effect of inquiry science activity in educational productivity.
International journal of curriculum development and practice. 6(1) 33-46.

Shope, R. E. (2006). Teaching science for conceptual change: Toward a proposed taxonomy.
California, USA: ProQuest. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.tz/

Sileshi, Yitbarek. (2012). Low-Cost Apparatus from Locally Available Materials for Teaching-
Learning Science. African Journal of Chemical Education, 2(1, Special Issue ).

Singer, S., Hilton, M., & Schweingruber, H. (2005). American's lab report: Investigation in high

Skamp, K. (2011). Teaching primary science constructively. South Melbourne, Vic.: Cengage
Learning.

Page 120 of 159

Sözen, Merve, & Bolat, Mualla. (2011). Determining the misconceptions of primary school
students related to sound transmission through drawing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 15, 1060-1066. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.239

Suleiman, M.M. (2013). Exploring Science Teachers' Experiences Of Teaching Science

With Limited Laboratory Resources: A Case Study Of Community Secondary
School In Lindi, Tanzania. (Master's Dissertation), AGA KHAN UNIVERSITY
Tanzania Institute for Higher Education Institute for Educational Development, Eastern
Africa, Tanzania. Retrieved from http://www.grin.com/en/e-book/282010/teachers-
experiences-of-teaching-science-with-limited-laboratory-resources

Sunal, D. W., Wright, E., & Sundberg, C. (2008). The impact of the laboratory and technology
on learning and teaching science K-16. Charlotte, N.C: IAP/Information Age Pub.

Tarhan, Leman, & Sesen, Burcin Acar. (2010). Investigation the effectiveness of laboratory works
related to “acids and bases” on learning achievements and attitudes toward laboratory.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2631-2636. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.385

Tasker, R. 1981. "Children's views and classroom experiences". In Australian Science Teachers
Journal, 27(3), pp.33-37

Taşoğlu, Aslıhan Kartal, & Bakaç, Mustafa. (2010). The effects of problem-based learning and
traditional teaching methods on students’ academic achievements, conceptual
developments, and scientific process skills according to their graduated high school types.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2409-2413. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.346

Thomas, O., & Israel, O. (2012). Improvisation of science equipment in Nigerian schools.
Universal Journal of Education and General Studies, 1(3), 4448.

Tobin, K. G., Kahle, J. B., & Fraser, B. J. (1990). Windows into science classrooms: Problems
associated with higher-level cognitive learning. London; New York: Falmer Press.

Tsuma, O.G.K., 1998. Science Education in African Context. Jomo Kenyatta Foundation, Nairobi.

Udosen, I. N. (2011). Instructional media: An assessment of the availability and frequency

of use by social studies teachers in Akwa Ibom State. Journal of Educational Media &
Technology (JEMT) Nigeria, 15(2), 141.

Page 121 of 159

Udosen, Idongesit N., & Ekukinam, Thelma U. (2013). Improvisation of Technological
Instructional Media and Students’ Performance in Primary Science in Nigerian Schools.
World Conference on Science and Technology Education

Uguanyi, J.U., (1994). Aids: A threat to African survival. Discovering and Innovation 8(1): 30-
34
UNESCO (1978). A practical guide to international and vocational education. Paris
Von Glasersfeld, E. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In P. Watzlawick
(Ed). The Invented Reality. New York: Norton.

Webster Dictionary (2004). The New Webster Dictionary of English Language (International
Edition)

Welzel, M. (1998). The emergence of complex cognition during a unit on static electricity.
International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 20, No. 9, Sf. 1107-1118

White, R.T. 1988. Learning science, Basil Blackwell Ltd. Oxford

Woodley, E. (2009). Practical work in school science why is it important? School Science Review,
91(335), 4951.

Woolnough, B.E. (1991). Practical science as a holistic activity. In B.E. Woolnough (Ed.),
Practical science: The role and reality of practical work in school science. (pp. 181-195). The UK,
Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Yenice, N. & Aktamış, H. (2004). Eğitim fakülteleri ve sınıf öğretmenleri için fen bilgisi
laboratuvar deneyleri. Anı Yayıncılık: Ankara.

