Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A comparison of the effects of an investigative-based and a traditional laboratory program on students’… McCarthy, Thomas Andrew 1983

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1983_A8 M23.pdf [ 6.1MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0055316.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0055316-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0055316-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0055316-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0055316-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0055316-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0055316-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0055316-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0055316.ris

Full Text

A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF AN INVESTIGATIVE-BASED AND A TRADITIONAL  LABORATORY PROGRAM ON STUDENTS'  UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROCESS OF SCIENCE by THOMAS ANDREW MCCARTHY B . S C , THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, 1974  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Mathematics and Science Education  We accept t h i s T h e s i s as conforming to  the r e q u i r e d  standard  The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h April  Columbia  1983  © Thomas Andrew McCarthy, 1983  DE-6  In p r e s e n t i n g  this  thesis i n partial  f u l f i l m e n t of the  r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that it  freely  t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make  a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y .  agree that permission f o r extensive for  University  s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may  for  financial  of  Education  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h 1956 Main M a l l V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T  1Y3  Date  (3/81)  PlfR/C^  f?^^  Columbia  my  It is thesis  s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my  permission.  Department  thesis  be g r a n t e d by t h e h e a d o f  copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s  gain  further  copying of t h i s  d e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s o r h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . understood that  I  written  ABSTRACT PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of  of t h i s study was to compare the e f f e c t i v e n e s s  two approaches  to l a b o r a t o r y work i n changing  understanding of the processes of s c i e n c e . investigative-based  l a b o r a t o r y approach  student  An author-designed  was compared to a  t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y method as o u t l i n e d  in conventional  l a b o r a t o r y manual t e x t s . T h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n was undertaken  to provide e m p i r i c a l  data concerning the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of an approach  used i n  t e a c h i n g l a b o r a t o r y work during the past f i v e y e a r s .  The  study was c a r r i e d out i n a s e n i o r high school i n the B.C. Lower  Mainland.  PROCEDURE The sample c o n s i s t e d of 41 students e n r o l l e d of  the author's B i o l o g y 12 c l a s s e s .  group,  i n two blocks  One block was the c o n t r o l  assigned to use the t r a d i t i o n a l  l a b o r a t o r y approach  and  the other was the experimental group assigned to be exposed to the i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d l a b o r a t o r y approach.  The experimental  phase of t h i s study took p l a c e over the f i r s t  three months of  the calender year 1983. The students i n both groups were p r e t e s t e d using the Welch Science Process Inventory (SPI) instrument during the f i r s t week of the study.  F o l l o w i n g exposure  to treatment, the  students were p o s t t e s t e d using the same SPI instrument.  ii  Data obtained from the instrument was  analyzed using  a n a l y s i s of covariance with the p o s t t e s t as the variable.  The  criterion  F v a l u e s obtained from t h i s a n a l y s i s were  compared with the c r i t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e at the 0.05  F values that were r e q u i r e d f o r  level.  FINDINGS From the a n a l y s i s of data, i t was p o s t t e s t means, that there was  found  from the adjusted  a significant  difference  between the l a b o r a t o r y groups with r e s p e c t to an of the process of s c i e n c e . based  l a b o r a t o r y group was  Specifically, found  the  understanding  investigative-  to have a s t a t i s t i c a l l y  s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r understanding of the process of s c i e n c e than the t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y group.  CONCLUSIONS Although possessed  i t was  concluded  that the experimental group  a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r understanding of the process  of s c i e n c e , c a u t i o n was  suggested  i n attempting  to g e n e r a l i z e  the a p p l i c a t i o n of the r e s u l t s of t h i s study o u t s i d e the limiting  c o n f i n e s of the study.  Recommendations f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h were  "iii  -  proposed.  TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT  i i  TABLE OF CONTENTS  iv  LIST OF TABLES  v i i  LIST OF FIGURES  viii  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS CHAPTER 1  ix  INTRODUCTION  1.0 The Problem  1  1.1 The Importance of the Problem  2  1.2 Hypothesis  5  CHAPTER 2  ~ REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE  2.0 Views on the E f f e c t i v e n e s s Laboratory I n s t r u c t i o n  of the T r a d i t i o n a l 7  2.1 A l t e r n a t i v e Forms o f Laboratory I n s t r u c t i o n as Compared to more T r a d i t i o n a l Forms 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4  Academic Achievement Student I n t e r e s t C r i t i c a l Thinking and Reasoning A b i l i t y Understanding the Nature and Process of Science  2.2 Measurement of Laboratory Research  Study Outcomes..  2.2.1 Watson-Glaser C r i t i c a l T h i n k i n g A p p r a i s a l . . . . 2.2.2 Test on Understanding Science 2.2.3 Welch Science Process Inventory 2.3 Summary  13 14 15 16 19 21 23 24 26 28  CHAPTER 3 ~ METHOD OF STUDY 3.0 I n t r o d u c t i o n  35  3.1 P o p u l a t i o n  35  iv  Page 3.1.1  D e s c r i p t i o n of Subjects  35  3.1.2  S e l e c t i o n of Subjects  36  3.2 Research Design  38  3.3 E v a l u a t i o n Instrument  39  3.4 P r o c e d u r a l  40  Details  3.4.1  C o n t r o l Group A c t i v i t i e s  41  3.4.2  Experimental  42  Group A c t i v i t i e s  3.5 A n a l y s i s Techniques  45  CHAPTER 4 - ANALYSIS OF DATA 4.0 I n t r o d u c t i o n  48  4.1 D e s c r i p t i o n of Research F i n d i n g s  48  4.1.1 4.1.2  A n a l y s i s of Co-Variance F-Test R a t i o  4.1.3  Regression  (Ancova)  Graphical Analysis  50 51 52  CHAPTER 5 ~ CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.0  Introduction  54  5.1 Conclusions  55  5.2 L i m i t a t i o n s  57  5.3 Recommendations  58  5.4 Epilogue  59  BIBLIOGRAPHY  61  Appendix A  Sample l e t t e r s  of Consent  Appendix B  O v e r a l l Timetable  of Events  Appendix C  68 71  A c t i v i t i e s i n the C o n t r o l Group's T r a d i t i o n a l Laboratory Program 73 Appendix D An Example of the process of S c i e n t i f i c Investigation 89 Appenix E A c t i v i t i e s i n the Experimental Group's I n v e s t i g a t i v e - B a s e d Laboratory Program.... 93 - v -  Appendix F  Raw  Scores  for  and T 2  Appendix G  Standard  Appendix H  Data Outlay f o r the A n a l y s i s of Covariance..  D e v i a t i o n Graphs f o r  112 and T 2 .  119  LIST OF TABLES Page  TABLE 1.  Summary of s t u d i e s comparing the t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y method to an a l t e r n a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y method on measure of academic achievement  30  Summary of s t u d i e s comparing the t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y method to an a l t e r n a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y method on measures of enhanced student i n t e r e s t i n l a b o r a t o r y course of study  31  Summary of s t u d i e s comparing the t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y method to an a l t e r n a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y method on measures of c r i t i c a l t h i n k i n g and reasoning a b i l i t i e s  32  Summary of s t u d i e s comparing the t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t r o y method to an a l t e r n a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y method on measures of student understanding of the nature and process of science  33  5.  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of c l a s s e s  37  6.  Data O u t l a y - T]_  125  7.  Data O u t l a y - T  126  8.  Treatment E f f e c t s (ANCOVA)  51  9.  C a l c u l a t i o n s of estimated p o s t t e s t scores  52  2.  3.  4.  2  - v i i  -  L I S T OF FIGURES Page FIGURE 1.  A n a l y s i s of p r e t e s t scores - c o n t r o l group  120  2.  A n a l y s i s of p o s s t e s t scores - c o n t r o l group  121  3.  A n a l y s i s of p r e t e s t scores - experimental  group.  122  4.  A n a l y s i s of p o s t t e s t scores - experimental  group  123  5.  C o m p a r i s o n o f p r e and p o s t t e s t s c o r e s e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l  49  Treatment r e g r e s s i o n l i n e s  53  6.  - viii  -  ACKNOWLEDGMENT  The w r i t e r advisor, this  f o r encouragement  study.  advice  i s indebted  Thanks  and g u i d a n c e i n the d e v e l o p m e n t  a r e a l s o due t o D r . W. B o l d t f o r h i s  and a i d i n s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s e s  I would  also  like  to express  tion,  staff  their  cooperation during  study.  t o D r . R. C a r l i s l e , my m a j o r  and t o Dr. F. G o r n a l  my g r a t i t u d e t o t h e a d m i n i s t r a  and s t u d e n t s o f my S e n i o r S e c o n d a r y S c h o o l f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l  stage of t h i s  - 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.0  THE PROBLEM The  purpose of t h i s study was to determine  the r e l a t i v e  e f f e c t i v e n e s s of two methods of teaching a s e n i o r high school l a b o r a t o r y b i o l o g y program.  E f f e c t i v e n e s s was based on  achievement of s t u d e n t s ' understandings  of the process o f  s c i e n c e o c c u r r i n g during the course. The  treatment  examined i n t h i s  study was an  ' i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d ' format wherein with an o p p o r t u n i t y to develop  students were provided  t h e i r own hypothesis to a  r e s e a r c h problem, d e s i g n and c a r r y out an experiment, and d i s c u s s the outcomes of the experiment The  treatment  format  after  was compared with a " t r a d i t i o n a l " l a b o r a t o r y  i n which the students performed  a c o n v e n t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y manual. treatment  a n a l y s i s of data.  assigned e x e r c i s e s using  Comparison between the  and c o n t r o l groups was undertaken  using the S.P.I.  (Science Process I n v e n t o r y ) , an instrument designed Welch and M i l t o n O. P e l l a Wisconsin.  (1968) from  the U n i v e r s i t y of  T h i s instrument purports to measure student  understanding  of the process of s c i e n c e which Welch and P e l l a  (1968) d e r i v e d from books by Beveridge, Lachman, Nash and Wilson  f o r v a l i d i t y judgment. suggestions from  Conant, Kemeny,  (Welch, 1968, p.64).  d e r i v e d process were presented  of  by Wayne  Elements of t h i s  to f o u r t e e n research  scientists  The l i s t was then r e v i s e d on the b a s i s  the s c i e n t i s t s .  - 2 Specifically, is  there  any  of  the  be  attributed  then,  significant  process  of to  the  Importance The  science  of  education. and  Association  long  that  too  stated  student  twelve  students  as  follows:  understanding  classes  that  can  to  procedures?  been  1970,  P r a c t i c e s of  was  be  Problem  In  thought  laboratories  of  laboratory  the  may  in biology  exposure  l a b o r a t o r y has  Standards  problem  difference in  science  investigative-based  1.1  the  the the  the  a  Commission  National  case  obvious  distinctive  to  for  argue  feature  of  of Professional  Science  school  Teacher's  science  (Ramsey  & Howe,  1969):  T h a t the e x p e r i e n c e p o s s i b l e f o r s t u d e n t s i n the l a b o r a t o r y s i t u a t i o n s h o u l d be an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f a n y science c o u r s e h a s come t o h a v e a w i d e acceptance in science teaching. What t h e b e s t kinds o f e x p e r i e n c e s a r e , h o w e v e r , and how these may be b l e n d e d w i t h m o r e c o n v e n t i o n a l c l a s s w o r k , has n o t been o b j e c t i v e l y e v a l u a t e d to the e x t e n t t h a t c l e a r d i r e c t i o n b a s e d on r e s e a r c h i s a v a i l a b l e for teachers (p.75). Less  than  ten  years  science  instruction  Science  laboratory  concern  because  experience Science  students'  was  in  of  not  case  as  i s now  science the  educators  view  the  are  a  trend  to  an  to  laboratory  in  as  seemed  be  retreat  resulting  laboratory  continue as  the  i t once  c u r r e n t l y of  activities,  science  science  for  self-evident  requirements  there  student-centered and  later,  special from  in  (Gardner,  disheartened  absolute  endeavor  less  time  1979). by - as  if i t  -  3  -  y i e l d s the whole t r u t h and nothing but. reason f o r such a misconception may students understand  Yet a l a r g e p a r t of the  be our f a i l u r e  to help  the process of s c i e n c e .  Merely to provide students with d e f i n i t i o n s of terms l i k e "hypothesis" and  "theory" w i l l not help them understand  s u b t l e and complex aspects of t e s t i n g an h y p o t h e s i s .  Too  l a b o r a t o r y courses o f f e r any s o r t of c o n f r o n t a t i o n with unknown.  The  student i s expected  something  he/she a l r e a d y knows.  to produce  through  few  the  a v e r i f i c a t i o n of  Instead of r e c o r d i n g what  a c t u a l l y o c c u r s , he/she i s t r a i n e d supposed to be.  the  to ask what a r e s u l t i s  A student should be compelled  to t h i n k  the bearing of h i s r e s u l t s on the p o s s i b l e  conclusions.  Such concerns may  have prompted the f o l l o w i n g  recommendation from the B r i t i s h Columbia  Assessment c o n t r a c t  team: That teachers of s c i e n c e at both the j u n i o r and s e n i o r secondary l e v e l s make a conscious e f f o r t to promote the development of s k i l l s such as d e s i g n i n g experiments, and i n t e r p r e t i n g d a t a , ... and an a p p r e c i a t i o n of the nature and methods of s c i e n c e (Hobbs, 1978, p.47). D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with e x i s t i n g been expressed even by some who required  laboratory instruction  c o n s i d e r that time and money  f o r i n s t r u c t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y work must be  (Caplan & Fowler, 1968).  has  spent  "Cookbook" l a b o r a t o r y e x p e r i e n c e s ,  i n which the student goes through  the motions of experimental  work without a concern f o r an understanding of the u n d e r l y i n g p r i n c i p l e s , would not seem capable of p r o v i d i n g meaningful  -  experiences f o r concept  4 -  learning  (Ausubel, 1964).  Activities  which simply confirm what the textbook or teacher has a l r e a d y s a i d a l s o seem to be u n p r o f i t a b l e (Anderson Hurd, 1 9 6 4 ) .  & Weigard, 1967;  Laboratory a c t i v i t i e s of these s o r t s  student p r i m a r i l y  i n m a n i p u l a t i o n of apparatus  r e q u i r e o n l y minimal  i n v o l v e the  and data and  c o n s i d e r a t i o n by the student of the  r a t i o n a l e f o r these o p e r a t i o n s and c e r t a i n l y do not convey an impression of s c i e n t i f i c  research.  Stake and E a s l e y  s t a t e the case r a t h e r p o i g n a n t l y by r e l a t i n g an a c t u a l classroom occurrence: b l a c k i n the beaker they asked, The  girl  at the next t a b l e s a i d ,  (1978)  an anecdote  from  "Seeing nothing but inky 'What's supposed to happen?' ' I t s supposed to go up and  down,' so they a l l wrote, ' I t went up and down,' i n t h e i r l a b reports"  (p. 19 :6 ) .  Having  become d i s i l l u s i o n e d with the t r a d i t i o n a l method  of l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t i o n as e x e m p l i f i e d i n l a b o r a t o r y t e x t s issued  to s c i e n c e s t u d e n t s , the author has experimented  an " i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d " l a b o r a t o r y format Until  the advent  to e m p i r i c a l l y  with  i n h i s classroom.  of t h i s study, the o p p o r t u n i t y has not a r i s e n  t e s t the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of t h i s  alternate  l a b o r a t o r y approach i n terms of student understanding  of the  process of s c i e n c e . At t h i s j u n c t u r e the 'process of s c i e n c e ' w i l l be expressed  as t h i s t h e s i s demands that the process of s c i e n c e  be measured to determine treatment.  the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of experimental  - 5 Welch and P e l l a  (1968) do not s t i p u l a t e  i n d e t a i l what  students must demonstrate to i n d i c a t e knowledge of the process of s c i e n c e .  The author  c o n s i d e r s that f o r knowledge of the  process of s c i e n c e students must demonstrate the a b i l i t y t o : 1.  make c a r e f u l o b s e r v a t i o n s that lead to i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , e x p l a n a t i o n s and p r e d i c t i o n s ,  2.  advance and formulate an hypothesis that i s based on p r i o r o b s e r v a t i o n s or r e s e a r c h and attempts to p r e d i c t some f u t u r e event,  3.  d e v i s e experiments adequately  4.  that t e s t hypotheses  and that are  controlled,  report results  i n the form of organized  quantitative  data t a b l e s and/or q u a l i t a t i v e o b s e r v a t i o n s , 5.  analyse data e i t h e r by graph  or s t a t i s t i c s ,  6.  draw i n f e r e n c e s and d i s c u s s r e s u l t s  from  experimental data and a n a l y s e s , 7.  suggest  f u r t h e r research or the c r e a t i o n of new  hypotheses  due to the i n s u f f i c i e n c y of data or  sources of e r r o r .  1.2  Hypothesis Because previous s t u d i e s , i n g e n e r a l together, do not  provide d e f i n i t i v e  r e s u l t s r e g a r d i n g the d i f f e r e n t i a l  effect  of an i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d l a b o r a t o r y program to a t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y program the research hypothesis form.  i s stated i n n u l l  So c o m p a r i n g  the t r a d i t i o n a l  investigative-based T h e r e i s no of  laboratory  significant  the process of s c i e n c e  exposure  6 laboratory  the  group:  increase  i n student  t h a t c a n be a t t r i b u t e d  of s t u d e n t s to i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d  procedures.  g r o u p and  understanding to the  laboratory  - 7 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE  2.0  Views on  LITERATURE  the E f f e c t i v e n e s s of  T r a d i t i o n a l Laboratory I n s t r u c t i o n The  r o l e of science  much d i s c u s s i o n and nineteenth  century  l a b o r a t o r y work has  been a t o p i c of  i n v e s t i g a t i o n since the l a t t e r part of when i n d i v i d u a l l a b o r a t o r y work by  the  the  student became common. The  f o l l o w i n g survey w i l l  not  attempt to provide  a review  of i n v e s t i g a t i o n s that concern themselves with arguments f o r the  i n c l u s i o n of or e l i m i n a t i o n of l a b o r a t o r y work in  curricula. the  Instead  laboratory  what w i l l  in science  e f f e c t i v e n e s s of v a r i o u s The  first  be under review i s the  education  and  the  p a r t of t h i s survey w i l l  look at the v a r i e t y of 'traditional'  i t s effectiveness in providing  what the authors of the manuals p e r c e i v e Following  laboratory  the student with  to be  this w i l l  a l t e r n a t i v e forms of  valuable  be an examination  of s t u d i e s that make comparisons between the l a b o r a t o r y method and  of  perceived  l a b o r a t o r y method as o u t l i n e d i n many science  laboratory experience.  use  forms of l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t i o n .  