Yılmaz, A. (2005). Lise 1 Kimya Ders Kitabındaki Bazı Deneylerde Kullanılan Kimyasalların
Tehlikeli Özelliklerine Yönelik Ö÷rencilerin Bilgi Düzeyleri ve Öneriler, Journal of Hacettepe
University Faculty of Education, 28, 226-235.

Yilmaz, Ozgur, & Ince, Elif. (2012). The Usage of Alternative Assessment Techniques in
Determination of Misconceptions about Electromagnetic Field-Magnetism Contents and
Effects of Video-Based Experiments on Students’ Achievement at Distance Learning
Course. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 55, 155-160. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.489

Yoloye, E.A. 1986. The relevance of educational content to national needs in Africa. In
International Review of Education. 32(2), pp. 149-172.

Page 122 of 159

Zacharia, Zacharias C., & Olympiou, Georgios. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative
experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 317-331. doi:
10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.03.001

Zymelman, M. 1990. Science education and development in Sub-Saharan Africa. Technical paper
No. 124. Washington: World Bank.

Page 123 of 159

Appendices
Appendix A

TTC INTEGRATED SCIENCE CURRICULUM versus IMPROVISED MATERIALS

CONTENT IMPROVISED MATERIAL SOURCE

2.6. Anatomy of human systems -700 science experiments for
2.6.1 digestive system everyone by UNESCO
2.6.2 respiratory system -Lungs model
2.6.3 circulatory system -Low-cost equipment for
2.6.4 nervous system science and technology
2.6.5 endocrine system education, UNESCO
2.6.6 excretory system
2.6.7 skeletal system -Amazing science tricks for
2.6.8 muscular system kids and parents by Michio
Goto
3.5 Kinetic theory of matter
3.5.1 Basic assumptions of Kinetic theory -New UNESCO source book
3.5.2 Forces acting between molecules for science teaching, 1973
3.5.3 Solids
- The nature of solids -Upper primary science
- Cohesion and adhesion materials in my environment by
- Ductility and malleability - Elasticity Commonwealth of learning,
- Hooke’s Law and elastic modulus 2001

3.5.4 Liquids -Practice of science education

- The nature of liquids -A plastic-bag porcupine by JICA & Hiroshima
- Cohesion and adhesion in liquids - Surface tension -A cup that empties University 1994

Page 1 of 159
 - The shape of liquid surfaces -A skewered balloon
- Capillarity -Paper cup that will not burn -WWW.youtube.com
3.5.5 Gases -WWW.google.com
- The nature of gases
- Kinetic theory of gases
- Kinetic and molecular interpretation of the pressure
of an ideal gas

4. FORCES AND MOTIONS

4.1 Statics
6.1.1 Equilibrium of solids
- Conditions of equilibrium of a body
- A body in equilibrium under two or more parallel
forces
- A body in equilibrium under two or more non-
parallel forces

4.1.2 Examples
- Equilibrium of a body on a horizontal plane
- Equilibrium of a body on an inclined plane
- Equilibrium of a suspended object

4.1.3 Application: -Suspending a kettle in the air

- The beam balance -Balancing forks

4.3 Dynamics
4.3.1 Newton’s Laws of motion
- Introduction: mass and inertia
- Newton’ s first law of motion: the principle of inertia
Page 2 of 159
 - Newton’s second law of motion i) Resultant of
internal forces
ii) Resultant of external forces iii) Relationship
between the resultant external force and acceleration
iv) Formula: Force = mass x acceleration
- Newton’s third law of motion: the principle of action
and reaction Examples of application of Newton’s laws
of motion
(1) Movement on an inclined plane with or -Gripping grains of rice
without friction
(ii) Horizontal motion on a rough surface -Coin and card
(iii) Forces of inertia -Book with candle
- Uniform motion in a circle:
centripetal and centrifugal forces
4.3.2 Linear momentum
- Definition of linear momentum:
- Conservation of linear momentum
- Generalization of Newton’s second law:
dp = F
dt
Definition of impulse
-Water rocket
- Application: Propulsion by reaction
- Inelastic collision (head-on) ‘
- Elastic collisions (not head-on)

4.4 Energy problems and solutions

4.4.1 Different forms of energy -Fruits electricity
4.4.2 Chains of transformation of energy -Motor clips
I) Nuclear reaction -Motorcar
ii) Thermal power station
Page 3 of 159
iii) Hydro Electric power station
iv) Installation of wind operated machine
v) Geothermal installation -Plastic bottle fan
vi) Solar installation

5. ELECTRICITY AND MAGNETISM

5.1 Electrostatics
5.1.1 Electrification by friction; contact and
induction -Pencil spin and Ping-Pong ball
5.1.2 Distribution of charge on the surface of a -Straw and balloon that can bend water
conductor -Cans can walk
5.1.3 Electric charge and coulomb’s Law -Plastic cup capacitor
5.1.4 The concept of electric field -Pet bottle Electroscope
5.1.5 Electric intensity and lines of force: -Van de Graff generator
(i) Isolated charges (ii) Unlike charges (iii) Like
charges
5.1.6 Electrostatic potential
5.1.7 Potential difference
5.1.8 Electric potential energy
5.1.9 Relationship between electrostatic field and
potential difference
5.1.10 Thunderstorm

5.3 Electromagnetism
5. 3.1 Magnetic fields around a straight conductor
5.3.2 Magnetic field around a plane circular coil
5.3.3 Magnetic field in the center of a solenoid
Equivalence between a bar magnet and a solenoid
(Ampere hypothesis) Applications: -Electric bell -Magnetic spoon

Page 4 of 159
 -Loudspeaker -Motor clips
-Telephone -Electromagnet using nail
-Spectrometer using CD

5. 5 Alternating current
5.5.1 Electromagnetic induction
- Magnetic flux
-Conditions for generation of induced current
- Direction of induced current
- Lenz’s Law
- The magnitude of induced e.m.f.
- The intensity of induced current.
- Flux linkage
- Quantity of induced electric charge
- Transformation of mechanical energy into electrical
energy
- Induced e,m,f. and force on moving electrons
Applications:
-Dynamo -Motor and generator
- Transformer -Transformer
- Self induction
5.5.2 Alternating current

6. LIGHT AND HEAT

6.1 Geometrical Optics

6.1.1 Reflection and its applications
6.1.1.1 Laws of reflection.
6.1.1.2 Plane mirrors
(I) Reflection of light on a plane mirror

Page 5 of 159
(ii) Regular reflection and diffusion of light
(iii) The law of reversibility of light.
(iv) Formation of real and virtual image of an object

6.1.2 Refraction
6.1.2.1 Description of the phenomena of refraction
6.1.2.2 Laws of refraction
- The real and apparent depth
- The critical angle
- Total internal reflection and its practical applications -Bending light through water

6.1.4 Spherical thin lenses

- Types of lenses
- Geometrical terms of spherical thin lens
- Images formed by converging and diverging lenses
- Graphical construction of images formed by
converging and diverging lenses
- The lenses formula
- Magnification in lenses
- The power of lenses
- Defects of lenses: chromatic and spherical aberration
- State the defects of lenses and how they occur.

6.1.5 Some Optical Instruments

6.1.5.1 Magnifying glass -Loupe camera using milk carton
6.1.5.2 Microscope
6.1.5.3 Telescope
6.1.5.4 Human eye

Page 6 of 159
 6.2 Heat
6.2.1 Thermal effects
6.2.1.1 Temperature
6.2.1.2 Measurement of temperature
6.2.1.3 Scales of temperature in terms of measurable
physical properties that change with temperature
6.2.2 Measurement of heat:
- Measurement of heat capacity and specific heat
capacity by:
i) Electrical method
ii) Method of mixtures
9.2.3 Thermal expansion: -Coin, balloon and PET bottle
- Linear expansion
- Cubic expansion
- Superficial expansion