s t u d i e s that have examined the s o - c a l l e d  manuals and  science  traditional  laboratory  instruction. The  d e f i n i t i o n of  used i n t h i s review and The  general  'traditional'  laboratory  as used by researchers  f e a t u r e of these t r a d i t i o n a l  i n s t r u c t i o n as i s as  laboratory  follows.  - 8 experiments i s that e v e r y t h i n g i s explained given  the  about the l a b o r a t o r y  to the students before  theory  underlying  they proceed.  the experiment, the  experimental procedure to be used and of how  the data are  the data should  to be analyzed.  look l i k e  the  laboratory  verification an a r t i c l e  i l l u s t r a t i o n of what The  main purpose of  Education  that  researchers  l a b o r a t o r i e s or  l a b o r a t o r i e s when r e f e r r i n g  to  traditional  educators have d e c r i e d i n the science  in Bioscience  and  teacher  such emphasis on  laboratory.  criticized  educators.  He  Rasmussen (1970), i n  both c o l l e g e claimed  science  that high  school  l a b o r a t o r y work i s no b e t t e r than i t i s because formal school  training  i s "...  than i n s c i e n c e . . . " to r e a l l y  more o f t e n  largely  not p a r t i c u l a r l y e x c i t i n g . separately  "Operationally, laboratory teacher  or by  the  i n good science l a b o r a t o r y but  limited  science  rather  opportunities  Laboratory a c t i v i t i e s ,  according  i l l u s t r a t i v e , non-investigative,  and  Laboratory achievement i s u s u a l l y  from the science  the student l e a r n s  should  ... about science  (p.292), with very  i n v e s t i g a t e ideas.  to Rasmussen, are  evaluated  the  instruction.  Science  teachers  An  such terms as " v e r i f i c a t i o n "  "conventional"  exact  students to v e r i f y  experiment as presented does work. o f t e n use  They are  a detailed description  i s often given.  such an approach i s to allow  experiment  content of the  that the  course.  f u n c t i o n of  the  be c e r t i f i c a t i o n of statements made by  the  textbook ..."  that,  teaching,  "the  i n most present  (p.292).  Rasmussen said  textbook supports  the  cases these r o l e s are  - 9 reversed."  He  p o i n t e d out  C u r r i c u l u m Study one m i g h t w i s h  t h a t the B i o l o g i c a l  (B.S.C.S.) m a t e r i a l s a r e n o t as s u c c e s s f u l as  "...  due  i n l a r g e p a r t to teacher r e l u c t a n c e to  c h a n g e t h e i r mode o f o p e r a t i o n " In r e v i e w i n g p r e v a i l i n g Lee N e d e l s k y laboratory recipe;  (p.293).  laboratory practices,  ( 1 9 6 5 ) compared t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l o r  instruction  t h a t i s , the s t u d e n t  a p p l y t o the d a t a .  is told  unnecessary outside  felt  t o be data.  phenomena  comparison  l a b o r a t o r y as;  structured  Nedelsky  the  d e s c r i b e s the  watched  were  any  written  investigative  t o h i s own  c o u l d a b o u t a phenomenon.  devices  In t h i s  i s more m o t i v a t e d .  l a b o r a t o r y , h o w e v e r , c o s t s more and  i n g u i d i n g the s t u d e n t  o b j e c t i v e s of the c o u r s e .  Nedelsky  The  instructor the  f o r the c o m p a r a t i v e  laboratory.  However, N e d e l s k y  needs  major  t h a t the h i g h e r  r a r i t y of the u n s t r u c t u r e d found  t h a t most  of  few  t h e h i g h e r c o s t o f t e a c h i n g p e r s o n n e l was  main reason  find  t o t h i n k and T h i s type  toward  found  to  less  i s c h a r a c t e r i s e d by  clearly defined behavioural objectives.  o f e q u i p m e n t and  a  experimental  l a b o r a t o r y t h e s t u d e n t has more t i m e  an e x p e r t  to  t i m e nor g a t h e r e d  f o r the e x p e r i m e n t  the s t u d e n t  t o e x e r c i s e i n g e n u i t y , and  t o be  carefully  up  observed.  leaving  o u t a l l he o r she  what e q u a t i o n s  instructor  a  to set  that this represented  s u r e t h e y w a s t e d no Conclusions  follow  p r e c i s e l y how  t h e l a b o r a t o r y p e r i o d , away from  s e t - u p and By  Nedelsky  o r d e r l i n e s s " where t h e  the students  traditional  as a k i t c h e n where s t u d e n t s  t h e a p p a r a t u s , what r e a d i n g s t o t a k e , and  "sterile  Sciences  teachers  cost the  familiar  with  the  unstructured  advantages outweighed  (1980). of  the  was  laboratory in college  This  f u n c t i o n i s not  exercise, based  on  should  skills".  techniques  skills  biologists Such for  science.  because  do  skills  Education  about  Misconception  the  one  lecture  use  was  courses.  one-afternoon  "most s c i e n t i f i c  sophisticated  i s that l a b o r a t o r i e s  P i c k e r i n g claimed  usable  students  science  misconceptions  p o s s i b l e in a simple,  two  students  directly  college  theory i s  supporting  80).  Misconception "finger  that i t s  C h r o n i c l e of Higher  two  a l a r g e number o f v e r y (p.  the  somehow " i l l u s t r a t e "  Pickering said,  experiments"  be  i n The  Pickering identified  laboratories  l a b o r a t o r y expressed  criticising  published  that  -  i t s disadvantages.  A recent a r t i c l e laboratory  10  learn i n the  learn  are worth  that very  and  and  teach  of  the  as  as  do  tools  ends  Many o f  will  the  are o b s o l e t e .  chemists  teaching only inquiry  plan.  laboratories few  few  to  science laboratories  c a r e e r s they  i n the  dissections  basic s c i e n t i f i c  in their  exist  Few  titrations. t o be  mastered  i n themselves  (p.  80) . Pickering courses an  by  d i s t i n g u i s h e d between  contending  e x e r c i s e in doing  the o b j e c t i v e o f  t h a t a good  laboratory  t e a c h i n g as  the p o s i n g  of c a r e f u l l y  nature.  The  being  a good  science.  essentially  defined questions  intellectual  and  laboratory  l a b o r a t o r y course  science while  t e a c h i n g about  lecture  processes  lecture He  course  viewed  Socratic, t o be  students  should  has  good involving  asked  should  be  of  use  are  - 11 those of s c i e n t i f i c it  r e s e a r c h so they come to see how  i s to o b t a i n meaningful  data.  difficult  Such a l a b o r a t o r y course  could e a s i l y be defended  as f i t t i n g  into a l i b e r a l  education,  a c c o r d i n g to P i c k e r i n g .  U n f o r t u n a t e l y most l a b o r a t o r y courses  do not f i t i n t o t h i s model. P i c k e r i n g sees other d i f f i c u l t i e s  as w e l l .  Too few l a b . courses o f f e r any s o r t of c o n f r o n t a t i o n with the unknown... The element of c r e a t i v e s u r p r i s e i s almost completely m i s s i n g . The r e s u l t s of an experiment should be ambiguous enough so that a student i s compelled to t h i n k through the bearing of h i s r e s u l t s on the p o s s i b l e c o n c l u s i o n (p.80). M a r s h a l l D. Herron  (1971) examined 41 Chem. Study  l a b o r a t o r y e x e r c i s e s f o r t h e i r content and  stated  purposes.  He grouped these 41 e x e r c i s e s i n t o three major c a t e g o r i e s : (1) e x e r c i s e s through which the student was  expected  to  " d i s c o v e r " c e r t a i n s p e c i f i e d p r i n c i p l e s or r e g u l a r i t i e s i n chemical phenomena;  (2)  problem-solving behaviour solution;  and  (3)  exercises involving  i n f e r e n c e or  and having no pre-determined,  exercises said  the student the chance to observe,  to " i l l u s t r a t e "  unique  or to "give  together with e x e r c i s e s  intended to g i v e the student p r a c t i c e i n developing l a b o r a t o r y techniques"  (p.196).  - 12 According  t o H e r r o n , 24 o f t h e 41 l a b o r a t o r y  exercises  (more t h a n 50%) w e r e o f t h e i l l u s t r a t i v e - d e m o n s t r a t i v e variety. with  S i x were o f t h e o p e n - e n d e d p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g  four of the s i x o c c u r r i n g  concluded, that  very  late  i n the course.  " I n the l i g h t o f t h i s a n a l y s i s , i t would  the 'discovery  r u b r i c i s misleading  1  l a b o r a t o r y p o r t i o n of these m a t e r i a l s " Herron, quoting of  f r o m BSCS m a t e r i a l s ,  i n t e r a c t i o n o f f a c t s and i d e a s "  Herron maintains that  identifies  Laboratory  and T a m i r  Structure  examined l a b o r a t o r y  (1978) u s i n g  the student  activities  that  themselves to the goals They d e c i d e d  that  However, lacks  an i n s t r u m e n t c a l l e d t h e Inventory  (LAI),  from P r o j e c t P h y s i c s (PSSC) m a t e r i a l s ,  the materials  and t h e t o check on  d i d not always  the p r o j e c t developers  lend  advocated.  t h e l a b o r a t o r y g u i d e s f o r t h e two c o u r s e s  were l a c k i n g i n i n s t r u c t i o n s and q u e s t i o n s stimulate  (p.201).  as a  problems.  and T a s k A n a l y s i s  P h y s i c a l S c i e n c e Study Committee Herron's contention  the goal  l a b o r a t o r y w o r k i n t h e BSCS c o u r s e  e m p h a s i s on t h e o r i g i n o f s c i e n t i f i c Lunetta  to the  (p.198).  some u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e n a t u r e o f s c i e n c e  vigorous  He  appear  as a p p l i e d  the t e x t o f the c o u r s e as t h a t o f h e l p i n g  "obtain  type,  such i n q u i r y a c t i v i t i e s  that  might  as t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f  h y p o t h e s e s , t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f p r o b l e m s , and t h e d e s i g n  of  experiments. They i d e n t i f i e d  what t h e y c o n s i d e r e d  t o be s i x i m p o r t a n t  d e f i c i e n c i e s where s t u d e n t i n v o l v e m e n t , o r i t s l a c k w e r e  - 13 concerned:  (1)  formulating  problems or i n f o r m u l a t i n g  (2)  relatively  no student involvement i n i d e n t i f y i n g and  few o p p o r t u n i t i e s  measurement procedures, design (4)  (3)  hypotheses,  to design  even fewer o p p o r t u n i t i e s to  experiments and to work according  l a c k of encouragement to d i s c u s s  assumptions underlying  o b s e r v a t i o n and  to t h e i r own  design,  l i m i t a t i o n s and  the experiments,  (5)  lack of  encouragement to share student e f f o r t s i n l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s when t h i s  i s appropriate,  e x p l i c i t provisions facilitate As use  and  for post-laboratory  (6)  lack of  d i s c u s s i o n s to  c o n s o l i d a t i o n of f i n d i n g s and understanding  i n d i c a t e d , s c i e n t i s t s and science  of cookbook-type, and v e r i f i c a t i o n  advocate l a b o r a t o r y  activities  p u p i l s the nature of s c i e n c e ,  (p.10).  educators decry the  l a b o r a t o r i e s and  that are designed to convey to i t s methods, and the s p i r i t o f  inquiry.  2.1  A l t e r n a t i v e Forms of Laboratory I n s t r u c t i o n as Compared to More T r a d i t i o n a l Forms In reviewing  the e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s , i t becomes apparent  that many r e s e a r c h e r s instruction instruction.  have examined forms of l a b o r a t o r y  that d i f f e r  from t r a d i t i o n a l methods of  Many of these s t u d i e s have a r i s e n perhaps from  f r u s t r a t i o n with t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y p r a c t i c e s . such f r u s t r a t i o n may have spawned new and innovative that the r e s e a r c h e r s  Indeed, methods  wish to t e s t e m p i r i c a l l y as to t h e i r  - I n -  e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n the c o g n i t i v e , a f f e c t i v e and  psychomotor  domains. The s t u d i e s presented here w i l l the  be grouped according to  dependent v a r i a b l e ( s ) they measure.  v a r i a b l e s w i l l be c o n s i d e r e d :  The  following  academic achievement, student  i n t e r e s t , c o g n i t i v e a b i l i t y , psychomotor s k i l l s ,  and  student  understanding of the nature and process of s c i e n c e . 2.1.1.  Academic  Achievement  Using a m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s of variance and trend a n a l y s i s of adjusted means over ten q u i z z e s , Egelston  (1973)  found that by using an ' i n d u c t i v e ' method of l a b o r a t o r y instruction  i n comparison to the t r a d i t i o n a l method,  s u p e r i o r i t y of achievement was obtained by the group  involved  with the i n d u c t i v e procedures. I n t e r e s t i n g l y , over the span of the ten e x e r c i s e s , each followed by a q u i z z , the achievement of the experimental group using the i n d u c t i v e method, s t a r t e d out at a lower l e v e l but e v e n t u a l l y surpassed that of the c o n t r o l group which used the t r a d i t i o n a l method.  E g e l s t o n a t t r i b u t e s t h i s e a r l y poor  performance to the n o v e l t y of the i n d u c t i v e method which hindered achievement  initially.  E g e l s t o n ' s i n d u c t i v e method which she d e f i n e s as an open-ended  approach where the student develops and researches  t h e i r own problem, i s s i m i l a r to that o f James Bock's  (1979)  a l t e r n a t e l a b o r a t o r y method which he c a l l s an " i n q u i r y i n v e s t i g a t i v e " program.  U n l i k e E g e l s t o n , however, Bock found  - 15  -  no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the academic achievement of those students  who  undertook the t r a d i t i o n a l  e x e r c i s e s as d e p i c t e d pursued the  i n standard  Biology  laboratory  texts and  those  i n q u i r y - i n v e s t i g a t i v e program.  Tanner  (1969) a l s o found no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n  measure of comprehension, l a t e r a l  t r a n s f e r and  comparisons were made of students  engaged i n an  r e t e n t i o n when i n d u c t i v e or  d i s c o v e r y method vs the t r a d i t i o n a l method which Tanner the  who  calls  " d i d a c t i c " method. Indeed, of the v a r i o u s  s t u d i e s that measured academic  achievement a f t e r an exposure to an a l t e r n a t e method few  s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e d a strong  r e t e n t i o n and  2.1.2 Using Allen  laboratory  trend toward  increased  comprehension of knowledge.  Student I n t e r e s t an  i n q u i r y type of l a b o r a t o r y approach, Moll  (1982) were i n t e r e s t e d i n whether students  a b e t t e r a t t i t u d e towards t h e i r l a b o r a t o r y work. a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e  of t h e i r data  d i f f e r e n c e s were obtained  would e x h i b i t Using  allows  i n the p o s i t i v e d i r e c t i o n .  At  least find  were more r e c e p t i v e to l a b o r a t o r y work which  f o r more independent choice  conducting  an  some s i g n i f i c a n t  w i t h i n the parameters of t h e i r study, Moll and A l l e n d i d that students  and  of problem, planning  and  of experiment.  In c o n t r a s t , Robert A l l i s o n ' s (1972) study d i d not show the marked improvement i n students'  positive attitude  - 16  -  towards l a b o r a t o r y work that Moll and  A l l e n showed.  study compared i n q u i r y l a b o r a t o r y experience to laboratory two  i n a c o l l e g e chemistry course.  He  Allison's  conventional  compared how  the  methods e f f e c t e d changes in student a t t i t u d e s towards  science, c r i t i c a l  thinking,  self-evaluation.  He  n e i t h e r more nor  laboratory  concludes that the  skills  and  i n q u i r y approach i s  l e s s e f f e c t i v e that i n the  conventional  approach i n improving a t t i t u d e s toward s c i e n c e , t h i n k i n g or l a b o r a t o r y  skills.  A comparison of an a u t o - t u t o r i a l l a b o r a t o r y in a l e s s independent l a b o r a t o r y conducted by Harold examinations on  Park and  higher  and  students  i n p h y s i c a l science  John Butzow (1975).  was  Using  independence of work-study habits and  toward the course, they found that achieved  critical  scores  on  attitude  independent study students  independence of study, but  found  no  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in a t t i t u d e s . Studies  on student a t t i t u d e e i t h e r i n d i c a t e that a t t i t u d e  improves when students work with an  inquiry laboratory  or that a t t i t u d e remains the same as that found working with a c o n v e n t i o n a l  2.1.3  Critical  format,  in students  format.  Thinking  and  Reasoning  Ability  A number of s t u d i e s measured the c o g n i t i v e a b i l i t i e s students engaged i n a l t e r n a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y  activities.  P a r t i c u l a r among the c o g n i t i v e measures were those of t h i n k i n g and  reasoning.  of  critical  - 17 U n l i k e the c a t e g o r i e s of academic achievement and interest, c r i t i c a l  t h i n k i n g and  reasoning i s , by i n d i c a t i o n of  most s t u d i e s , enhanced s i g n i f i c a n t l y by exposure of to  l a b o r a t o r y methods which d i f f e r P a v e l i c h and Abraham  " g u i d e d - i n q u i r y " format  student  from the  (1979) developed  students  traditional. what they c a l l e d  f o r freshman chemistry  a  students.  S i m i l a r to other methods p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d , the g u i d e d - i n q u i r y format to and  allows the student c o n s i d e r a b l e freedom  i n v e s t i g a t e a problem of t h e i r c h o i c e , design an analyse the r e s u l t s .  p e n c i l t e s t developed  experiment  Using a P i a g e t i a n - t y p e paper and  by the C o g n i t i v e A n a l y s i s P r o j e c t ,  P a v e l i c h and Abraham were able to show that an exposure to an i n q u i r y l a b o r a t o r y format  allows the student to  ... i n v e s t i g a t e chemistry at a l e v e l cons i s t e n t with h i s / h e r l e v e l of i n t e l l e c t u a l development ... the more concrete student experiences chemistry s o l e l y at the concrete level; whereas the formal student has experiences which tax h i s / h e r a b s t r a c t t h i n k i n g a b i l i t i e s (p.103). Rickert  (1962) s t u d i e d the development of the  t h i n k i n g a b i l i t y of c o l l e g e freshmen and  critical  i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p to  the o r g a n i s a t i o n of a p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e l a b o r a t o r y course. experimental  An  course, i n which the students were g i v e n  o p p o r t u n i t i e s to analyse problems, c o l l e c t and organise data, t e s t hypotheses, introduced.  and  to draw c o n c l u s i o n s from data,  T h i s experimental group of students was  with a c o n t r o l group which followed a t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y course  format.  was compared  survey  A s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between  - 18 the groups' c r i t i c a l C r i t i c a l Thinking, group.  thinking a b i l i t y ,  and the ACE Test o f  was found which favoured the experimental  R i c k e r t concluded that a p h y s i c a l science  course can improve students' the l a b o r a t o r y critical  ability  course provides  laboratory  to t h i n k c r i t i c a l l y i f  them with o p p o r t u n i t i e s  to use  t h i n k i n g and problem s o l v i n g methods.  Tamir and Glassman (1971) compared BSCS and non-BSCS students'  performance on an i n q u i r y - o r i e n t e d performance  laboratory  test.  They found that the BSCS students d i d  s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r , due mainly to s u p e r i o r i t y i n reasoning and  self reliance.  The r e s e a r c h e r s  concluded that BSCS  students had a d i s t i n c t advantage i n s o l v i n g open-ended problems using experimental procedures i n the l a b o r a t o r y . S i m i l a r r e s u l t s were obtained  two years e a r l i e r by Edgar  (1969) . Campbell developing  (1978) evaluated  materials  course.  s t a t e s were i n v o l v e d .  significant  model f o r  and i n s t r u c t i n g the l a b o r a t o r y p o r t i o n of  a beginning c o l l e g e p h y s i c s different  a Piagetian-based  Students (N=55) i n two  Although there were no  improvements i n l e a r n i n g p h y s i c s  content,  there  was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the use of more f o r m a l i s t i c reasoning  abilities  f o r the students.  c y c l e " model i n v o l v e d activities:  three  "learning  separate but i n t e r r e l a t e d  e x p l o r a t i o n , concept i n v e n t i o n , and concept  a p p l i c a t i o n with 10 " l a b o r a t o r y The  Campbell's  above s t u d i e s do provide  intervention  periods".  some support f o r the idea  that  - 19 laboratory a c t i v i t i e s  that d i f f e r  v e r i f i c a t i o n - t y p e can be used  from  the  traditional  to help students l e a r n to t h i n k  critically.  