8. AIR and WATER

8.1 Physical and Chemical properties of air and water -Obedient straw
8.1.1 Air -Stuck together coffee cups
8.1.1.1 Physical and chemical properties of air -Imploding can
8.1.1.2 Composition of air -Fountain in a bottle
8.1.1.3 Importance and roles of air -Perpetual motion in a hose
8.1.1.4 Existence of force in air -Candle that can suck water
8.1.1.5 Atmospheric pressure. Torricelli’s -Lifting jar with palm
experiment. -Immovable rubber grove
8.1.1.6 Atmospheric pressure units -Egg sucked into a bottle
8.1.1.7 Uses of pressure in gases: operating a bicycle -Egg that floats
pump, suction pump, syringe, siphon, straw -Upside-down bottle

Page 7 of 159
 8.1.1.8 Air pollution -Film canister using card
8.1.2 Water -Mist-making device
4.1.2.1 Physical and chemical properties of water
4.1.2.2 Composition of water
8.1.2.3 Importance and role of water

8.1.2.4 Water pollution

8.1.2.5 Water supply and Purification of water -Sand and AC method

8.1.2.6 Factors influencing pressure at a point in water -milk bottle boat

in equilibrium (p = ρ g h) -Floating Ping-Pong ball
8.1.2.7 Equilibrium of water in communicating
containers

9. EARTH IN SPACE

9. 1 The earth atmosphere -Why is sky blue (plastic bag & milk)
9. 2 Global warming
9. 3 The solar system
9. 4 Our galaxy the Milky way

Page 8 of 159
Appendix B

A PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON PLAN

LESSON PLAN 1
Name of tutor: Kizito NDIHOKUBWAYO
Name of school: TTC MATIMBA & MUHANGA
Class: YEAR 1 (G10)
Date and Time: 16th February 2015 at 10:20-12:00 AM
Subject: INTEGRATED SCIENCE
Topic: ELECTROSTATICS
Subtopic: Electrification by friction, contact (conduction) and induction

Objectives: At the end of this lesson, students should be able to:

-Describe 3 ways of electrostatic charging materials
-Identify 2 types of charges
Experiment: -Pencil spin and Ping-Pong ball
-Straw and balloon that can bend water
-Cans can walk
-Balloons can stick on the wall
Keywords: static electricity, friction, contact, and induction

Page 9 of 159
Time Content Students activities Teacher’s activities Reference/
Resource
5min Action to nature -Students: not possible! -The teacher does take a balloon Plastic balloons
Introduct and asks who can paste this
ion balloon on the wall. Possible or
-Students answer: hahah not?
(roughing) rubbing! -Teacher takes a balloon and rubs
it with hair and asks: what am I
doing?
-Students say: it stack/fall down -I am going to paste it on the wall,
guess what will happen!

40min Identifying the problem -Students think and say: -Teacher asks why does it stack -Books,
Develop charges/gravity What phenomenon is this? He -laboratory
ment They do and find it falls down suggests them to put unrubbed improvised
side of balloon to wall materials, (Pencil
-How can you explain what has spin, Ping-Pong
happened? (Give some time for ball, Straw,
some class discussion) balloon, water, al
Prediction/hypothesizing -They suggest: -What is the cause of attraction? Cans, combs, Fur,
Existence of different charges plastic rod,
Triboelectric
-By doing experiment -How can we distinguish many Series handout)
types of charging? -pieces of chalk,
-chalkboard,
Planning experiment Teacher provides materials to -notebooks,
Students and triboelectric series -internet
sheet

Page 10 of 159
 Experiment and observation Students perform experiment in Teacher assists students and
different groups provides them a worksheet of
experiment

Organising results Students record what processes Teacher requests them to record
they went through and findings their findings

Consideration and discussion Students draw different objects Teacher requests them to present
showing realized situations what they did using drawings

5min Drawing conclusion Students are enthusiastic to know Using graphs drawn by students, Pieces of chalk,
Conclusi the polarity of materials he makes them realize friction chalkboard
on charging when rubbing, contact
when finger touches charged
balloon and induction charging
when moving can

Self-evaluation

Page 11 of 159
LESSON PLAN 2
Subtopic: Electric intensity and lines of force: (i) Isolated charges (ii) unlike charges (iii) like charges

Objectives: At the end of this lesson, students should be able to:

-Identify the property of different charges
-State 2 laws of electric charges
Experiment: Electroscope