2.1.4  Understanding Science  the Nature  The m a j o r i t y of r e s e a r c h e r s who understanding of s c i e n c e and  and Processes of measured students'  s c i e n c e processes used a  d i s c o v e r y or i n q u i r y l a b o r a t o r y approach method.  Researchers  experimental  allowed students a f a i r degree  freedom i n s e l e c t i n g a problem research.  as t h e i r  In t h i s way  and  of  in analysing their  they b e l i e v e d  own  that a student would g a i n  a g r e a t e r understanding of the s c i e n c e process as the students would be d i r e c t l y exposed to the f r u s t r a t i o n s and in developing h i s / h e r own Raghubir approach  difficulties  experimental d e s i g n .  (1979) compared a " l a b o r a t o r y - i n v e s t i g a t i v e "  to the t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y approach  the i n v e s t i g a t i v e approach  and  provided students with  found  that  the  o p p o r t u n i t y to develop the s t r a t e g i e s and a t t i t u d e s a s s o c i a t e d with s c i e n t i f i c  investigation.  Raghubir  concludes h i s study  by s t a t i n g e m p h a t i c a l l y t h a t , "... c o n v e n t i o n a l l y taught s c i e n c e courses are, t y p i c a l l y , sense  that they provide the student with very  opportunity for s e l f - i n i t i a t e d (p.  instructor-centred,  and  little  self-directed  study"  16). S i m i l a r l y , Boohar (1975) developed  a l a b o r a t o r y program  that allowed f o r s t u d e n t - d i r e c t e d a c t i v i t i e s . that  i n the  initially  Boohar found  students were f r u s t r a t e d by the l a c k of  - 20  -  d i r e c t i o n but  that u l t i m a t e l y , having completed  inquiry-based  activity,  the students f e l t  that they had  understanding of the processes of s c i e n c e . unfortunately  d i d not  instrument described conclusions  Stekel's (1979) and of two  science:  in the r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e .  Boohar (1975).  random  f i n d i n g s of Raghubir  S t e k e l compared the  effectiveness  l a b o r a t o r y programs in c o l l e g e p h y s i c a l  a t r a d i t i o n a l program with a l a b o r a t o r y manual and  students s e l e c t e d  t h e i r own  t o p i c , designed t h e i r own experiment.  procedures, and  Serlin  completed  of  the  (p <.01),  scientists. l a b o r a t o r y in  In h i s terms, such a l a b o r a t o r y would  emphasize h y p o t h e s i z i n g , than f a c t - g a t h e r i n g three  and  experimenting, and  inferring  principle verification.  criteria  f o r the d i s c o v e r y  l e a r n e r , (b) guidance be provided and  laboratory:  use  as a d i s c o v e r y  activity  experimental groups and  one  (a)  the  of advance  (c) f u r t h e r guidance be provided  the nature of science Two  by the  rather  Serlin  a c t i v i t i e s be matched to the developmental stage of  organisers,  an  understanding of  (1977) a l s o t a l k e d about a d i s c o v e r y  college physics.  established  general  S t e k e l found a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e  operations  a  In the open-ended approach  problems r e l a t e d to a  the open-ended group, on  a c t i o n s and  students.  his  students.  more f l e x i b l e , open-ended program.  favouring  any  Instead,  s u b j e c t i v e f i n d i n g s and  (1970) work supports the  different  an  Boohar,  conduct an e m p i r i c a l study using  are based on  v e r b a l i z a t i o n s by  an  for  by  describing  the  c o n t r o l group were  - 21 involved. science  -  Students were provided  problem s o l v i n g , and  standards of e v a l u a t i o n . covariate, Serlin effective  p r a c t i c e in the process of  i n s e t t i n g up and  With v e r b a l SAT  scores  found that the d i s c o v e r y  in i n c r e a s i n g students'  science  providing used as a  laboratory  was  process s k i l l s  (p =  0.05) . A few  studies  t r a d i t i o n a l and  i n d i c a t e d no  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between  alternative laboratory  forms on measures of  student understanding of the nature and  process of  science.  For example, Cannon (1975) i n a study that i s very  s i m i l a r to  Stekel's  Inventory  (1970), used the Welch Process of Science  to measure student understanding of the process of Unlike Stekel there was  (who  used the same instrument),  Cannon found  no d i f f e r e n c e between l a b o r a t o r y groups with  to understanding the process of  student understanding of the nature and be enhanced by a l l o w i n g  the recent  t h e i r own  respect  science.  In summary there are c o n t r a s t i n g opinions  directing  science.  as to whether  process of science  can  that student a degree of freedom i n  work.  Yet, of the nine s t u d i e s  found in  l i t e r a t u r e , seven i n d i c a t e d that the a l t e r n a t i v e  l a b o r a t o r y method was  s u p e r i o r when contrasted  with  the  t r a d i t i o n a l method.  2.2  Measurement of Laboratory Research Study Outcomes No  matter what the d e s i r e d outcomes of  i n s t r u c t i o n are,  increased  a t t i t u d e toward s c i e n c e ,  achievement, more  increase  in c r i t i c a l  laboratory favourable thinking  skills  - 22 or  i n c r e a s e i n the understanding  of the nature and process of  s c i e n c e , measures must be taken to v e r i f y whether the outcomes have been achieved. Outcomes of l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t i o n measured with paper  and p e n c i l  i n science have been  t e s t s , with l a b o r a t o r y s k i l l  examinations, with the use of c h e c k l i s t s and r a t i n g  scales,  with classroom o b s e r v a t i o n a l instruments f o c u s s i n g on v e r b a l or  non-verbal  i n t e r a c t i o n , or some combination  of these.  If  the g o a l s are to be achieved the r e s e a r c h e r needs to make c e r t a i n that the measure used  i s s u f f i c i e n t l y s e n s i t i v e to  d e t e c t any changes that occur between the beginning and end o f the  treatment. In many s t u d i e s , i n v e s t i g a t o r - d e s i g n e d t e s t s or other  instruments are used.  Frequently i n f o r m a t i o n about  r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y , as w e l l as the methods used to o b t a i n these measures, i s sketchy.  Even more f r e q u e n t l y an  e x p l a n a t i o n of the t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e underlying the instrument  i s not presented.  seldom found  These types of i n f o r m a t i o n are  i n the a b s t r a c t of a d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n ;  f r e q u e n t l y are not provided i n j o u r n a l a r t i c l e s based  and  on the  d i s s e r t a t i o n research. Welch (1971) noted i n s t r u c t i o n a l procedures  that 30 r e s e a r c h r e p o r t s concerning (including  laboratory instruction)  made no connection between the i n s t r u c t i o n a l procedure t e s t chosen  to measure the e f f e c t .  c o n s i d e r i n g Tamir's  (1972) statement  and the  This i s important when that the l a b o r a t o r y i n  - 23 s c i e n c e education  i s not only a unique mode of i n s t r u c t i o n but  a l s o a unique mode of assessment. to develop  Therefore  s e n s i t i v e e v a l u a t i o n instruments  i t is desirable that w i l l  provide  i n f o r m a t i o n about what the student does i n the l a b o r a t o r y and about h i s / h e r growth and a b i l i t y  to develop  i n q u i r y and other  related laboratory s k i l l s . The  e f f e c t s of science l a b o r a t o r y experiences on  achievement have normally investigator-designed such as the Nelson  been measured by the use of an  t e s t or by the use of a well-known t e s t  Biology test,  to c i t e only one example.  Science teaching t r a d i t i o n a l l y has emphasized the l e a r n i n g of scientific  ' i n f o r m a t i o n ' , concepts, p r i n c i p l e s , and f a c t s ,  with l i t t l e  emphasis on the development of problem-solving  skills,  and t h i s o r i e n t a t i o n  instruments ability  that were used.  to i d e n t i f y or r e c a l l  i s reflected  i n many of the t e s t  Tests o f t e n emphasized  student  f a c t s at r e l a t i v e l y low  taxonomic l e v e l s but seldom have assessed development of higher l e v e l s k i l l s  that i n v o l v e a p p l i c a t i o n ,  analysis,  s y n t h e s i s and e v a l u a t i o n (Bloom, 1956).  2.2.1  Watson-Glaser C r i t i c a l A p p r a i s a l (WGTCA)  According  Thinking  to i n f o r m a t i o n i n the Mental  Yearbook (1959),  Measurements  the s u b - t e s t s of t h i s instrument  to evaluate the a b i l i t y  are designed  to i n t e r p r e t data, to draw c o r r e c t  i n f e r e n c e s , to draw a p p r o p r i a t e deductions, assumptions, and to evaluate arguments.  to r e c o g n i s e  Such mental  operations  can be accomplished  not unique to s c i e n c e . 1961) with  has l i t t l e  i n many context  that a r e  Indeed, the WGCTA (Watson & G l a s e r ,  to do with  science  l a b o r a t o r y work i n p a r t i c u l a r .  constructed  areas  teaching  i n general o r  The instrument was  and v a l i d a t e d f o r use i n the s o c i a l sciences and  i s concerned with  s o c i a l and h i s t o r i c a l phenomena.  While one  can argue that t r a n s f e r of l e a r n i n g i s a d e s i r a b l e outcome o f i n s t r u c t i o n , the d i f f e r e n c e between science experience  and h i s t o r i c a l  laboratory  and s o c i a l events i s very l a r g e .  Seven i n v e s t i g a t o r s used the WGCTA t e s t related  to the s c i e n c e l a b o r a t o r y .  in their  research  Three (Hoff, 1970;  Rogers, 1972; Sorensen, 1966) reported  that students  involved  i n t h e i r treatment groups (an a l t e r n a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y approach) made s i g n i f i c a n t gains and  above those  in their c r i t i c a l  over  i n v o l v e d i n the c o n t r o l groups who pursued a  t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y approach. Dawson, 1975;  t h i n k i n g scores  Four ( A l l i s o n , 1973;  M i t c h e l l , 1978; Sherman, 1969) reported no  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the a l t e r n a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y groups and the t r a d i t i o n a l group on measure of reasoning ability.  2.2.2  Test on Understanding  Science  A second, f r e q u e n t l y used, instrument Understanding Science (1963).  i s the Test on  (TOUS), developed by Cooley and K l o p f e r  Form W of TOUS i s a f o u r - a l t e r n a t i v e s i x t y  m u l t i p l e choice subscales:  test.  The items are c a t e g o r i z e d  item  i n t o three  - 25 Subscale I.  -  Understanding about the enterprise  Subscale I I .  The  (18  The  TOUS was  items)  scientist  Subscale I I I . Methods and  scientific  (18  items)  aims of science  developed as a research  tool.  (24  items)  I t s content  v a l i d a t i o n r e s t s upon an a n a l y s i s of s c i e n t i s t s at work and upon a d i v e r s e l i t e r a t u r e of  i n c l u d i n g the h i s t o r y and  science. C r i t i c i s m s of TOUS have emerged.  suggested that form W might be stronger  v a l i d i t y evidence.  specific.  He  improved  Wheeler  Aikenhead  through r e v i s i o n and  (1968) has  t e s t as concerning  t h e i r a p p r e c i a t i o n or l a c k of  for science  and  scientists.  four d i s s e r t a t i o n s t u d i e s  three  Smith, 1971) involved  perceive  Some items, to a s c i e n t i s t s '  image.  In the reported,  negative  i . e . , students  Aikenhead r e p o r t s , are answered according 'good guy'  been more  (1973) suggests that some  items evoke a response of a t t i t u d e ;  appreciation  Welch (1969) has  s t a t e s that too many items embrace a  viewpoint of s c i e n c e .  the  philosophy  researchers  reported  (Baxter,  in which use 1969;  Sherman,  was  1969;  no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between groups  in a l t e r n a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y work and  t r a d i t i o n a l groups.  of TOUS  The  f o u r t h reported  the experimental group (a r e v i s e d general course i n p h y s i c a l science)  exhibited  those i n the  that the  students in  education  laboratory  s i g n i f i c a n t gains  in  TOUS s c o r e s , even when d i f f e r e n c e s i n a b i l i t y , s c h o l a s t i c achievement, background knowledge, or s k i l l were covaried  out  - 26 of  the a n a l y s i s , and concluded  that the l a b o r a t o r y e x e r c i s e s  had made an important c o n t r i b u t i o n to student knowledge as tested by the TOUS instrument  2.2.3  (Whitten, 1971).  Welch Science Process Inventory (SPI)  Wayne Welch and M i l t o n 0. P e l l a reliable  and useable  science.  a valid,  instrument to i n v e n t o r y the knowledge of  the process of s c i e n c e . pertaining  (1968) developed  T h i s instrument c o n s i s t s o f 135  items  to assumptions, a c t i v i t i e s , products and e t h i c s of V a l i d i t y was e s t a b l i s h e d by determining the  instrument d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power between students, s c i e n c e t e a c h e r s , and s c i e n t i s t s . Kuder-Richardson  R e l i a b i l i t y was measured by  formula 20.  The authors concluded  t e s t measures the understanding high school students, t h e i r  that the  of the process of s c i e n c e by  t e a c h e r s , as w e l l as p r o f e s s i o n a l  scientists. Douglas Magnus (1973) and Edward Lucy (1972) conducted experiments comparing the s e l f - d i r e c t e d the c o n v e n t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y .  In both cases the SPI instrument  was used to measure the understanding science.  l a b o r a t o r y s t u d i e s to  Lucy found a s i g n i f i c a n t  of the process of  improvement i n the  independent l a b o r a t o r y s t u d e n t s ' understanding of the process of  science.  The Magnus study r e v e a l e d no d i f f e r e n c e between  the experimental and c o n t r o l groups i n the understanding of the process of s c i e n c e . J u d i t h Damewood (1971) evaluated student competence i n the process of s c i e n c e i n a p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e course f o r  - 27 p r o s p e c t i v e elementary who  teachers.  were f r e e to choose t h e i r own  I t was  found  that students  laboratory exercise  performed at a higher l e v e l on the SPI than the student using the p r e s c r i b e d , content-based  laboratory exercises.  In a s i m i l a r study, but with students of p h y s i c s , Spears and  Zollman  (1977) focussed on the use of l a b o r a t o r i e s  intended to provide students with experiences i n understanding of s c i e n c e .  that would a i d  the process of s c i e n c e as w e l l as the  content  Students were placed i n e i t h e r a s t r u c t u r e d ,  t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y s i t u a t i o n or i n an u n s t r u c t u r e d , open-ended one.  The SPI  instrument was  given both as a  p r e - t e s t during the f i r s t week of the semester, and as a p o s t - t e s t , during the l a s t week. grade,  and  lecture  data a n a l y s i s . found  Pre-test scores, laboratory  i n s t r u c t o r were used as c o v a r i a t e s i n the  When scores were analysed, no d i f f e r e n c e s were  f o r the components of the SPI:  outcome, e t h i c s and  goals.  assumptions, nature of  S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s d i d occur  i n the f o u r t h component, a c t i v i t i e s , with students structured Zollman  l a b o r a t o r y s c o r i n g higher i n t h i s area.  conclude  by s t a t i n g  t h a t , "Unstructured  can provide u s e f u l experience experience  the s c i e n t i f i c p r o c e s s . . . "  ... and  Spears  and  laboratories  f o r students having  i n s c i e n t i f i c experimentation  i n the  prior t r a i n i n g in  (p.37).  F i n a l l y , of the four d i s s e r t a t i o n s t u d i e s i n which use of the SPI 1975)  instrument was  r e p o r t e d , two  (Cannon, 1975;  Dawson,  reported f i n d i n g s of no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e and  (Smith, 1972;  S t e k e l , 1970)  reported s t a t i s t i c a l l y  two  significant  - 28 increases  i n the understanding of the process of science by  the a l t e r n a t e l a b o r a t o r y group over the t r a d i t i o n a l  laboratory  group.  2.3  Summary The  review of l i t e r a t u r e  i n d i c a t e s many s t u d i e s  dealing  with comparisons between the t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y method and some a l t e r n a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y method. t r a d i t i o n a l method may be d e s c r i b e d verification  as i n v o l v i n g students i n  l a b o r a t o r i e s that are q u i t e s t r u c t u r e d ,  students l i t t l e complexities  In the main, the  opportunity  to explore  of the s c i e n t i f i c process.  allowing  f o r themselves the The a l t e r n a t i v e  l a b o r a t o r y methods examined i n t h i s review come under a v a r i e t y of names given based' e x e r c i s e s ,  them by t h e i r researchers  - 'inquiry-  'open-ended' l a b o r a t o r i e s , ' i n v e s t i g a t i v e '  procedures, ' i n d u c t i v e ' e x e r c i s e s , and the 'discovery' approach.  A l l of these methods tend to emphasize  involvement i n problem-creation, design  and i n f e r r i n g  rather  hypothesizing,  than f a c t - g a t h e r i n g  student  experimental and p r i n c i p l e  verification. As  a means of e n c a p s u l a t i n g  the v a r i e t y of s t u d i e s  examined i n t h i s review, four t a b l e s have been compiled which r e v e a l the e s s e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the s t u d i e s . table  i s categorized  measured by  according  to the dependent v a r i a b l e  researchers.  These t a b l e s i n d i c a t e that i n a l l of the s t u d i e s (except  Each  that done by Spears and Zollman  (1977)) the  surveyed  - 29 alternative  l a b o r a t o r y method was f o u n d t o be e i t h e r  superior  t o o r t h e same as t h e t r a d i t i o n a l method o f l a b o r a t o r y p r o c e d u r e on t h e v a r i o u s m e a s u r e s e x a m i n e d by t h e However  t h e number o f s t u d i e s  t h a t showed no  d i f f e r e n c e between the methods c o u p l e d of the  inappropriate  instruments  need f o r f u r t h e r  with  researchers.  significant the r e s e a r c h e r  t o measure v a r i a b l e s , i n d i c a t e  research.  use  TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF STUDIES COMPARING THE TRADITIONAL LABORATORY METHOD TO AN ALTERNATE LABORATORY METHOD ON MEASURES OF ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT  Researcher  A l t e r n a t e Laboratory Type __  Instrument Used  Results No Significant Significant Gain i n Difference Scores on Alternate Lab. Type  Egelston  Inductive  Significant Gain i n Scores on Traditional Lab. Type  ResearcherConstructed Tests O  Bock  Inquiry-Investigative  Knowledge and Application Subtests from BSCS  Tanner  Inductive  ResearcherConstructed Test  Pare &  Independent study  Nelson Biology Test  x  TABLE 2 - SUMMARY OF STUDIES COMPARING THE TRADITIONAL LABORATORY METHOD TO AN ALTERNATE LABORATORY METHOD ON MEASURES OF ENHANCED STUDENT INTEREST IN LABORATORY COURSE OF STUDY  Researcher  Alternate Laboratory Type  Instrument Used  Results No Significant Difference  M o l l and Allen  Inquiry  Researcher Constructed Test  Allison  Inquiry  Researcher Designed Questionnaire  P a r e and Butzow  Independent Study  Student Verbalizations  Significant Gain i n S c o r e s on Alternate L a b . Type  Significant Gain i n S c o r e s on Traditional L a b . Type  TABLE 3 - SUMMARY OF STUDIES COMPARING THE TRADITIONAL LABORATORY METHOD TO AN ALTERNATE LABORATORY METHOD ON MEASURES OF CRITICAL THINKING AND REASONING ABILITIES Researcher  A l t e r n a t e Laboratory Type  Results  Instrument Used  No Significant Significant Gain i n Difference Scores on Alternate Lab . Type Allison  Inquiry  WGCTA  Pavelich and  G Inquiry  Piagetian-Type Paper and P e n c i l Test  Inquiry  ACE Test of Critical Thinking  Tamir and Glassman  BSCS vs non-BSCS  BSCS Inquiry Test  Campbell  'LearningCycle Model  ResearcherConstructed  Hoff  Inquiry  WGCTA  x  Rogers  Discovery  WGCTA  x  Sorensen  Open-ended  WGCTA  X  Dawson  Discovery  WGCTA  Mitchell  Discovery  WGCTA  Sherman  Inquiry  WGCTA  Abraham Rickert  1  Test  Significant Gain i n Scores on Traditional Lab . Type  TABLE 4 - SUMMARY OF STUDIES COMPARING THE TRADITIONAL LABORATORY METHOD TO AN ALTERNATE LABORATORY METHOD ON MEASURE OF STUDENT UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE AND PROCESS OF SCIENCE Researcher  A l t e r n a t e Laboratory TYpe  Instrument Used  Results No Significant Significant Significant Gain i n Gain i n Difference Scores on Scores on Alternate Traditional Lab. Type Lab. Type  Raghubir  Investigative  Subjective Student Responses  Boohar  StudentDirected  Subjective Student Responses  Stekel  Open-ended  SPI  x  Serlin  Discovery  Subjective Student Responses  X  Cannon  Discovery  SPI  x  Dawson  Discovery  Subjective Student Responses  x  Baxter  Investigative  TOUS  x  Sherman  StudentDirected  TOUS  x  Smith  Investigative  TOUS  TABLE 4 - SUMMARY OF STUDIES COMPARING THE TRADITIONAL LABORATORY METHOD TO AN ALTERNATE LABORATORY METHOD ON MEASURE OF STUDENT UNDERSTANDING Continued OF THE NATURE AND PROCESS OF SCIENCE Researcher  A l t e r n a t e Laboratory Type  Instrument Used  Results No Significant Difference  Whitten  ResearcherRevised Lab. Course  TOUS  Magnus  SelfDirected  SPI  Lucy  SelfDirected  SPI  Damewood  SelfDirected  SPI  Spears and Zollman  Open-ended  SPI  Smith  Discovery  SPI  Significant Gain i n Scores on Alternate Lab. Type  Significant Gain i n Scores on Traditional Lab. Type  x (4th comp. only)  - 35 CHAPTER 3  METHOD OF STUDY  3.0  INTRODUCTION A nonequivalent  c o n t r o l group design  S t a n l e y , 1963, pp. 47-50) was used to t e s t  (Campbell and the hypothesis of  no d i f f e r e n c e between the means of the t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y method and the i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d l a b o r a t o r y method on the dependent v a r i a b l e c o n s i d e r e d . components of t h i s d e s i g n ,  In what f o l l o w s , the  i n c l u d i n g d e s c r i p t i o n of the  s u b j e c t s , s e l e c t i o n of the s u b j e c t s , teaching methods, design of the study, are  3.1  i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n , data p r e s e n t a t i o n and analyses  described.  