Activities Students activities Teacher’s activities Reference/

Resource
Identifying the problem Key question: Books, laboratory
How can we Identify the property improvised
of different charges? materials, pieces
of chalk,
chalkboard,

Page 12 of 159

Prediction/hypothesizing -like charges repel
-unlike charges attract
-isolated charges are neutral
Planning experiment
Experiment and observation Students make electroscope
And perform experiment
Results and discussion Students realize that same charges Teacher requests them to present
repel but different ones attract each what they did using drawings
other
Self-Evaluation
notebooks, the
internet
-What are charges attract or
repel? What about neutral?
Teacher provides materials to
Students
Materials: Al foils, plastic pet
bottles, metal wires, cutter
Teacher gives them a drawn
picture electroscope and
procedure and requests them to
work in groups
Teacher aware students on how
to cut aluminum foil and assists
them during experiment
Page 13 of 159
Appendix C

MANUAL EXPERIMENT WORKSHEET

First experiment: aluminum can walk

Objective: demonstration of charging by rubbing and induction

Materials:
-comb or straw
-tissue
-aluminum can

Method and steps

-rub the straw with tissue or comb with human hair
-take it near aluminum can on a smooth surface

Observation
Can will walk toward the straw or comb but walk away from tissue

Interpretation
Describe the phenomenon in terms of charges.

Page 14 of 159
The second experiment: create and use electroscope

Objective: demonstration of charging by friction, induction, and conduction

Materials:
-PVC, tissues, plastic bottle, aluminum foil, and metal string

Method and steps

Rub the PVC with tissue several times, construct an electroscope, take the charged PVC near the metal string above the electroscope, and
then touch with finger on metal

Observation
When put PVC on metal, aluminum foil will repel. When put PVC near metal, aluminum foil repel. When touching on metal, earthing is
occurred.

Interpretation
Describe the phenomenon in terms of charges.

Page 15 of 159
Appendix D

TEST ANSWERS

1A: -Like charges repel each other

-Unlike charges attract each other

1B: Static electricity is a study of charges at rest.

It is electricity in unmovable situation. It is when electric charge does not move or flow; for example when a balloon is rubbing with a

cloth.

2: Six steps:

a) Take electroscope to TV screen turned on and observe. Aluminum foils will scatter.

b) Touch on electroscope when still holding to screen. Aluminum foils will close.

Page 16 of 159
c) Release the electroscope and it will scatter again. This is inductive charging, now electroscope which was neutral is
charged. But we do not know what kind of charge it consists. If it has negative charges, TV will have opposite ones
(positive) and vice-versa.

d) Now take a plastic pet bottle and rub it with hair; we know that after rubbing hair will have positive and bottle will be
charged negatively.

e) Take the pet bottle near to electroscope. If aluminum foils repel each other further, the TV will be charged positively
because electroscope has same charge of pet bottle which is pushing negative charges to foils. If aluminum foils attract
each other than they were, so the TV would contain negative charges since electroscope should have excess of positive
charges as pet bottle will push negative ones to attract with positive.

Page 17 of 159
 ++

----
----
----

f) So as conclusion, the TV above is positively charged.

3: Electrostatics applied examples:

 Comb with hair exchange charges
 A television screen easily collects dust
 When getting out of a car, you can sometimes get a small electric shock
 You sometimes get a small electric shock from a cat that has rolled on a synthetic carpet
 Balloons charged same way repel each other
 Thunderstorm produces huge flashes of lightning
Uses of electrostatics:

 Vender Graff generator

 Electroscope
 Capacitors
 Photocopiers and laser printers
 Defibrillators

Page 18 of 159
  Electrostatic dust precipitators
 Paint sprayers

4:

 Neutralization of electroscope where the number of + and –ve charges are equal and it is in a stable state (not charged).
 Inducing positive charges to repel Al. foil or gold leafs and negative ones move towards positive rod (number of + and – is
equal).
 When the rod attaches on electroscope, it transfers its charges to electroscope with same charges and repelling the aluminum foil.
 When remove the rod, electroscope stays charged, having more positive same number reduced from rod than negative charges.

5: A, D

Page 19 of 159