Population 3.1.1  Description  The s u b j e c t s i n t h i s study were grade 12 students enrolled  i n B i o l o g y twelve  at a Senior Secondary School, i n  D i s t r i c t #38, Richmond during the 1982-83 school The Senior Secondary School grades,  e n r o l l s students  11 and 12 and at the time of t h i s study  approximately  1,000 students  i n the g e o g r a p h i c a l  enrolled.  considered  i n two  there were  The school i s l o c a t e d  centre of Richmond and the students  from middle c l a s s or lower middle c l a s s Students  season.  of the B i o l o g y 12 course  come  families. are g e n e r a l l y  "academic" i n that a m a j o r i t y of the students have  - 36 a s p i r a t i o n s to continue t h e i r education at a post-secondary level.  3.1.2  S e l e c t i o n of the Subjects  Two c l a s s e s of B i o l o g y 12, taught by the author, p a r t i n t h i s study.  took  One c l a s s , c o n s i s t i n g o f 21 s u b j e c t s ,  were from the author's b l o c k B c l a s s and the other b l o c k C, c o n s i s t e d o f 20 s t u d e n t s .  class,  Block B became the c o n t r o l  group as these students were exposed to the t r a d i t i o n a l method of l a b o r a t o r y procedures course.  from l a b o r a t o r y texts issued f o r the  B l o c k C students were the experimental group that  were r e q u i r e d to be exposed to the author's i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d l a b o r a t o r y method. Although a r e l a t i v e l y small number of s u b j e c t s took p a r t i n t h i s study, the minimum requirement laid  down by Borg and G a l l Campbell  of 30 i n d i v i d u a l s  (1979, p.195) was exceeded.  and S t a n l e y (1963) p o i n t out that the use of  n a t u r a l l y formed c l a s s e s i n experiments procedure  i s an a c c e p t a b l e  i n the s o c i a l s c i e n c e s when random assignment  s u b j e c t s to treatment  i s not p o s s i b l e .  t h i s study where students were a l l o c a t e d a non-random f a s h i o n .  of  Such i s the case i n to s p e c i f i c blocks i n  One could not assume randomness as  c e r t a i n students were assigned to s p e c i f i c blocks by school c o u n s e l l o r s i n accordance program r e q u e s t s .  with the s t u d e n t s ' p a r t i c u l a r  - 37 -  The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the two B i o l o g y 12 c l a s s e s are outlined  below:  TABLE 5  CHARACTERISTICS OF CLASSES  Class  Size  Male  Female  Block B ( c o n t r o l )  21  7  14  Block C  20  8  12  The author who p a r t i c i p a t e d c l a s s e s had taught p r i o r to the study.  as the teacher f o r both  s e n i o r high school b i o l o g y f o r s i x years P r i o r to t h i s , he taught s c i e n c e i n a  j u n i o r high school f o r two y e a r s . The author, at the time of t h i s study, was 30 years of age.  - 38 3.2  Research The  r e s e a r c h design used  nonequivalent 1963,  Design i n t h i s study was the  c o n t r o l - g r o u p design  (Campbell  pp. 47-50) where an experimental  and S t a n l e y ,  and c o n t r o l group are  both given a p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t , but i n which the groups do not have pre-experimental  equivalence.  The design i s  represented by the f o l l o w i n g diagram: _ 0 _ X _ 0 _ 0 0 where 0 r e p r e s e n t s p r e t e s t or p o s t t e s t measurement of the dependent v a r i a b l e , understanding  of the process of s c i e n c e ;  and X r e p r e s e n t s the experimental  treatment.  As a r e s u l t of the f a c t that students were assigned by school c o u n s e l l o r s to e i t h e r the c o n t r o l or experimental groups,  i t may not be assumed that experimental  randomly s e l e c t e d .  s u b j e c t s were  Thus, t h i s r e s e a r c h design i s  quasi-experimental as opposed to t r u e - e x p e r i m e n t a l .  The main  d i f f i c u l t y with non-random assignment i s that the experimental and  c o n t r o l groups may d i f f e r  confounding  i n some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ,  the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the experiment.  these i n i t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s between treatment  groups,  thus  To l e s s e n with  r e s p e c t to p r i o r achievement, an a n a l y s i s of covariance (ANCOVA) was used  as a s t a t i s t i c a l  In the nonequivalent  technique.  c o n t r o l - g r o u p d e s i g n , there i s some  t h r e a t to i n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y a r i s i n g  from  i n t e r a c t i o n between  such v a r i a b l e s as s e l e c t i o n and maturation, h i s t o r y , or s e l e c t i o n and t e s t i n g .  s e l e c t i o n and  In the absence of  - 39 randomization, the p o s s i b i l i t y  always e x i s t s that some  c r i t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e , not r e f l e c t e d o p e r a t i n g to contaminate  i n the p r e t e s t , i s  the p o s t t e s t data.  An a n a l y s i s of  c o v a r i a n c e mathematically c o n s i d e r s some of these p o s s i b i l i t i e s and w i l l  i n d i c a t e the importance  of such  interactions. The  nonequivalent c o n t r o l group design has some  p r a c t i c a l advantages over the true experimental c o n t r o l - g r o u p design.  T h i s i s due, i n p a r t , to the f a c t that the former  design d e a l s with i n t a c t c l a s s e s and does not d i s r u p t the s c h o o l ' s program.  3.3  E v a l u a t i o n Instrument The Welch Science Process Inventory (SPI) was used i n  t h i s study to determine  i f there were changes i n the students'  understanding of the process o f s c i e n c e . developed  by Wayne W. Welch ( 1 9 6 8 ) and i s a v a i l a b l e  author f o r r e s e a r c h purposes The  student was asked  from the  only.  t e s t c o n s i s t s o f 135 statements  a c t i v i t i e s , assumptions,  concerning  products and e t h i c s of s c i e n c e .  The  to agree or d i s a g r e e with each of the  statements.  The response  key designed  f o r the instrument.  The  T h i s instrument was  of the students was scored using a  r e l i a b i l i t y of Form D, as measured by the Kuder-  Richardson Formula  2 0 , i s 0.86 based  on a sample o f 171  students (mean score and standard d e v i a t i o n of 103.78 and 13.10 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) .  These students were drawn randomly  from  - 40 a p o p u l a t i o n of 2,500 s e n i o r high school students d i f f e r e n t high schools throughout test's r e l i a b i l i t y students and  the United S t a t e s .  c o l l e g e graduates  The  measured with r e s p e c t to s e n i o r high  i t has been s u c c e s s f u l l y used with  c o l l e g e students  Content  was  i n 50  (Magnus, 1973)  undergraduate  and by the t e s t ' s author  on  (Welch and Walberg, 1968).  v a l i d i t y was  e s t a b l i s h e d by 14 r e s e a r c h  s c i e n t i s t s agreeing to the a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s of the items to sample the "universe of s i t u a t i o n s " . of  those  The  test consists only  items where at l e a s t 75 percent of the  agreed with the keyed response c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y was  to each item.  determined  scientists  The  instruments*  by i n v e s t i g a t i n g  the  d i r e c t i o n of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n among students, s c i e n t i s t s , science teachers. and Massachusetts  Nineteen  scientists  from Harvard  I n s t i t u t e of Technology,  16  and  University  experienced  s c i e n c e t e a c h e r s , e n r o l l e d at the U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin 1,286  students were given the i n v e n t o r y .  a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e , i t was  found  students s i g n i f i c a n t l y  Through a one-way  that the  d i s c r i m i n a t e d by s c o r i n g the s c i e n t i s t s  and  instrument  the highest  and  lower.  The Welch Science Process Inventory was  developed  the auspices of the S c i e n t i f i c L i t e r a c y Research  under  Center at the  U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin.  3.4  Procedural D e t a i l s Students  i n v o l v e d i n t h i s study were exposed to  during the p e r i o d between January  4, 1983,  treatment  and March 25,  1983.  - 41 P r i o r to t h i s time, l e t t e r s of consent were obtained f o r the 41 s u b j e c t s of t h i s study from the students' themselves and t h e i r parents  (see Appendix A ) .  Following r e c e i p t of consent,  a random s e l e c t i o n was made of the group to represent c o n t r o l and  the group to r e p r e s e n t the e x p e r i m e n t a l .  The a c t i v i t i e s  of the c o n t r o l group (Block B) and the experimental (Block C) w i l l  be considered i n turn beginning  a c t i v i t i e s of the c o n t r o l group. of events found  group  f i r s t with the  (A c h r o n o l o g i c a l t i m e t a b l e  that summarize when a c t i v i t i e s  took p l a c e may be  i n Appendix B.)  3.4.1  C o n t r o l Group A c t i v i t i e s  To e s t a b l i s h base scores on the understanding  of the  process of s c i e n c e , the e v a l u a t i o n instrument, the SPI, was administered  to the c o n t r o l group as a p r e t e s t during the  f i r s t week of the study.  The SPI was e a s i l y  r e q u i r i n g no s p e c i a l d i r e c t i o n s .  Subjects were merely  to express agreement or disagreement statements  of the Inventory.  took 45 minutes,  administered, asked  with each of the  A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the instrument  and was thus completed  during one c l a s s  period. F o l l o w i n g the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the SPI instrument, the students i n the c o n t r o l group followed a t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y program using assigned e x e r c i s e s from two l a b o r a t o r y manuals ( I n v e s t i g a t i o n s of C e l l s and Organisms by P. Abramoff and R. Thomson, and A Student B i o l o g i c a l Science by W. Mayer.  Laboratory Guide -  T h i s program together with  - 42 l a b o r a t o r y manuals have been i n use i n the B i o l o g y 12 course f o r s e v e r a l years preceding t h i s study. i n groups of two, completed period.  The students, working  each e x e r c i s e l a b o r a t o r y i n one  A d e s c r i p t i o n of these e x e r c i s e s may be found i n  Appendix C.  These e x e r c i s e s were chosen  by the i n s t r u c t o r so  as to c o r r e l a t e with t h e o r e t i c a l l e c t u r e m a t e r i a l being d e a l t with i n c l a s s .  Such l e c t u r e m a t e r i a l was i d e n t i c a l  g i v e n to the experimental In the seven c o n t r o l group,  to t h a t  groups.  l a b o r a t o r y e x e r c i s e s undertaken  by the  the experimental procedures, data format and  a n a l y s i s procedure  are s p e c i f i e d  l a b o r a t o r y manuals.  f o r the students i n the  Thus, the c o n t r o l group were subjected to  a h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d , convergent  type of l a b o r a t o r y . The  f u n c t i o n of the i n s t r u c t o r d u r i n g t h i s l a b o r a t o r y time was to facilitate  the smooth o p e r a t i o n of those procedures  i n the l a b o r a t o r y manual.  S t r i c t observance  outlined  of the manual  procedures was f o l l o w e d so as not to p r e j u d i c e student o p i n i o n by the o f f e r i n g of the i n s t r u c t o r ' s v i e w p o i n t s . A p o s t t e s t was administered on the l a s t day of the study and  the r e s u l t s of t h i s examination  were used  to determine the  change ( i f any) i n s t u d e n t s ' understanding of the process o f science.  3.4.2  Experimental Group A c t i v i t i e s  Pre and p o s t t e s t i n g using the SPI was accomplished same f a s h i o n and at the same time i n the c o n t r o l  group.  i n the  i n the experimental group as  -  43  -  P r i o r to student l a b o r a t o r y work, the students experimental group were i n s t r u c t e d scientific  i n the rudiments  method of i n v e s t i g a t i o n .  During  this  i n the of the  instruction,  the students were presented with an example of the a p p l i c a t i o n of  the s c i e n t i f i c  method  (see Appendix D).  T h i s example,  together with a model of the process of s c i e n t i f i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n , was used  to b r i n g out the f o l l o w i n g s a l i e n t  p o i n t s concerning the experimental (a)  To observe  scientific  approach:  i s not j u s t to look, but to n o t i c e .  It  r e q u i r e s a f o c u s s i n g of a t t e n t i o n . (b)  C a r e f u l o b s e r v a t i o n s lead to i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , e x p l a n a t i o n s and p r e d i c t i o n s .  (c)  Q u a l i t a t i v e o b s e r v a t i o n s are d i s t i n g u i s h e d from quantitative observations. o b s e r v i n g , instruments  During  are used  quantitative  to extend  powers of  observation. (d)  The statement  of a problem must be p r e c i s e and  should not t r y to encompass too general a f i e l d . (e)  Hypotheses are based  on p r i o r o b s e r v a t i o n s or  research. (f)  Any number of schemes f o r the t e s t i n g of  hypotheses  may be d e v i s e d . (g)  In an experiment,  i t i s not only the hypothesis  which i s being questioned; experimenter (h)  the s k i l l  of the  i s a l s o under t e s t .  A data t a b l e must be r e a d i l y readable and d e p i c t all  q u a n t i t a t i v e measures taken.  -  (i)  44  -  Reporting r e s u l t s and d i s c u s s i n g shortcomings procedures original  During  leads to f i n a l  of  r e f l e c t i o n s on the  hypothesis.  the ensuing weeks f o l l o w i n g the p r e t e s t and  d i s c u s s i o n concerning the s c i e n t i f i c method of experimentation,  students i n the experimental group became  engaged i n l a b o r a t o r y procedures  following theoretical  l e c t u r e s on the process of s c i e n t i f i c laboratory a c t i v i t i e s allowed than  (outlined  to be more f l e x i b l e  i n the c o n t r o l group.  investigation.  i n Appendix E) students were  i n the design of t h e i r Before student  the students were presented with  In the  experiments  experimentation,  ' p r i o r knowledge', which was  not g i v e n i n c l a s s l e c t u r e s which could be used by the students to r e f i n e t h e i r hypotheses clearly stated.  on problems which were  The problems themselves  were c a r e f u l l y  chosen  and worded so that a c o n c l u s i o n was not revealed or i m p l i e d . In each case d e f i n i t i v e  "answers" were not r e a d i l y o b t a i n a b l e  by the students e i t h e r from previous l e c t u r e s on s u b j e c t matter  or l i t e r a t u r e r e s e a r c h .  During  student engagement i n the process of  investigation,  the teacher acted as a general guide by asking  probing questions and o f f e r i n g c r i t i c i s m s of the students' designs and a n a l y s e s .  The teacher, however, d i d not " t e l l "  the student how to do the experiment these d e c i s i o n s were deemed  or what experiment  to do;  the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the student.  - 45 At the end of each l a b o r a t o r y , experimental group were r e q u i r e d for evaluation.  Each r e p o r t  statement of the problem,  the students i n the  to hand i n a w r i t t e n  included,  (a) a t i t l e ,  (c) f o r m u l a t i o n  (d) an o u t l i n e of experimental procedure, data,  ( f ) a n a l y s i s of data,  report (b) a  of the hypothesis, (e) c o l l e c t i o n of  (g) a d i s c u s s i o n , and (h) an  o v e r a l l conclusion.  The teacher  o u t l i n e and provided  minimal guidance, but the students were  required  3.5  this  to make a l l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and e v a l u a t i o n s .  A n a l y s i s Technique Following  raw  gave the students  scores  standard control  the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n  of the 41 s u b j e c t s were tabulated  deviation  and the mean  is),  (X) and range f o r pre and p o s t t e s t s of the  ( T ) and experimental 2  Using t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n , scores  of the p o s t t e s t of the SPI,  as these scores  (T-^) groups were c a l c u l a t e d .  a g r a p h i c a l a n a l y s i s was drawn up of deviated  from the means.  Data from composite t a b l e s of changes i n raw scores between pre and p o s t t e s t were used t o : (a)  present  a g r a p h i c a l a n a l y s i s comparing T^ changes  i n score (b)  provide  and T 2 changes i n score. a data base f o r the a n a l y s i s of covariance  (ANCOVA). An ANCOVA was performed so as to c o n t r o l f o r the e f f e c t s of students'  previous  knowledge of the s u b j e c t . A l l  computations were performed at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Research Computing Center using  the BMD03R program -  -  -  46  M u l t i p l e Regression with Case Combinations - Nov. 1972, Health S c i e n c e s Computing F a c i l i t y , UCLA. Initially,  an ANCOVA was performed  using  the f o l l o w i n g  o v e r a l l model: Y  i j  =$0  +  l  e  where  X  ±iJ.I  +  X  ij2  + g  Y^j i s p o s t t e s t (dependent  independent  3  X  ij3  +  e  rj  variable  ; i = 1,2...N; j = 1,2  (criterion  variable)  variable)  f^X^-^ i s a treatment v e c t o r (X-^)  variables  e  2 ij2 x  i  s  t  h  e  P  r e t  est  variable  ( X ) or the 2  covariate ^3 ij3  "'•  X  st  h  i  e  n t e r a  —  E  ction  variable  (Xg)= X-^X  2  i s the r e s i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e  [Yij - E ( Y ^ ) ]  To determine the importance of the c o v a r i a t e (X3),  F =  the f o l l o w i n g  \>i*l  interaction  t e s t was c a r r i e d out:  ~ R y.'* l" 2  R  2  d-R  2 y  .  / k  k  1 2 3  ) /n-3-1  m  u  where: R  2 y.l23  =  a  o  n  t  o  r  variance  i n Y due to a l i n e a r  combination of X-^, X  2  and X3.  2  R^.12  =  amount of variance  i n Y due to a l i n e a r  combination of X-^, and X . 2  k-^ , k n  2  = n-k-1 degrees of freedom = t o t a l number of s u b j e c t s  i n the two groups  - 47  The be  d e c i s i o n r u l e , i f >,^^i 27' F  H  F  o  conducted to t e s t the  =  R  "  Y.12  R  Y.2  (1-R .I )/ Y  Finally,  ma  Y  following  statistical  hypothesis,  level:  / : L  3 8  2  using  the adjusted  individual  regression  difference  discussed.  The  the  statistical  (S ! = 0 at the©C= 0.05  :  o  followed.  t e s t f o r treatment e f f e c t s ,  t e s t was  H  r  r e j e c t e d , was To  -  v a l i d i t y and  p o s t t e s t scores  (^) ^j a<  l i n e s f o r each group were drawn and  reliability  of the r e s u l t s of t h i s  are dependent, i n p a r t , upon the v a l i d i t y of the  the  study  following  assumptions: 1.  The  instrument employed  adequate v a l i d i t y  and  in t h i s study possesses  reliability  f o r the  purposes  f o r which they were employed. 2.  The  inherent  assumptions of a n a l y s i s of  covariance  such as homogeneity of r e g r e s s i o n were not s e r i o u s l y violated.  -  4 8  -  CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA AND RESEARCH FINDINGS  4.0  INTRODUCTION The  r e s u l t s of the analyses  are presented  i n t h i s chapter.  described  i n Chapter Three  These analyses  evaluate the  e f f e c t i v e n e s s of two methods of l a b o r a t o r y  instruction in  biological  traditional  science  - the h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d  l a b o r a t o r y method and the more f l e x i b l e  investigative-based  l a b o r a t o r y method.  4.1  D e s c r i p t i o n of Research Raw scores  may be found it  Findings  from the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n  i n Appendix F.  From the c a l c u l a t e d mean  i s apparent that p o s t t e s t scores  from p r e t e s t scores  of the SPI instrument  generally varied  values little  f o r the c o n t r o l group (a change o f 0 . 1 9 )  whereas a change of 2 . 9 5 i n the mean scores p o s t t e s t was recorded  between pre and  f o r the experimental group.  t h i s change i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y  Whether  s i g n i f i c a n t was determined  using  the ANCOVA model. A g r a p h i c a l a n a l y s i s of d e v i a t i o n s means may be found The  from the  i n Appendix G ( f i g u r e s 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 ) .  composite graph comparing changes from pre to  p o s t t e s t scores (To)  i n score  f o r the experimental  i s indicated  (Fig. 5 ) .  (T-^) and c o n t r o l groups  hHrf  P5=  -0-  LA_L_  -t~t-^  A  -t-r  1-1-  4-t-f-  -M-  A~  &0 -+e-  •A4-A-  - t - H -  t-r  A  A A^ -01  -fi>4 - I O > L .  8°  35  loo)  //,»  -+-  - 50 The s c a t t e r e d p o i n t s found on t h i s graph were f i t t e d least-square regression lines l a t e r  in this analysis.  Of  p a r t i c u l a r note are two data p o i n t s  ( T j - 125/110 and T  2  112/100) that markedly d e v i a t e from the general tendency of data p o i n t s . the  by  -  linear  These p o i n t s w i l l be seen to have  h i g h e s t r e s i d u a l e r r o r i n the estimated r e g r e s s i o n  lines  (-15.481 and -11.556 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) .  4.1.1 Raw  A n a l y s i s of Covariance (ANCOVA)  data scores f o r Y o f T  2  were given codes of 1 and  -1 r e s p e c t i v e l y , the data o u t l a y of which may 6  (Appendix H).  be seen on Table  These scores were then used to estimate the  o v e r a l l r e g r e s s i o n model on which  the ANCOVA was  based.  From the a n a l y s i s of the f u l l model the f o l l o w i n g  results  were o b t a i n e d : (a)  Ry.123  (b)  e ^ j are g e n e r a l l y low (range 23.64)  =  °«  8 9  Thus, extraneous v a r i a b l e s are seen to have a very low e f f e c t on the dependent variance  i n Y was  variable  due to f a c t o r s X-^t X  Using the t e s t s t a t i s t i c get  the r e s u l t : F = 0.8903 - 0.8893/1 (1-0.8903) /37 F =  0.34  (Y) .  Indeed 2  indicated  * 89% o f the  and X 3 . i n Chapter Three  we  - 51 since  F  > . 9 5 i , 3 7 then H  i s tenable and the  F  Q  reduced model may be adopted. the  Thus, there i s no d i f f e r e n c e i n  performance on the c r i t e r i o n measure due to i n t e r a c t i o n  between the treatment e f f e c t s and the c o v a r i a t e .  4.1.2  F-Test Ratio  Treatment e f f e c t s c a l c u l a t e d reduced model i n d i c a t e (a)  (b)  that:  covariate  effect constitutes  variation  i n Y scores.  treatment e f f e c t s variation  (c)  below i n Table 8 from the  residual variation  - 87% o f the t o t a l  constitute  - 2% o f the t o t a l  i n Y scores. effects constitute  - 11% o f the t o t a l  i n Y scores. TABLE 8 TREATMENT EFFECTS  Source o f V a r i a t i o n  Proportion of Variation  Covariate  (X )  R  Treatment  E f f e c t (X )  R  Residual  Degrees of Freedom 1  = 0.87  2  Y.l  Y.12- Y.2 R  (1-4.12  }  =  =  Total  0  0  '  '  0  1  2  X 1  38  1.00  Using the F- t e s t of s i g n i f i c a n c e Chapter 3: F = 0.8893 - 0.8720 (1-0.8893) /38 F = 5.97  s t a t i s t i c referred  to i n  - 52 Since  F > 95F-L 3c. then H  rejected. level,  Thus, there  Q  may be  i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e , at the .05  i n the performance on the c r i t e r i o n measure due to the  e f f e c t s of the treatment v a r i a b l e .  4.1.3  Graphical  Analysis  Regression l i n e s of T^ and T the o v e r a l l \l  estimated  = o b  ^  +  regression  X  + ±  j  l  b  2  data  2  can be drawn using  equation:-  ij2  X  TABLE 9 CALCULATIONS OF ESTIMATED POSTTEST SCORES Treatment  Y; (b + b ) + b X 19;*5 + 1.5) + (b - bi) + b X riQ.S - 1.5) + *  l  X  fl  T  1  T  1  Equations f o r T-L and  T  /N.  (T )  Y  x  Y  <T ) 2  l  =  2  2  2  1inear  .80X  2  + 21.0  = 0 .80X  2  + 18 .0  0  The  for T  1  = 21.0 and f o r T  2  lines  l i n e s represents  0.8 X? = 0.8 X?.  the e f f e c t  v a r i a b l e on the c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e . to be s i g n i f i c a n t at the <*<.05 l e v e l .  i s 0.8.  The  = 18.0 ( F i g . 6)  d i f f e r e n c e between the Y - i n t e r c e p t  regression  ?  =  2  variations are:  Thus, the slope of both r e g r e s s i o n Y-intercept  2  of the two  of the treatment  This d i f f e r e n c e was shown  - 54 CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  5.0  Introduction T h i s study o r i g i n a t e d from the author's d e s i r e to t e s t  empirically  the e f f e c t s of an author-designed i n v e s t i g a t i v e -  based l a b o r a t o r y program on student process  of s c i e n c e .  understanding of the  In response to d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n  contemporary l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s ,  with  there have been many  i n n o v a t i v e attempts to develop i n s t r u c t i o n a l  laboratory  a c t i v i t i e s which are more c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the nature of science.  However, at l e a s t  in biology,  the q u a n t i t a t i v e  e v a l u a t i o n of the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of these innovations the exception  r a t h e r than the r u l e .  So there now e x i s t s an  urgent need f o r both innovation of new l a b o r a t o r y and  e v a l u a t i o n of t h e i r  activities  instructional effectiveness.  T h i s study d e a l s with  the e v a l u a t i o n of the r e l a t i v e  e f f e c t i v e n e s s of a t r a d i t i o n a l flexible,  has been  l a b o r a t o r y program and a more  i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d l a b o r a t o r y program.  These  l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s were p a r t of a b i o l o g y 12 secondary school program at a Senior Secondary School months of the school year 1982/83. group, followed  during  One group, the c o n t r o l  a traditional  l a b o r a t o r y program  e x e r c i s e s from a conventional  l a b o r a t o r y manual.  group followed student  three  using The other  a more f l e x i b l e program which emphasized  involvement i n h y p o t h e s i s i n g ,  experimental  designing  - 55 and used  the d i s c u s s i n g of research f i n d i n g s . s i n c e the r e g i s t r a t i o n procedure  students to s p e c i f i c c l a s s e s ; presumed i n the  precluded assignment of  thus, random s e l e c t i o n was  c o n t r o l group design  used with the Welch Science Process Inventory  measure student understanding Statistical  not  study.  A quasi-experimental nonequivalent was  I n t a c t c l a s s e s were  a n a l y s i s performed  computer program was  used  used  to  of the process of s c i e n c e . by an a n a l y s i s of c o v a r i a n c e  to minimize  any b i a s due  to p r i o r  knowledge about the s c i e n c e p r o c e s s .  5.1  Conclusions Based upon the r e s u l t s from the a n a l y s i s of data i t may  be concluded One  may  that the n u l l hypothesis s t i p u l a t e d  be r e j e c t e d .  That  i s , students  i n Chapter  involved in a  l a b o r a t o r y program that emphasized more involvement student-directed  i n v e s t i g a t i o n s achieved a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  b e t t e r understanding scientists  of the a c t i o n s and o p e r a t i o n s of  than students  i n a t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y program.  However, i t should a l s o be noted v a r i a n c e i n Y was  in  accounted  that o n l y 2% of the  f o r by the treatment  effects.  Other, more s u b j e c t i v e c o n c l u s i o n s that are borne out of t h i s study come from and,  the author's ethnographic o b s e r v a t i o n s ,  although not based  on an a n a l y s i s of q u a n t i t a t i v e  are considered s a l i e n t p o i n t s to be expressed. c o n c l u s i o n s are:  These  data,  - 56 1.  Most of the students  i n the i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d  program enjoyed these a c t i v i t i e s more than p r i o r experiences programs.  motivation  discussions  in l e v e l of  unknown.)  The length of time r e q u i r e d  for  laboratory  to t h i s apparent increase remains  activities  3.  traditional  (The degree to which i n - c l a s s  contributed  2.  with  their  to complete  f o r the experimental  laboratory  group exceeded  the c o n t r o l group.  Although the length of time r e q u i r e d to complete l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s was g r e a t e r experimental  group, with  f o r the  an increase  i n time i t was  found that a great deal more was accomplished c l a s s time given 4.  that  f o r experimentation.  The amount of apparatus r e q u i r e d experimental  i n the  f o r the  group was g r e a t e r and of a more d i v e r s e  nature than that r e q u i r e d  f o r the c o n t r o l group.  This necessitated greater preparation  time f o r the  instructor. 5.  E v a l u a t i o n of l a b o r a t o r y r e p o r t s from the experimental and  group was found to be more  time consuming f o r the i n s t r u c t o r .  difficult Such  r e p o r t s , which included a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n s by the students lengthy  of p r o c e d u r a l  methods and, o f t e n ,  d i s c u s s i o n s of r e s u l t s , were o f t e n  to assess  as to t h e i r m e r i t s .  difficult  C o n t r o l group r e p o r t s  - 57 tended to be more cursory, to stated questions  simply  o f f e r i n g answers  from the p r e s c r i b e d  laboratory  manuals. 6.  During l a b o r a t o r y c l a s s e s there were o f t e n as many as s i x or seven quite d i f f e r e n t procedures place  at once i n the experimental group.  it difficult  T h i s made  f o r the i n s t r u c t o r to monitor a l l  of the students'  5 .2  taking  experimental  designs.  Limitations Measuring understanding of the process of science  matter of a s s i g n i n g responses.  q u a n t i t a t i v e scores  is a  to s u b j e c t i v e  These responses are s e n s i t i v e to e x t e r n a l  influences.  The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of these i n f l u e n c e s and the  e f f e c t they have on experimental r e s u l t s i s a c o n t i n u i n g problem i n a f f e c t i v e r e s e a r c h . T h i s study was l i m i t e d to grade 12 students and was c a r r i e d out over a r e l a t i v e l y  short p e r i o d of three months.  What e f f e c t the i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d students'  understanding of the process of science when t h i s  method i s used over longer has  l a b o r a t o r y method has on  not been i n v e s t i g a t e d .  time periods  or with other  grades  The r e s u l t s of t h i s study must  t h e r e f o r e be used with c a u t i o n when attempting to g e n e r a l i z e outside The  the p o p u l a t i o n  studied.  involvement of the i n v e s t i g a t o r as the teacher i n  t h i s study introduced  a p o s s i b l e e r r o r as the i n v e s t i g a t o r  - 58 possesses  a b i a s towards the i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d method of  laboratory teaching.  I t has been shown (Rosenthal and  p.163) that i f the r e s e a r c h e r has a strong expectancy  Fode, that h i s  i n n o v a t i o n i s s u p e r i o r to c o n v e n t i o n a l p r a c t i c e , h i s experiment and  might y i e l d  this finding.  n o n - i n s t r u c t o r designed  a n a l y s i s of c o v a r i a n c e , and  instrument  experimenter The  may  use of a r e l i a b l e  together with  r e s e a r c h e r avoidance  suggestion to s u b j e c t s that one b e t t e r than another;  The  experimental  have minimized,  an  of the  treatment  was  to some degree,  this  bias e f f e c t .  l a c k of random assignment of s u b j e c t s l i m i t s  i n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y of t h i s study.  the  However, t h i s random  assignment i s not recognized as a major problem the more s i m i l a r the experimental r e c r u i t m e n t , as r e f l e c t e d  and  c o n t r o l groups are i n t h e i r  i n the s i m i l a r i t y  i n p r e t e s t means:  In p a r t i c u l a r i t should be recognized that the a d d i t i o n of even an unmatched or nonequivalent c o n t r o l group reduces g r e a t l y the e q u i v o c a l i t y of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n over what i s obtained i n Design 2, the One-group P r e t e s t - P o s t t e s t Design. [True experimental design] (Campbell and S t a n l e y , 1963, p.47) 5.3  s  Recommendations 1.  Innovation, development and  e v a l u a t i o n of  l a b o r a t o r y programs should be 2.  continued.  I n c o r p o r a t i o n of i n c r e a s e d student the process of s c i e n t i f i c considered  new  involvement  in  i n v e s t i g a t i o n should  be  f o r at l e a s t some l a b o r a t o r y experiences  in secondary  schools.  These l a b o r a t o r y experiences  -  -  59  do possess some unique 3.  advantages.  T h i s study should be r e p l i c a t e d with more heterogenous p o p u l a t i o n s and at other  4.  A study needs to be conducted, i n s t r u c t o r s , both p a r t i a l and determine factor  the i n s t r u c t o r ' s  in building  5.  impartial,  The  to  Or, a r e p l i c a t i o n of  be made with removed b i a s e s .  A s i m i l a r study needs to be conducted,  understanding  several  student understanding of s c i e n c e  p e r i o d of time, to determine  6.  involving  i n t e r e s t as a m o t i v a t i n g  processes i n the l a b o r a t o r y . t h i s study may  institutions.  over a longer  i f r e t e n t i o n of  i s increased i n l a b o r a t o r y work.  e f f e c t of the i n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d l a b o r a t o r y  method on other areas of s c i e n c e : chemistry, p h y s i c s and  areas such as  earth s c i e n c e , needs to be  investigated.  5 .4  Epilogue I t was  hoped that by exposing  science students to an  i n v e s t i g a t i v e l a b o r a t o r y program they would emerge from  the  l a b o r a t o r y with some understanding of the problems and o p e r a t i o n s of a s c i e n t i s t . to f e e l  I t was  hoped that they would begin  t h e i r dependence on a framework that  establishes,  designs and d i r e c t s experiementation, that they would the l i m i t s of both t h e i r p e r c e p t u a l senses and a b i l i t i e s and  learn  thinking  see the u s e f u l n e s s of v a r i o u s instruments  that  - 60 could help them s o l v e the problem. would develop used to decide  I t was  an experiment to generate  hoped that  they  data that could  the v a l i d i t y of t h e i r hypotheses and  then  be to  t e n t a t i v e l y accept, r e s t a t e i n a modified form or d i s c a r d what was  chosen to be the best Within  hypothesis.  the l i m i t e d c o n f i n e s of t h i s study,  a s p i r a t i o n s seem to have been  accomplished.  these  -  6 1  -  BIBLIOGRAPHY Abramoff, P., and Thomson, R.G. I n v e s t i g a t i o n s of c e l l s and organisms. Scarborough, Ont.: Prentice-Hall, 1 9 7 8 . Abramoff, P., and Thomson, R.G. I n v e s t i g a t i o n s of c e l l s organisms (Teacher's Manual). Scarborough, Ont.: Prentice-Hall, 1 9 7 9 .  and  Aikenhead, G.S. The measurement of high school students' knowledge about s c i e n c e and s c i e n t i s t s . Science Education, 1 9 7 3 , 5 7 5 3 9 - 5 4 9 . r  A l l i s o n , R.O. An i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o the a t t i t u d e s toward s c i e n c e of c o l l e g e chemistry students as a f u n c t i o n of l a b o r a t o r y experience. Dissertation Abstracts, 1 9 7 3 , 2 8 , 4 9 2 7  .  Andersen, H.O. schools.  Readings i n s c i e n c e education f o r secondary New York: C o l l i e r - M a c m i l l a n , 1 9 6 9 .  Andersen, H.O., and Weigand, J.E. I n s t r u c t i o n a l theory, problem-solving and s c i e n c e t e a c h i n g . School Science Mathematics, 1 9 6 7 , J5_7 , 4 8 3 - 4 9 0 .  and  Ausubel, D.P. A c o g n i t i v e s t r u c t u r e theory of school learning. In L. S i e g e l (Ed.), I n s t r u c t i o n : Some contemporary v i e w p o i n t s . Sanfrancisco: Chandler Publishing, 1 9 6 7 . Bady, R.J. Students' understanding of the l o g i c of hypothesis testing. J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1 9 7 9 , 1 6 ,  6 1 - 6 5 ,  Bady, R.J., and Engeart, M.A. 'Try and prove i t ' : e x e r c i s e i n the l o g i c of s c i e n c e . The Science 1 9 7 8  ,  Dec.,  3 6 - 3 7  an Teacher,  .  Baxter, K.W. A comparative study of the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of three methods of teaching a general p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e course. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1 9 6 9 , 30_, 482-A. Beisenherz, P.C, and O l s t a d , R.G. The use of l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t i o n i n high school b i o l o g y . The American B i o l o g y Teacher, 1 9 8 0 , j42_, 1 6 6 - 1 7 5 . Beveridge, W.I.B. The A r t of s c i e n t i f i c London: Heinemann, 1 9 5 0 .  investigation.  B i l l e h , V.Y., and M a l i k , M.H. Development and a p p l i c a t i o n of a t e s t on understanding the nature of s c i e n c e . Science Education, 1 9 7 7 , 6 1 , 5 5 9 - 5 7 1 .  - 62  -  B l o s s e r , P.E. A c r i t i c a l review of the r o l e of the l a b o r a t o r y i n science t e a c h i n g . Columbus, Ohio: Clearinghouse f o r Science, Mathematics and Environmental Education, 1981. Bock, J.S. A comparison of the e f f e c t s of an i n q u i r y - i n v e s t i g a t i v e and a t r a d i t i o n a l l a b o r a t o r y program i n high school chemistry on students' a t t i t u d e s , c o g n i t i v e a b i l i t i e s and developmental l e v e l s . D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1980 , 4 J ) , 6220-A. Boohar, R.K. I n v e s t i g a t i v e l a b o r a t o r i e s f o r high and low budgets. J o u r n a l of C o l l e g e Science 1975, 5, 261-263 .  enrollments Teaching,  Borg, W.R., and G a l l , M.D. Longman, 1979.  New  E d u c a t i o n a l Research.  Buros, O.K. The f i f t h mental measurements yearbook. Park, New J e r s e y : The Gryphon P r e s s , 1959.  York: Highland  Cannon, R.A. A comparison of two l a b o r a t o r y methods i n v e s t i g a t i n g i n t e r e s t and the understanding of the process of science in a general education p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e course. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1976, 36 , 4379-A. Campbell, T.C. strategy.  An e v a l u a t i o n of a l e a r n i n g c y c l e i n t e r v e n t i o n D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1978, 3S_, 3903-A.  Campbell, P.T., and S t a n l e y , J.C. Experimental and q u a s i experimental designs f o r r e s e a r c h . In N.L. Gage ( E d . ) , Handbook of r e s e a r c h on t e a c h i n g . Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963. Cooley, W. and Klopper, L.E. The e v a l u a t i o n of s p e c i f i c educational innovations. J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1963, _1 , 73-80 . Creager, J.G. B i o l o g y l a b o r a t o r y manual. Macmillan, 1981.  New  York:  Damewood, J.C. E v a l u a t i o n of a p h y s i c a l science course f o r p r o s p e c t i v e elementary teachers i n terms of competence a t t a i n e d in the process of s c i e n c e . D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1971, 32_, 3112. Dawson, J.C. An i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the e f f e c t s of two instructional strategies. Dissertation Abstracts, 36, 3538A.  1975,  Edgar, I.T. A study of the e f f e c t s of l a b o r a t o r y centered i n s t r u c t i o n on student c r i t i c a l t h i n k i n g s k i l l s . D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1969 , 29, 3910A.  - 63 E g e l s t o n , J . Inductive v s . t r a d i t i o n a l methods of teaching high school b i o l o g y l a b o r a t o r y experiments. Science E d u c a t i o n . 1973, J57_, 467-477. Gardner, M. Trends i n development and implementation of s c i e n c e c u r r i c u l u m i n the U.S.A. New York: Macmillan, 1979. Herron, J.O. A summary of research i n science Science Education, 1975, 12, 338-357.  education.  Hobbs, E.D. (Ed.) B r i t i s h Columbia science assessment: summary r e p o r t . B.C. Government P r i n t e r , 1978. Hoff, D.B. A comparison of a d i r e c t e d l a b o r a t o r y versus an e n q u i r y l a b o r a t o r y to general education c o l l e g e astronomy, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 31, 2755A. H o f s t e i n , A., and L u n e t t a , V.N. The r o l e of the l a b o r a t o r y i n science e d u c a t i o n . Review of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 1982, 52, 201-217. Hurd, P.D. New d i r e c t i o n s i n teaching secondary school s c i e n c e . Chicago: Rand McNally, 1969. Isaac, S. Handbook i n research and e v a l u a t i o n . Macmillan, 1978.  New  York:  Kennedy, M.H. B i o l o g i c a l science: i n t e r a c t i o n of experiments and i d e a s . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1977. Kenny, D.A. A quasi-experimental approach to a s s e s s i n g treatment e f f e c t s i n the nonequivalent c o n t r o l group design. P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 1975, 8_2, 345-362. K l e i n , S.E., Yager, R.E., and McCurdy, D.W. The l a b o r a t o r y i s v i t a l i n science i n s t r u c t i o n i n the secondary s c h o o l . The Science Teacher, 1982, j l 9 . 20-23. Kramm, K.R. Research and l a b o r a t o r y i n s t r u c t i o n . C o l l e g e Science Teaching, 1974, j l , 174-175.  J o u r n a l of  Lawson, A.E., Blake, J.O., and Nordland, F.H. T r a i n i n g e f f e c t s and g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of the a b i l i t y to c o n t r o l v a r i a b l e s i n high school b i o l o g y students. Science E d u c a t i o n , 1975 , J59_, 387-396. Layton, D. Science f o r the people. H i s t o r y P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1974.  New York:  Science  - 64 Levine, D.I., and L i n n , M.C. S c i e n t i f i c reasoning a b i l i t y i n adolescence: t h e o r e t i c a l viewpoints and e d u c a t i o n a l implications. J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1977, 1±, 371-384. Lewis, R.W. How to w r i t e l a b o r a t o r y s t u d i e s which w i l l teach the s c i e n t i f i c method. Science Education, 1947, 31, 14-17. L i n n , M.C, Chin, B. , and T h i e r , H.O. Teaching c h i l d r e n to control variables: i n v e s t i g a t i o n of a f r e e - c h o i c e environment. J o u r n a l of Research in Science Teaching, 1977, L4, 249-255. Lucas, A.M. Hidden assumptions i n measure of knowledge about s c i e n c e and s c i e n t i s t s . Science Education, 1975, 59 , 481-485. Lucy, E . C An e v a l u a t i o n of a l a b o r a t o r y science program i n a p r o f e s s i o n a l education course f o r p r o s p e c t i v e secondary s c i e n c e t e a c h e r s . D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1973, 33, 6197. Lunetta, V.N., and Tamir, P. An a n a l y s i s of l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s i n two modern s c i e n c e c u r r i c u l a , Dissertation A b s t r a c t s , 1978 , 25.' 3359A. Mackay, L.O. Development of understanding about the nature of s c i e n c e . J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1971, 8, 57-66. Magnus, D.L. A comparison between t e a c h e r - d i r e c t e d i n s t r u c t i o n and student s e l f - d i r e c t e d study i n p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e f o r undergraduate elementary education majors. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1973, 34_, 3214. M a n t e u f f e l , M.S., and L a e t s c h , W.M. Problem f o r m u l a t i o n i n undergraduate b i o l o g y student i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . J o u r n a l of C o l l e g e Science Teaching, 1981, JL£, 160-163. Mayer, W. B i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e : an i n q u i r y into l i f e : student l a b o r a t o r y guide. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1968. Mayer, W. B i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e ; an i n q u i r y i n t o l i f e : teacher's manual. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1969. Mayer, W. (Ed.) B i o l o g y teachers' handbook. Wiley and Sons, 1978.  New  York:  M i t c h e l l , D.A. The p r o d u c t i o n of c r i t e r i a f o r e v a l u a t i n g s c i e n c e c u r r i c u l u m m a t e r i a l s . Research i n Science Education, 1978, 8, 59-69.  John  - 65 M o l l , M., and A l l e n , R.D. Student and graduate teaching a s s i s t a n t response to i n v e s t i g a t i v e l a b o r a t o r i e s . J o u r n a l of C o l l e g e Science Teaching, 1 9 8 2 , 11, 2 1 9 - 2 2 2 . Moshman, D., and Thompson, P.A. Hypothesis teaching i n students: sequences, stages and i n s t r u c t i o n a l strategies. J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1 9 8 1 , 18^, 3 4 1 - 3 5 2 . Mouly, G.J. 1978.  E d u c a t i o n a l Research.  Boston:  A l l y n and  Bacon,  Munby, H. What i s s c i e n t i f i c t h i n k i n g . Ottawa, O n t a r i o : P u b l i c a t i o n s O f f i c e of the Science C o u n c i l of Canada, 1982. Nedelsky, L. Science teaching and t e s t i n g . Harcourt, B r i c e and World, 1 9 6 5 .  New  York:  N e l k i n , D. Science textbook c o n t r o v e r s i e s and the p o l i t i c s of equal time. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT p r e s s , 1 9 7 8 . O l s t a d , R.G. The e f f e c t of s c i e n c e teaching methods on the understanding of s c i e n c e . Science Education, 1977 , 2 1 , 9-12. Pare, R.R., and Butzow, J.W. The r e l a t i o n s h i p among independence of work h a b i t s , a t t i t u d e and achievement i n an a u d i o - t u t o r i a l p h y s i c a l science course. J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1 9 7 5 , _12, 1-30. P a v e l i c h , M.J., and Abraham, M.R. An i n q u i r y format l a b o r a t o r y program f o r g e n e r a l chemistry. J o u r n a l of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 7 9 , 100-103 . P e l l a , M.O. C r i t e r i a f o r good experimental research i n the teaching of s c i e n c e . Science E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 6 1 , 4 5 , 396-399 . P i c k e r i n g , M. Are l a b . courses a waste of time? J o u r n a l of C o l l e g e Science Teaching, 1 9 8 0 , 11, 2 1 0 - 2 1 1 . Raghubir, K.P. The l a b o r a t o r y - i n v e s t i g a t i v e approach to science i n s t r u c t i o n . J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1 9 7 9 , 16_, 1 3 - 1 7 . Ramsey, G.A., and Howe, R.W. An a n a l y s i s of research on i n s t r u c t i o n a l procedures i n secondary school s c i e n c e . The Science Teacher, 1 9 6 9 , J36_, 7 2 - 8 1 . Rasmussen, F.A. Matching l a b o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s with b e h a v i o r a l o b j e c t i v e s . B i o l o g i c a l S c i e n c e , 1970 , 20 , 292-294.  - 66 R i c k e r t , R.K. The c r i t i c a l t h i n k i n g a b i l i t y of c o l l e g e freshman p h y s i c a l science students: a study of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the development of the c r i t i c a l t h i n k i n g a b i l i t y of c o l l e g e freshman p h y s i c a l science students and science course o r g a n i z a t i o n , i n i t i a l s k i l l i n science and general c o l l e g e a b i l i t y . Dissertation A b s t r a c t s , 1962, _52, 1449. Rogers, R. A comparison of two methods of science i n s t r u c t i o n in a c o l l e g e general s t u d i e s program. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1972, 32^, 4252. Romey, W.O. Inquiry techniques f o r teaching s c i e n c e . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1968. Rosenthal, R. Experimenter e f f e c t s i n b e h a v i o r a l New York: Appleton-Century C r o f t s , 1966.  research.  S c o t t , F.W. A study i n teaching s c i e n t i f i c method and a t t i t u d e i n the j u n i o r high s c h o o l . Science Education, 1940, 2 ± , 30-35. S e r l i n , R.C. The e f f e c t s of teaching a general b i o l o g y course using a u t o - t u t o r i a l or a l e c t u r e - l a b o r a t o r y method. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1977 , 37.' 5729A. Sherman, J.E. The r e l a t i v e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of two methods of u t i l i z i n g laboratory-type a c t i v i t i e s . Dissertation A b s t r a c t s , 1969, 29_, 4319A. Smith, A.E. An experimental study of the use of an extended l a b o r a t o r y problem. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1971, 32, 1403A. Smith, M.O. A comparison of two l a b o r a t o r y methods f o r the teaching of general p h y s i c a l science at the c o l l e g e level: v i c a r i o u s experimentation versus conventional experimentation. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1971, 32, 5116A. Sorensen, L.L. Change i n c r i t i c a l t h i n k i n g between students in l a b o r a t o r y centered and l a b o r a t o r y centered instruction. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1966 , 26_, 6567A. Spears, J . , versus of the Science  and Zollman, D. The i n f l u e n c e of s t r u c t u r e d unstructured l a b o r a t o r y on students' understanding process of s c i e n c e . J o u r n a l of Research i n Teaching, 1977 , 14_, 33-38 .  Stake, R.W., and Easley, D.L. Case s t u d i e s i n science education. New York: MacMillan, 1980.  - 67 S t a n l e y , J . C , and Hopkins, K.D. E d u c a t i o n a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l measurement and e v a l u a t i o n . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e H a l l , 1972. S t e k e l , F.D. The e f f e c t s of i n c r e a s i n g the student involvement i n a c o l l e g e p h y s i c a l science l a b o r a t o r y program. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1971, J3_l, 5880A. S t o t h a r t , J.R., and Bingham, R.M. LEIB-IRA: p r e l i m i n a r y report. The American B i o l o g y Teacher, 1972, 25, 346-348. Tamir, P. 1975,  The p r a c t i c a l mode i n s c h o o l s . j53_, 499-506.  School Review,  Tamir, P. How are l a b o r a t o r i e s used? J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1977, L4_, 311-316. Tamir, P., and L u n e t t a , V.N. I n q u i r y - r e l a t e d tasks i n high school science l a b o r a t o r y handbooks. Science Education, 1981, £ 5 , 477-484. Tanner, R.T. E x p o s i t o r y - d e d u c t i v e versus d i s c o v e r y - i n d u c t i v e programming of p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e p r i n c i p l e s . J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1969 , 6^, 142-148 . Tawney, D.A. The nature of s c i e n c e and s c i e n t i f i c i n q u i r y . In Sutton, CR., and Hayson, J . J . ( E d s ) , New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974. Welch, W.W., and P e l l a , M.O. The development of an instrument f o r i n v e n t o r y i n g knowledge of the processes of s c i e n c e . J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1968 , _5, 64-68 . Welch, W.W., and Walberg, H.J. An e v a l u a t i o n of summer i n s t i t u t e programs f o r p h y s i c s t e a c h e r s . J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1968 , _5 , 64-68. Wheeler, S.E. C r i t i q u e and r e v i s i o n of an e v a l u a t i o n instrument to measure students' understanding of science and s c i e n t i s t s . Science E d u c a t i o n , 1968, j>_2, 172-179. White, R.T. Relevance of p r a c t i c a l work to comprehension of physics. Physics E d u c a t i o n , 1979, _14 , 384-387. White, R.T. Comment on the l a b o r a t o r y - i n v e s t i g a t i v e approach to s c i e n c e i n s t r u c t i o n . J o u r n a l of Research i n Science Teaching, 1980 , 17_, 359-360.  -  68  -  APPENDIX  A  Sample l e t t e r s of Consent  - 69 Richmond S r . Sec. S c h o o l L e t t e r h e a d  Dear  Parent/Guardian,  In a d d i t i o n t o b e i n g your son/daughter's  b i o l o g y t e a c h e r , I am a l s o a p a r t -  time g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t a t U.B.C. ( S c i e n c e E d u c a t i o n Department). your son/daughter  a consent form f o r a study I w i s h t o conduct  e f f e c t i v e n e s s of a new  l a b o r a t o r y method I have d e s i g n e d .  I have g i v e n to determine  the  Such a method w i l l  a l l o w s t u d e n t s more p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the d e s i g n of t h e i r b i o l o g y  experiments  and a l l o w them to d i s c u s s t h e i r r e s u l t s i n a manner t h a t I hope w i l l r e s u l t i n a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the p r o c e s s e s of s c i e n c e . The s t u d e n t s w i l l be s e p a r a t e d i n t o a c o n t r o l and e x p e r i m e n t a l group w i t h the c o n t r o l group s i m p l y f o l l o w i n g t r a d i t i o n a l l a b methods from the p r e s c r i b e d lab  t e x t and the e x p e r i m e n t a l group f o l l o w i n g my l a b d e s i g n .  w i l l be i n the  g  P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n my  field  r o u  Your  son/daughter  P-  of study i s s t r i c t l y  on a v o l u n t e e r b a s i s and  w i l l t a k e p l a c e between January 4 and March 31, 1983.  Refusal to p a r t i c i p a t e  or withdraw from the s t u d y w i l l not j e o p a r d i z e c l a s s s t a n d i n g of t h e s u b j e c t s . Students who  do not p a r t i c i p a t e i n the study w i l l complete  as scheduled but w i l l not w r i t e the p r e / p o s t t e s t . consent  to your son/daughter's  the c l a s s  As p a r e n t / g u a r d i a n , i f you  p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n my s t u d y p l e a s e i n d i c a t e by  s i g n i n g the p o r t i o n below and r e t u r n i n g i t to Mr. McCarthy by m a i l . Sr.  Sec. S c h o o l ,  __  activities  (Richmond  7171 F o s t e r Road).  consent  i n Mr. McCarthy's study as d e s c r i b e d above.  t o have my  son/daughter  participate  - 70 Richmond S r . Sec. S c h o o l L e t t e r h e a d  Dear S t u d e n t : As you a r e aware by now,  I am a graduate s t u d e n t a t the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h  Columbia ( S c i e n c e E d u c a t i o n Department), complete my volunteers.  as w e l l as your b i o l o g y t e a c h e r !  t h e s i s r e q u i r e m e n t s , I have d e s i g n e d a f i e l d experiment  To  that requires  That i s where you come i n !  For one of my b i o l o g y 12 b l o c k s , I w i l l be u s i n g an a l t e r n a t e l a b o r a t o r y method t o t h e one you n o r m a l l y use of  J a n u a r y , F e b r u a r y and March.  t h e i r own  (i.e.  t h e one from your l a b t e x t ) f o r the months  T h i s l a b method w i l l r e q u i r e s t u d e n t s to d e s i g n  e x p e r i m e n t s , h y p o t h e s i z e and d i s c u s s t h e i r r e s u l t s .  As a c o n t r o l , I w i l l  have the o t h e r b i o l o g y 12 b l o c k c o n t i n u e as we have done t h i s y e a r - u s i n g the t r a d i t i o n a l method of l a b i n s t r u c t i o n from the l a b t e x t . At the b e g i n n i n g and end of the s t u d y , a t e s t q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l be a d m i n i s t e r e d t h a t w i l l measure s t u d e n t s ' u n d e r s t a n d i n g , o f  the p r o c e s s e s of s c i e n c e .  R e f u s a l t o p a r t i c i p a t e or w i t h d r a w from the study w i l l not j e o p a r d i z e your class standing. I f you do c o n s e n t , p l e a s e i n d i c a t e by s i g n i n g the s e c t i o n below and r e t u r n i n g i t to me  1  ' _  as soon as p o s s i b l e .  .  study as d e s c r i b e d above.  consent t o p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n Mr.  McCarthy's  - 71  -  APPENDIX  Overall  Timetable  B  of  Events  - 72 -  DATE  J 4-7  1  2  Control  1  A,  ®  2  3  Exp  1  A,  ©)G)  2  DATE  Per.  1 2  (D  19  E  7  8  10 (3)  1 2 11  3  C  18  ©  E  (J) 16  1 2 ©  4  3  9  0 10  3  1 2  5  6  7  8  4  5  6  ©  1 2  3  3  F 21-25  3  1 2  3  13  14  15  ©  16  17  11  12  (4)  13  14  15  M 14-18  M 7-11  1 2  ©  J 24-28  F 14-18  3  12  (3)  F 28-4 M  1 2  3  F 7-11  3  C  Per.  1 2  J 31-4F  DATE  Activity  J 17-21  Class Period  Activity  Activity  J 10-14  1 2  M 21-25  3  1 2  3  19  20  21  ©  22  23  24  25  ©  A^  17  18  (6)  (e)  19  20  21  ®  22  A,  In A Chronologically Ordered Sequence - Circled Numbers = Lab Activities - Uncircled Numbers = Lectures, Mic. Examination Work, Guest Speakers, Tests - A = SPI pretest - A = SPI posttest L  9  Chronological Sequence of Events during treatment period Jan. 4 to March 25.  - 73  -  APPENDIX  Activities  C  i n the Control  Traditional  Laboratory  Group's  program.  - 74 -  INQUIRY  E f O T E IHPLAMT AMD ANIMAL TISSUE In Inquiry 4-1 you found that certain reactions were speeded up by the action of the enzyme diastase. In this inquiry you will investigate the enzyme catalase (CAT-a-lace) in various tissues. One of the questions you will attempt to answer is whether catalase is present in all the tissues with which you will work.  MATERIALS 2 test tubes A variety of animal and plant tissues: fresh beef, pork, or lamb liver and kidney; worm tissues; frog blood; potato; apple; etc. 3  percent solution  hydrogen  peroxide  (H 0 ) 2  2  Graduated cylinder, 25-50 ml Thermometer, 0 ° - 1 0 0 ° C Vial 95 mm long X 25 mm external diameter One-holed stopper, No. 4 size Forceps Paper toweling Bunsen burner or other heat source  EXPERIMENTAL  DESIGN  On a demonstration table are slices of various plant and animal tissues, with labels for easy identification. D o not touch the samples at any time with your fingers, for you do not want to 32  introduce substances from your own skin tissue. Use the forceps to take a piece of each of the tissues and place it on a piece of paper toweling. Keep each piece apart from the others on the towel, and label the towel for their identification. On a second piece of paper toweling take identical tissues which have been boiled. Again handle the tissues with your forceps. Take two clean test tubes and pour 5 ml of fresh 3 percent hydrogen peroxide solution into each tube, (CAUTION: Hydrogen peroxide,  if spilled on clothing, will produce discohra-  tions.) Select an untreated and a boiled tissue sample of the same tissue, and with the forceps place one of them in each tube. • Observe and record the results [1]. Empty the tubes, rinse them, and again pour 5 ml of fresh 3 percent hydrogen peroxide solution into each tube. Proceed as before with another tissue pair. Continue in this manner until you have tested all tissue pairs and have added the results to your record for the first pair. Catalase is an enzyme that breaks down hydrogen peroxide, forming oxygen and water. • H o w does each sample tissue you tested indicate the presence or absence of catalase in the tissue [2]? Prepare a list of the tissues beginning with the one showing the greatest catalase activity and continuing in order of decreasing catalase activity. Which of the tissues are most active in catalase activity [3]? • least active [4]? >- What, if anything, do the  - 75 -  tissues at opposite ends o f the list have i n common [5]? • W h a t do your data indicate about catalase activity in boiled and untreated tissues [6]? H y d r o g e n peroxide is frequently used as an antiseptic. W h e n poured o n an open wound, it begins to bubble. • What does this indicate to you about human tissues [7]?  the chamber with the 10 ml of hydrogen peroxide. Insert the cork into the vial loosely to allow any gas generated to escape. R e c o r d the temperature change i n the reaction chamber every 30 seconds f o r a period o f at least 5 minutes. Repeat this procedure at least t w o more times with fresh hydrogen peroxide and liver extract. • W h y [10]? T a k e the average of your three temperature measurements f o r If you held the test tubes with y o u r fingers each time interval o f 30 seconds. R e c o r d the during the preceding reactions, were you able results of each time trial and the trial averages to notice changes other than the production in a data table, and then graph this data. • B y of bubbles? I n many chemical reactions both reference to your data and graph, what is the in the laboratory and i n living organisms, total temperature change that o c c u r r e d i n some o f the energy is given off as heat. W e the reaction chamber [11]? • H o w many measure heat in units called calories and kilocalories o f heat does this temperature change calories (1000 calories). O n e calorie is the represent [12]? • I f your graph reaches a amount o f heat required to raise the temperature of 1 g o f water 1 ° C * A device frequently used to measure this heat is a calorimeter A (cal-o-RiM-cter). Figure 15 shows the type o f calorimeter y o u will construct f o r this investigation. Set up the calorimeter a n d place 10 m l o f hydrogen peroxide i n the reaction chamber. Moisten the thermometer, pass it through the hole i n the rubber stopper, l o w e r it into the hydrogen peroxide, and record the initial temperature. N o t e that the definition o f a calorie is i n terms o f water, not of hydrogen peroxide. • What assumptions does this suggest you are going to have to make about the use o f hydrogen peroxide i n this inquiry [8]? • W h y should y o u be concerned with the basic assumptions f o r this o r any other scientific inquiry [9]? Before proceeding further, read the remainder o f the experimental design and set up your controls for this inquiry. A f t e r y o u have measured the initial temperature o f the hydrogen peroxide i n the reaction chamber, introduce two drops o f liver extract (which y o u r teacher will supply t o you) into • This definition of calorie is the true one, not the "calorie" used by nutritionists in discussing food values. The latter actually is the lu'localorie.  - 0-100° C thermometer  -One-holed stopper (to be loosened during use of calorimeter with H 0 ) 2  2  -Vial (25x95 mm) -Reaction chamber -10ml of 3 percent HJOJ solution  15  A glass-vial calorimeter  33  plaU-au, what might ihis indicate about the rate oi reaction [13]? t> If the graph indicates that the temperature is decreasing after an initial increase, what should this indicate about the reaction [14]? • What is the source of the heat measured i n this inquiry [15]? Consider the data further. T h e reaction o f catalase with hydrogen peroxide takes place in the human body as well as in other animals and plants. • Does all energy resulting from  biochemical reactions appear as IK-at'.' F.xplain [16J. T h e temperature of the liver of the mammal f r o m w h i c h the liver extract was taken was probably about 3 8 ° C. What would happen to the activity of catalase if the liver temperature were increased briefly (for 3 to 5 minutes) to 50° C ? 55° C ? 60° C ? Design and carry out an experiment that will give you answers to this question.  - 77 -  EACTIOW  In Inquiry 6-4 you discovered some principles of diffusion in a model of a cell. H o w do the principles apply to a living cell? How is a cell's Internal environment affected when change in and around it occurs constantly?  MATERIALS  Part A 5 ml suspension of yeast cells (freshly prepared) for each group of 2 to 4 students Congo red solution Microscope slide Cover glass 2 test tubes Test tube rack Compound microscope Bunsen burner Test tube holder Beaker Part B Sprig of elodea 5 percent sodium chloride (NaCl) solution Compound microscope Microscope slide Cover glass Paper toweling or filter paper Medicine dropper (pipette) Glass of water Glass for NaCl solution  EXPERIMENTAL  DESIGN  Part A. Diffusion in a Uniform Environment Place 1 ml of yeast suspension in each of two test tubes. A d d 3 drops, of Congo red solution to each test tube. Heat the contents of one test tube to the boiling point in a beaker of boiling water, then extinguish the burner. Prepare wet mounts of both yeast suspensions and examine- under low and high power. • Describe the differences you observe in the two suspensions [1]. • H o w do you account for these differences in terms of the way the yeast cells were treated [2]? • What hypothesis can you offer about cell membranes and diffusion on the basis of this inquiry [3]? Part B. Diffusion in a Changi ging Environment The closely regulated environment inside an elodea cell contains a concentration of approximately 0.9 percent sodium chloride (table salt). If the cells are in water that is also near this concentration of salts, no special problems occur. • But what do you think will happen if you place a higher concentration of salt solution around the outside of the cells [4]? Place a leaf from a growing tip of elodea in a drop of tap water on a clean slide. Add a cover glass and study it under low power and high power. N o w place a small bit of paper 51  - 78 -  toweling or filter paper at one edge of the cover glass to draw the water off the leaf. A d d a drop of salt solution on the opposite side of the cover glass. It will be drawn under the cover glass as the water already there is drawn off by the paper towel or filter paper. Observe the effect on the cells as the salt water moves over the leaf. • Describe what you see taking place within the cells [5]..  j j j < I •'• i j i  .  '  , •  What will happen to-the cells if the leaf is washed and again placed in plain water? Remove the leaf and place it in a glass of water. Study it again under the microscope after a period of 5 minutes. • R e c o r d any changes you observe [6]. Will the plant die if allowed to remain in an unbalanced salt environment for 10 to 15 min-  utes? Test this question by placing the leaf in a glass of 5 percent N a C l solution. Remove after 15 minutes and observe under the microscope in a drop of the 5 percent N a C l solution. • What are the results [7]? • How can you tell if the cell is dead [8]? • What have you observed in Parts A and B of this inquiry about cell membrane activity [9]? • Why do you think the membrane in one instance inhibits the passage of a substance and in another instance does not [10]? • W h a t conclusions can you draw regarding the sizes of molecules of Congo red and of water [11]? • On- the basis of your study of Part B, formulate a statement about the ability of a cell to maintain its internal stability in a changing environment [12].  MITOSIS AND GENETIC CONTINUITY " L i k e tends to beget like." This phrase has a meaning so self-evident, we hardly pause to give it a second thought. Oak trees give rise to oak trees; rabbits reproduce more rabbits. Somehow the reproductive cells of an oak or a rabbit receive —and pass.on —hereditary materials that give them and their descendants specific characteristics of oaks or rabbits and not of some other organism. How have these hereditary potentialities been passed on from one cell to the next in such a precise way that all of. them, both in quantity and quality, can be transmitted to the reproductive cells? 52  T o answer, this question we must investigate the changes that occur in the nucleus of a cell before cell division occurs. These nuclear events are called mitosis. The process of mitosis is not easy to see in living cells because the nucleus and all the structures within it are nearly transparent in the living condition. We learned in Inquiry 1-4 about a special kind of microscope —the phasecontrast microscope —that makes it possible to see cell structure without killing cells, and that makes it possible to observe transparent structures. We could use such a microscope to observe mitosis in living cells.  - 79 -  62  Photosynthesis  EXERCISE 20 HOW  DOES LIGHT INTENSITY  AFFECT THE RATE OF  PHOTOSYNTHESIS?  The intensity of sunlight striking the surface of the Earth varies from hour to hour as well as from one season to another. Since oxygen is a by-product of photosynthesis, oxygen production may be used in designing an experiment to measure the effect of variations in light intensity on photosynthesis. The production of oxygen may be demonstrated by placing a plant under water and then measuring the escape of oxygen bubbles. In this exercise, changes in the photosynthetic rate under different light intensities will be measured. PROCEDURE  Following the method shown in Fig. 5.2, calculate the average number of bubbles produced per minute with the lamp 20 inches from the Elodea. 20-A Record your data in the table on page 279. Move the lamp to a distance of 10 inches from the Elodea. Allow the set-up to stand forfiveminutes. 20-B Why? Determine the average bubble count at this distance (10 inches) and record your data. Repeat this experiment with the light source five inches from the Elodea and record your data in the table.  20-C  Graph your results on page 279.  F O R T H O U G H T , D I S C U S S I O N , A N D FURTHER S T U D Y  1 How can you prove that the bubbles given off during photosynthesis are composed of oxygen? 2 How has the intensity of the light been varied in the experiment conducted in this exercise? 3 What is the relationship between the amount of oxygen produced (as bubbles) and light intensity? 4 If you were able to increase the intensity of light indefinitely, would you expect the production of oxygen to continue to increase at the same rate? Explain.  - 30: "  FIG. 5.2 PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING THE EFFECT OF LIGHT INTENSITY ON PHOTOSYNTHESIS  Select a "healthy looking" iprig of Elodea 6 Inches in length. Place it upside down In a large test tubo of spring water containing 0.25% sodium bicarbonate. Before completely submerging the Elodea sprig, cut of f W Inch from the base of the stem with a sharp razor blade. Remove any leaves near the cut end.  Place a short piece of rubber tubing over a 15-inch length of glass tubing. Suck up pond or spring water until the tube is full. Then hold your finger over rubber tubing so that the water column does not fall, and then clamp the rubber tubing.  Position the glass tubing gently over the end of the Elodea sprig and then clamp lost tube and glass tube to a ring stand. Keep Elodea and glass tube below water level.  C Position a light 20 Inches from the plant. Place a container of cool water between the light and the Elodea. (Why?) Turn the light on and allow to stand for S minutes before taking any readings. (Why?)  D Count the bubbles produced each minute for a 5 minute period. Calculate the average bubble count per minute.  - 81 -  64  Photosynthesis  EXERCISE 21 HOW C A N YOU DETERMINE IP C A R B O N DIOXIDE IS NECESSARY FOR PHOTOSYM ("i-IESIS?  The atmosphere is composed predominantly of nitrogen (approximately 78 per cent) and oxygen (approximately 21 per cent). In addition, it contains variable amounts of water vapor and small quantities of other gases. Carbon dioxide ( C O 2 ) constitutes about 0.04 per cent by volume of the atmosphere. PROCEDURE  CAUTION:  KOH  or N a O H is  oxiromtly hazardous t ° Do  not  touch with your  hands. Uio tongs or a plastic spoon to transfer this chem-  Your instructor will provide .you with several geranium plants that have been kept in the dark for 36 to 48 hours. Select a leaf from one of the plants and test it for the presence of starch (Figs. 5 . 3 A . B ) . Return the plants to the dark during the time you are testing the leaves. 21-A Why? ^ strong, positive starch test occurs, select another plant and-test the leaves until a negative or very weak starch test a  occurs. 21-S Why is this step necessory? Set up the experiment as shown in Figs. 5 . 3 C . D . This is geranium leaf in an atmosphere  a  c  c  o  m  p  l  i  s  h  e  d  b  y  p l a c i n g  a  ital froin its contoincr.  a  lacking C O 2 . Potassium or sodium hydroxide ( K O H or N a O H ) effectively remove C O 2 from the air. 21-C What "control" should be set up so that nteanir.gful conclusions can be made?  Set up this "control" along with the experimental set-up and place the "control" under bright lights for 24 hours. Test for photosynthetic activity by testing the leaves for starch. F O R T H O U G H T , D I S C U S S I O N , A N D FURTHER S T U D Y  1 In Fig. 5.3, why is potassium hydroxide (or sodium hydroxide) placed within the jar as well as in the funnel? 2 Based on the results of the experiment, what conclusions can be made about the necessity of carbon dioxide for photosynthesis? 3 Suppose you were to put a sprig of Elodea into a test tube completely filled with boiled (and cooled) water. You then seal the tube with a rubber stopper and place it under bright light. Would you expect photosynthesis to occur? Explain. 4 A solution of phenol red is orangish-red in the presence of carbon dioxide. The solution becomes yellowish in the absence of carbon dioxide. Devise an experiment to show that Elodea plants use C O 2 when photosynthesizing.  - 82 -  FIG. 5.3 PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING IF CO, IS NECESSARY FOR PHOTOSYNTHESIS  A Remove leof from trie plonl kept in the dark. Place leaf in hot olcoho! until pigment i« removed.  C Place a leaf in atmosphere locking CO*.  Of  H.O  EXPERIMENTAL SET UP  Place "experimental" and "control" set ups under bright lights for 24 hours. Then test for starch as shown in steps A and B.  96  Biological Transport  EXERCISE 31 • WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF VARIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS O N TRANSPIRATION?  M o s t l a n d plants obtain water from the soil. However, only a small amount of the water absorbed by the roots is used in growth a n d photosynthesis. T h e rest is lost t h r o u g h transpiration, a process i n which water is lost (as water vapor) from the surface of leaves, or i n some cases, from other aerial parts of plants. In this exercise you w i l l use a n apparatus called a potometer to determine the effects of various environmental factors on the rate of transpiration. PROCEDURE  NOTE:  TKe rubber  tubing'  must fit tightly on the capillory luoing to prevent air  ' "--  lc  • Completely cover the potometer flask (except for the openings) with aluminum foil. • U s i n g a 2-inch piece of rubber tubing, attach a 15-inch length of capillary tubing to the potometer flask. Support the capillary tubing i n an elevated position, using a clamp and ring stand as shown i n Fig. 8.1 A. Attach a millimeter ruler to the back of the tubing with tape. • F i l l the flask to the b r i m with water provided by your instructor. Pour the water i n slowly to avoid the formation of bubbles. • F o l l o w i n g the procedure shown i n Figs. 8.1 B,C,D, cut a b r a n c h from a geranium plant a n d insert it into a rubber  uK1  stopper. Keep the cut end moist, but avoid wetting the leaves.  noi£: After  • Slowly insert the rubber stopper and branch into the flask to avoid creating bubbles. (If this is done properly, water under . a running faucet w i l l be forced out of the end of the capillary tubing. When .(uvuid wetting tne leave^i) ^ pressure o n the stopper is released, the fluid in the capilc.;:ci cut anoihc-r inch on. Th he ! epi ^ g iM d to move back toward the flask. If this cui i-urfacci mu v.t brecUinj \'.-.\.should occur, fill a syringe with water a n d insert the needle i o i U IVi f of v/uier in tha vuointo the rubber tubing at the place where the capillary tubculur t i s i U t - s of "*' the brunch ' ing a n d the flask join. Slowly inject water until it comes back out of the end of the capillary tubing.) • Loosen the clamp on the ring stand a n d lower the capillary t u b i n g so that it is level with the surface of your table or desk (Fig. 8. IE). If the apparatus has been properly set up, the water column i n the tube w i l l begin to recede toward the flask. 31 - A V/i.ai i i ri.--j[.'i-i'i lor'this, rvio v o n i o n l of water? T h e rate at which the water moves is a measure of the rate of water uptake by the branch and may be used as a measure of the rate of transpiration. cutting  the  hror.cn oft, hold the cut c.id  a r v t  1  u  D  m  w  t e n  - 84 -  FIG. 8.1 PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING THE RATE OF TRANSPIRATION  C  Hold branch under water and cut off about 2 cm of stem.  Select a rubber stopper having a hole slightly smaller than diameter of stem. Insert a cork borer as shown, and ploce stem far enough Into cork borer so that when borer is removed the stem will project about 1 cm below the stopper. Carry out this procedure under water, but do not allow leaves to become wet.  Hole slightly smaller thon stem Rubber stopper Cork borer  Lower tube so it is level with the surface when ready to take measurements.  If water column goes past the end of the ruler. It may be returned to starting point by injecting water into rubber tubing with syringe.  - '85 -  98  Biological  Transport  N O T E : If tlio water column Soes past the i n d of the ruler nearest the flask, it may be returned to your starting position by injecting water into the rubber tubiny connecting thu capillary tubing to the flask.  • Determine the transpiration rate by recording the distance the water column moves each minute for a period of 10 minutes (be prepared to change to shorter or longer intervals of time depending on the rate of water movement in the column). 31-B  Record your results in the table on page 301.  31-C  Graph your data on page 30_.  FOR T H O U G H T , D I S C U S S I O N , A N D FURTHER STUDY  1 U n d e r what conditions i n nature w o u l d y o u expect a plant to have a high or low rate of transpiration? 2 D i d you have a "control" for this experiment? If not, suggest one. 3 H o w do y o u think a scientist would proceed to measure the actual force of the transpirational pull i n this experiment? 4 H o w is the movement of water and dissolved substances in a plant related to transpiration? 5 I n this experiment, what parts of the apparatus represented the missing (cut off) parts of the whole plant? 6 I n order for plants growing i n a desert to survive, what are some of the adaptations of the leaves or other organs that you would expect to find? 7 If you used the procedure i n this experiment, what would be the effect of the following on the rate of t r a n s p i r a t i o n — l i g h t intensity, air movement, humidity, others? Enter your results i n the table on page 301 a n d graph your data i n Fig. 31-C. 8 Devise a method for estimating the volume of water lost in transpiration per unit area of leaf surface in a given time (using the apparatus of this experiment). 9 O f what value is this control of water loss to the plant?  EXERCISE 49 HOW DO GIBBERELLINS AFFECT PLANT GROWTH? Gibberellins are plant growth substances that were first isolated in Japan from a fungus that caused a disease called "foolish seedling disease." The Japanese scientists who studied this disease found that the fungus was producing chemical substances that were strongly affecting the normal growth and development of rice plants. Gibberellins are also produced by the higher plants, beans, for example. In this exercise you will attempt to determine what aspect of plant growth is affected by this plant growth substance. PROCEDURE  • Working in teams of three, obtain 40 bean seeds that have been soaking in water for several hours. • Plant 20 seeds (about Vi inch deep) in moist vermiculite in a tray. Label the tray "Gibberellin treated" (Fig. 11.4B). • Plant the remaining 20 seeds in a second tray labeled "Control" "(Fig. 11.4B). • Watch the trays for the next seven to 10 days. When the plants are several centimeters tall (about three inches), select 10 plants in each tray that are about the same size. Label each individual plant with a number (1, 2, 3,...) along with the date. Cut the remaining plants at the ground level and discard the parts you have cut off (Fig. 11,4C). • Measure the height of each plant (in millimeters) from the soil to the tip of the shoot apex. 49-A Record the individual measurements in the table (page 341) under thu column headed "Day 0." • Apply a drop of gibberellin to the shoot apex of each plant in the " G - A " tray (Fig. 11.4D). 49-B What will you apply to the "control" plants? (This procedure should be repeated in three to four dc:ys.)  • Measure the height of each plant in the "experimental" and "control!' groups on each of five days following the initial measurement (Day 0) and on the eighth day (Fig. .11.4E).  Record the  measurements  in the  table (49-A).  49-C Do the conhol plants respond to gibberellin in the same wuy as the experimental plants? If not, how do they differ?  • Using the data in the table (49-A), calculate the per cent increase in length for each group on the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and eighth day by using the following formula:  - 87 -  FIG. 11.4 PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING EFFECT OF GIBBERELLIN ON PLANT GROWTH  A  Select 40 seeds that have been soaking for several hourj.  C  B  Plant 20 seeds In Vermicullte and label "Gibberellin treated experiment." Plant remaining 20 seeds and label "control."  After 7-10 days, select 10 plonb that are about the same size. Tag them with a number (1 A 3 , etc) and the dale. Discard remaining 10 plants.  D Apply a drop of Gibberellin solution to shoot apex.  Measure this distance.  Measure each plant (In millimeters) in the experimental and control groups. Record your measurement! In the table on page 341.  - 89 -  156  Plant Development  Average length (day 1, 2, 3, etc.) — Average Initial Length Average Initial Length X 100 = % Increase i n Length Plot these data in 49-D. Use a different colored pencil for the experimental and control group.  F O R T H O U G H T , D I S C U S S I O N , A N D FURTHER  STUDY  1 Based o n the results of this experiment, what do you think the rice plants that have "foolish seedling disease" look like? 2 T h e peas used i n this exercise are a dwarf variety whose dwarfness is controlled by a single gene. Suggest a possible way this gene might produce dwarf plants. 3 H o w would you go about determining where gibberellins are produced i n the plant?  >. 11.5 EFFECT OF GROWTH INHIBITORS ON PLANT DEVELOPMENT  Examine the planti every 2 to 3 days for the next 3 weeks. Record your observations in the table (on page 343) and by a drawing (on page 344),  - 89  -  APPENDIX D  An Example of the Scientific  Process  Investigation  -  90 -  AUTHOR'S MODEL OF THE PROCESS OF SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION  Problem  Observations under Natural Conditions  L i t e r a t u r e Research New Observations, New Hypothoses Support of Questionning of Hypothesis  Hypothesis Observations and/or Experimentation under Controlled Conditions  Prediction Design of Experiment  New Problems  - as used  i n p r e l i m i n a r y l e s s o n (P) of experimental  group  AN EXAMPLE OF THE APPLICATION  OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD  PROBLEM What i n t e r n a l f a c t o r causes the male piranah's  b e l l y to  turn b r i g h t red i n the presence of an e s t r u s female  piranah?  OBSERVATIONS (1)  When an e s t r u s female piranah piranah,  (2)  the piranah's  belly  i s placed near a male turns r e d .  I f the female i s not i n e s t r u s then the male b e l l y does not  turn r e d . ( A l l other  conditions controlled)  RESEARCH (1)  When an e s t r u s female of almost any higher v e r t i b r a t e comes near the male of the s p e c i e s , the l e v e l s of testosterone  (2)  i n the blood  stream of the male  rises.  From experiment, i t has been shown that the l e v e l s of testosterone  i n the blood  stream of the male  piranah  r i s e when an e s t r u s female i s p r e s e n t . HYPOTHESIS Perhaps t e s t o s t e r o n e  i s the i n t e r n a l  f o r the red b e l l y of the male EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES AND (1)  several t r i a l s . )  piranah.  DATA  C a s t r a t e a male, put with  factor responsible  COLLECTION  female - red b e l l y ?  Answer - not.  Control -  (Tabulate  non-castrated  male under the same c o n d i t i o n . (2)  I n j e c t a c a s t r a t e d male with e s t r u s female - red? - c a s t r a t e d male.  t e s t o s t e r o n e , place  (Tabulate  Answer - yes.  several t r i a l s . )  with Control  - 92 ANALYSIS Any graphs accumulated  from d a t a .  DISCUSSION Problems with the p r a c t i c a l aspects of the experiment. Any unexpected  ( i . e . , o f f the t o p i c ) r e s u l t s ?  Sources o f  error?  CONCLUSION The t e s t o s t e r o n e seems to produce the red b e l l y . A d d i t i o n a l examination r e q u i r e d , e.g., h i s t o l o g i c a l d a t a , m e t a b o l i c date. something  else.  Maybe t e s t o s t e r o n e  i s a precursor f o r  - 93 -  APPENDIX E  Activities  i n the Experimental Group's  I n v e s t i g a t i v e - b a s e d Laboratory Program  - 94 CATALASE ACTIVITY OF VARIOUS TISSUES - LAB 1  PRIOR KNOWLEDGE 1.  H  2  0  2  CATALASE (ENZYME)  H  2  + 1/2 0  2  + Energy  PEROXIDE (A METABOLIC POISON) 2.  C a t a l a s e i s found  in living  c o n c e n t r a t i o n s depending  tissues  in various  on the amount of peroxide  present. 3.  Peroxide i s sometimes used as an a n t i s e p t i c .  4.  1 calorie  i s the amount of heat r e q u i r e d  the temperature 5.  to r a i s e  of 1 gram of water 1°C.  A c a l o r i m e t e r i s a d e v i c e used to measure the amount of  heat r e l e a s e d or used by a r e a c t i o n .  STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM What are the r e l a t i v e amounts of c a t a l a s e found i n v a r i o u s kinds of t i s s u e ?  HYPOTHESIS (THEORY) Make a statement with regard to the f o l l o w i n g cooked liver.  tissues -  and uncooked minced - apple, potato, kidney and S u b s t a n t i a t e your  statements.  D.  95 -  EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES Be sure your procedures experiment  are w e l l organized such that the  may be repeated by another  investigator.  The  design must i n c l u d e c o n t r o l s * , the number of t r i a l s to be run, the length of each t r i a l ,  e t c . Some equipment  will  be l a i d out f o r you - ask f o r anything i n a d d i t i o n that you  E.  t h i n k you might need.  DATA Gather  and t a b u l a t e data - be sure data t a b l e s d e p i c t  quantitative results  (numbers, symbols).  Organize  your  observations.  F.  ANALYSIS To adequately  analyze data, f i g u r e s may be graphed so as  to see t r e n d s .  G.  DISCUSSION What r e l a t i o n s h i p s may be seen between the a n a l y s i s of the data and the o r i g i n a l hypothesis? intuition,  Use your  imagination and reasoning to i n t e r p r e t and  s p e c u l a t e from your a n a l y s i s of d a t a .  Any sources of  error?  * " I t has been c o n c l u s i v e l y demonstrated by hundreds of experimentors that the beating of drums w i l l r e s t o r e the sun a f t e r an e c l i p s e " . S i r R.A. Gregory  - 96 H.  CONCLUSIONS What c o n c l u s i o n s ( i f any) can be made about the o r i g i n a l hypothesis?  What f u r t h e r problems are suggested  outcomes of the research?  FINAL WRITE-UP  1.  Title  2.  Statement of the problem  3.  Formulation of the hypothesis  4.  Experimental  5.  C o l l e c t i o n of data  6.  A n a l y s i s of data  7.  Discussion  8.  Conclusion.  procedures  by the  - 97  -  C a t a l a s e A c t i v i t y - Teacher's A) Apparatus  supplied-  N o t e s - LAB  Mf  c o o k e d and u n c o o k e d , m i n c e d and  -  liver  potatoe  (20$ s o l u t i o n )  l o n g TT', t h e r m o m e t e r s , s t o p p e r s ( i e . crude c a l o r i m e t e r s )  -  3$ p e r o x i d e graduated  solution  cylinders,  balances  - tweezers, tubing, volumetric tubes, ring B) H y p o t h e s i s -  stands.  be; s u r e to) w a t c h t h a t s t u d e n t s comment  on  :  b o t h t h e r e l a t i v e amounts o f c a t a l a s e i n c o o k e d v s u n c o o k e d m a t e r i a l and p o t a t o e . J u s t i f i c a t i o n must be for  h y p o t h e s i s b a s e d on p r i o r  C) E x p e r i m e n t a l P r o c e d u r e s to  any procedures  liver  vs  provided knowledge.  that  attempt  m e a s u r e t h e amount o f e i t h e r o x y g e n o r  energy  r e l e a s e d f r o m t h e breakdown' o f  peroxide i s s a t i s f a c t o r y . Before actual experimentation begins  students  will  tissue  to  h a v e t o e s t a b l i s h t h e amount o f  be u s e d -  ive  too* much w i l l  result  i n excess-  oxygen.  D) D a t a and A n a l y s i s -  students w i l l  hopefully categorize  t h e i r data i n a readable f a s h i o n . A g r a p h i c a l a n a l y s i s o f temp, v s t i m e c l a r i f i e s if E) D i s c u s s i o n -  the energy  full  data  component i s m e a s u r e d .  and c o m p l e t e  d i s c u s s i o n of a l l exper-  imental r e s u l t s are looked f o r i n c l u d i n g any  s o u r c e s o f e r r o r t h a t may  have  t h e r e s u l t s - eg. p o o r l y i n s u l a t e d i m e t e r , p r e s s u r e b u i l d up) i n t h e test-tube.  affected calor-  stoppered  - 98  -  Laboratory 2 R e a c t i o n o f C e l l s i n Changing  Environments  A) P r i o r Knowledge 1 ) The  c l o s e l y r e g u l a t e d environment i n s i d e  elodea c e l l 0.9$  an  contains a c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f approx.  NaCl.  2 ) The n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t o f e l o d e a i s pond w a t e r o f a p p r o x . 100$  B" 0. 2  3) R e v e i w a l l o f t h e t h e o r e t i c a l  principles  of  o s m o s i s and d i f f u s i o n b e f o r e c o n t i n u i n g . B') S t a t e m e n t o f t h e P r o b l e m What i s t h e r e s p o n s e ; o f a n e l o d e a l e a f c e l l an environment t h a t c o n t a i n s a h i g h e r of NaCl than i t s n a t u r a l  to  concentration  environment?  C) H y p o t h e s i s . D) E x p e r i m e n t a l P r o c e d u r e s E) Data and O b s e r v a t i o n s F) A n a l y s i s G)  Discussion  - follow general guidelines from p r e v i o u s l a b .  - 99  -  LA6 %  R e a c t i o n of C e l l s i n Changing EnvironmentsTeacher's A) Apparatus  No>tes  s u p p l i e d - sprigs of - %  FaCl  solution  - microscope - eye B) H y p o t h e s i s -  be  elodea s l i d e s and c o v e r s l i p e s  droppers  sure the reasons  f o r the  a r e c l e a r l y s t a t e d and  hypothesis  supportable  by  theoretical notions. C) E x p e r i m e n t a l P r o c e d u r e s -  adequate c o n t r o l of  i s most n e c e s s a r y water  - light,  water') and will  temperature  content are c r i t i c a l .  to> u s e t h e same l e a f c e l l experimental  procedures  It i s better  as c o n t r o l  (5%  and  water)-  a l l o w student t o view the  (100$ this  evidence  continuously. D) D a t a and A n a l y s i s : - be s u r e t h a t o n l y m e a s u r e d  values  a r e r e c o r d e d on t h e d a t a t a b l e - a l l q u a l i t a t i v e r e s u l t s are observations s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d u n d e r t h a t Discussion-  and  title.  the major sources of e r r o r a r e maintenance of c o n t r o l l e d c o n d i t i o n s , improper  and  inadequate  evidence  s t a t i n g assuredely that the a r e as  claimed.  for  environments  - 100  -  Laboratory L i g h t , I n t e n s i t y and  3  the Rate of  Photosynthesis  A) P r i o r K n o w l e d g e 1)  L i g h t i n t e n s i t y v a r i e s f r o m h o u r t o h o u r as as  s e a s o n to: s e a s o n on t h e  earth.  2) L i g h t i n t e n s i t y i s a m e a s u r e o f t h e light 3 ) The  and  may  therefore  of photosynthetic plant l e a f over  How  r e f e r s to the  be u s e d as  information  synthesis Hypothesis  D)  Experimental  E)  D a t a and  P)  Analysis  the  the  lab  experielodea  2.  Problem i n t e n s i t y a f f e c t the  i n elodea l e a f  C)  in  concerning  i t s n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t , see  does l i g h t  amount  time.  mental subject.. F o r  B) S t a t e m e n t o f t h e  rate of  photo-  cells?  Procedures  Observations  G-) D i s c u s s i o n  of  watts.  a c t i v i t y taking place  4) E l o d e a , a w a t e r pikant, w i l l and  quantity  be m e a s u r e d i n  rate of photosynthesis  well  - f o l l o w general from previous  guidelin§s labs.  - 101  L i g h t I n t e n s i t y and  3  the Rate of Photosynthesis-Lab  Teacher's A) A p p a r a t u s  -  Notes  s u p p l i e d - sprigs* of  elodea  - t e s t tubes,clamps,  ring  stands-  - v a r i o u s wantages o f l i g h t - pond  water  B) H y p o t h e s i s - most s t u d e n t s w i l l concerning l i g h t  bulbs  make a g e n e r a l  i n t e n s i t y and  the r a t e of  s y n t h e s i s . I n d e e d , l e c t u r e knowledge up point i s i n s u f f i c i e n t  t©> w a r r a n t  h y p o t h e s i s such  100  watt  statement  any  "to t h i s  detailed  increase w i l l  i n a two-fold increase i n photosynthetic  will  will  intensity  find that photosynthetic  activity  also increase; i s s u f f i c i e n t .  C) E x p e r i m e n t a l P r o c e d u r e s to  result  activity.  A more g e n e r a l h y p o t h e s i s s u c h a s ; a s t h e i n c r e a s e s one  photo-  use  some s t u d e n t s w i l l  t h e amount o f s u g a r p r o d u c e d  attempt  by  photosyn-  t h e s i s a s an i n d i c a t i o n o f p h o t o s y n t h e t i c r a t e . This i s d i f f i c u l t  to:: m e a s u r e o v e r t i m e . M o r e  ad-  e q u a t e i s m e a s u r e o f o x y g e n e m i s s i o n w h i c h may r e a d i l y determined  by c o u n t i n g b u b b l e s  be  emerging  from the elodea l e a v e s . D) D a t a and A n a l y s i s - i t i s i m p o r t a n t understand  one must m e a s u r e t h e amount  photosynthetic product  produced  over  time.  E ) D i s c u s s i o n - f o r t h e d i s c u s s i o n t o be a d e q u a t e , a r e l a t i o n s h i p must be p r e s e n t e d f r o m Some s t u d e n t s may  data  clear  analysis.  n o t h a v e u s e d enough t i m e  to  e s t a b l i s h the l e v e l l i n g o f f i n p h o t o s y n t h e t i c a c t i v i t y that should^occurred a f t e r c intensity  to  t h a t t o m e a s u r e t h e RATE o f p h o t o i -  synthetic a c i t i v i t y , of  f o r the student  exposure:.  ontinuous  - 102 -  Laboratory Varying  4  Q u a n t i t i e s o f Carbon D i o x i d e  synthetic  Exposure and P h o t o -  Activity.  A) P r i o r Knowledge 1 ) I n t h i s c a s e t h e amount o f e x p o s u r e o f a p l a n t to v a r y i n g q u a n t i t i e s o f carbon d i o x i d e a r e r e l a t e d to t h e r a t e o f  photosynthesis.  2) A l t h o u g h t h e atmosphere i s j p r e d o m i n a t e l y of nitrogen  (approximately  (approximately  21$);  composed  78%); a n d o x y g e n  carbon dioxide c o n s t i t u t e s  a b o u t 0.04 p e r c e n t b y v o l u m e o f t h e a t m o s p h e r e . 3 ) Q u a n t i t i e s o f c a r b o n d i o x i d e do v a r y g l o b a l l y . Higher concentrations  are found i n i n d u s t r i a l i z e d  a r e a s where t h e b i - p r o d u c t s bustion are emitted  of f o s s i l  fuel  into the-air.  4) P o t a s s i u m o r s o d i u m h y d r o x i d e s o l i d s w i l l i v e l y remove C0  2  comeffect-  f r o m the: a i r .  B ) Statement o f t h e Problem 5  What i s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n  photo<synthetic  a c t i v i t y i n a geranium l e a f and v a r y i n g q u a n t i t i e s o f carbon d i o x i d e exposure t o that l e a f ?  - 103  Varying  Quantities  -  of Carbon D i o x i d e  s y n t h e t i c A c t i v i t y - Lab  E x p o s u r e and  Photo-  4  Teacher's Notes A) A p p a r a t u s S u p p l i e d -  Geranium plants;  - Beakers, p e t r i - KOH,  dishes,  NaOH s o l i d s  - lamps, c o t t o n ,  hot  - alcohol, iodine B-) H y p o t h e s i s — most s t u d e n t s w i l l r e l a t i o n s h i p between the synthetic  plates  solution  suggest a d i r e c t v a r i a t i o n amount o f CO2  and  photo-  a c t i v i t y . However, a more r e f i n e d  d e f i n i t i v e s t a t e m e n t may of the  funnels  be  f o r w a r d e d as  experience gained from the  and  a result  l a s t l a b where  p h o t o s y n t h e s i s r a t e s were measured. C) E x p e r i m e n t a l P r o c e d u r e s - t h i s t i m e a g e r a n i u m i s provided, not  not  e l o d e a . Because geraniums  h y d r o p h y t e s as a r e  i s hot  plant are  e l o d e a p l a n t s , oxygen e m i s s i o n  as v i a b l e a m e a s u r e o f p h o t o > s y n t h e t i c  activity.  The: a l c o h o l b a t h method o f e x t r a c t i n g c h l o r o p h y l l may  be  demonstrated i f d e s i r e d .  be u s e d t o i n d i c a t e t h e D)  D a t a and  Iodine  presence of  then  starch.  A n a l y s i s - accumulated data should n a t u r a l l y  l e a d to» a g r a p h i c a l  and  p o s s i b l y mathematical  c o r r e l a t i o n between p h o t o s y n t h e t i c  activity  and  c o n t r o l l i n g s u c h v a r i a b l e f a c t o r s as  the  carbon dioxide E) D i s c u s s i o n -  q u a l i t y and and  may  the  soil  concentration.  quantity  of l i g h t ,  quantity  c o m p o s i t i o n must be  fully  of water discussed.  - 104 Laboratory 5 - Determination of the Quantity of G i b b e r l l i c A c i d i n a Bean Seedling A)  P r i o r Knowledge 1)  Gibberllic  a c i d i s a p l a n t growth hormone that causes  stem e l o n g a t i o n 2)  i s extremely s m a l l .  A gibberllic often applied the  dicotyledonous  (<0.01 g/plant)  s o l u t i o n , using water as the s o l v e n t , i s to the a p i c a l meristematic region by  horticulturalists  B)  seedlings.  The q u a n t i t y of g i b b e r l l i c a c i d in most plants  3)  i n bean  when c e l l  elongation  i s required in  stem.  Statement of the Problem What i s the p r e c i s e q u a n t i t y of g i b b e r l l i c a c i d i n the p l a n t body of the common c a s t o r bean (Ricinus  communis)?  - 105  -  Determination of the Quantity of G i b b e r l l i c A c i d In a Bean S e e d l i n g - Lab 5 - Teacher's notes A)  Apparatus s u p p l i e d  - 200  pre-soaked c a s t o r bean seeds  - plant  trays  - vermiculite, potting - l a b e l s , eye  soil  droppers,  toothpicks  - s o l u t i o n s of g i b b e r l l i c  acid  (0.0001 g, 0.0005 g, 0.001 0.005 g, 0.01 B)  general  here yet  to s t i p u l a t e anything  range.  gibberllic 0.01  A little  concentrations  p l a n t s should and  water)  r e a l l y do not have s u f f i c i e n t  experience  C)  g in 10 ml  Hypothesis - a s p e c i f i c statement i s requested students  g,  research and  a  concerning  dicotyledon  b r i n g a f i g u r e of w i t h i n 0.0005  g per 10 ml  Experimental Procedure - using gibberllic  but  water.  known c o n c e n t r a t i o n s  a c i d the  student  c o n t r o l l e d experiment using  should  of  design  several plants  exposed to the hormone c o n c e n t r a t i o n s . q u a n t i t y of g i b b e r l l i c  a The  a c i d i s estimated  by  comparison to the a b i l i t y of known concentrations stem D)  of the hormone to  stimulate  elongation.  Data and A n a l y s i s - data must include the c o n t r o l measure of p l a n t stem growth (p.O a c i d ) and A l l plants  g of  gibberllic  stem growth of a l l other initially  plants.  are the same s i z e so  to allow comparisons a f t e r f i n a l  as  growth,  ( t e r m i n a t i o n - 8 days) A n a l y s i s of height concentratin  (y-axis) and  ( x - a x i s ) should  linear relationship  y=mx+b.  hormone  result The  in a  s l o p of  the  - 106 growth (m) d e p i c t s the r a t e of growth. Calculating  f o r a y equal  to the average  height of the c o n t r o l p l a n t s , a comparison may be made to the experimental  p l a n t s which  were under v a r y i n g c o n e n t r a t i o n s of gibberllic E)  acid.  D i s c u s s i o n - due to the f a c t that such minute c o n c e n t r a t i o n s of hormone are used i t i s critical  that s o l u t i o n s are made up c a r e f u l .  The degree of e r r o r should p o t e n t i a l sources  be i n d i c a t e d as  of e r r o r .  Stem e l o n g a t i o n may be discussed p a r t i c u l a r r e f e r e n c e to a p i c a l histology.  with  meristem  -  107  -  Laboratory 6 - The Rate of T r a n s p o r a t i o n and Humidity A)  P r i o r Knowledge 1)  As s t r i c t l y d e f i n e d , t r a n s p o r a t i o n r e f e r s to the process whereby water vapor i s l o s t from p l a n t  2)  to the  atmosphere  leaves.  For the purposes of t h i s l a b , the amount of water absorbed by the roots that i s used i n growth photosynthesis i s i n s i g n i f i c a n t of water  that i s absorbed and  and  compared to the amount  then l o s t  through  transpiration. 3)  Cobalt c h l o r i d e paper moisture.  ( s u p p l i e d ) i s s e n s i t i v e to  In the presence of moisture, t h i s blue  paper turns p i n k . 4)  R e l a t i v e humidity i s a measure of the q u a n t i t y of moisture i n the a i r compared to the same a i r when saturated.  R e l a t i v e humidity i s measured as a %, i e .  100% i s s a t u r a t i o n ; 60% would mean the a i r i s 60% s a t u r a t e d with m o i s t u r e . sling B)  Statement How  Humidity i s measured using a  paychrometer. of the Problem  does a change i n r e l a t i v e humidity a f f e t  t r a n s p i r a t i o n from a geranium  plant?  the rate of  -  108 -  The Lab  Rate of T r a n s p i r a t i o n and Humidity 6 - Teacher's Notes  A)  Apparatus Supplied  - Geranium p l a n t s - Ring stands,  clamps  - g l a s s tubing  (2mm diameter)  - rubber - razor  tubing blade  - 100 and 250 ml beakers B)  Hypothesis - s a t u r a t e d pressure  a i r (R.H.=100%) provides on l e a f  t r a n s p i r a t i o n i n view of the  f a c t that saturated  a i r can no longer  water that i s bein g t r a n s p i r e d . students  will  dryer a i r w i l l  reverse hold  Most  use t h i s as an i n d i c a t i o n that allow  f o r more r a p i d  t r a n s p i r a t i o n and that saturated  air will  reduce the t r a n s p i r a t i o n rate c l o s e to zero. C)  Experimental Procedure - two d i f f i c u l t i e s students 1)  set out to design  will  emerge when  t h e i r procedure -  How to c o n t r o l r e l a t i v e ,  ambient  humidity. 2)  How i s measure the rate of transpiration.  T h i s f i r s t problem may be overcome by taking measurements over a p e r i o d of s e v e r a l days, as R.H. v a r i e s c o n s i d e r a b l y  from day to day  depending on m e t e o r o l o g i c a l  conditions.  The  second problem w i l l  be solved  v a r i e t y of ways the best of which the  in a incorporate  use of an instrument that measures the  uptake of water by the p l a n t ' s roots as an i n d i c a t i o n of t r a n s p i r a t i o n r a t e .  - 109 Data and A n a l y s i s  - graphical  the r e l a t i o n s h i p transpiration. variable  analyses r e a d i l y  between humidity and rate of As humidity  i t i s displayed  Discussion - controlling variables experiment, several  indicate  i s the independent  on the x - a x i s . is difficult  in this  p a r t i c u l a r l y i f the procedures  days f o r completion.  be c o n t r o l l e d  take  Temperature must  as must q u a l i t y , q u a n t i t y and  d u r a t i o n of l i g h t . Many students w i l l make mention of the many and varied  p r a c t i c a l problems with  apparatus.  their  - 110  -  L a b o r a t o r y 7 - The Rate of T r a n s p i r a t i o n and Temperature  A)  P r i o r Knowledge 1)  T h i s i s a c o n t i n u a t i o n of the previous l a b i n the sense that you w i l l transpiration  2)  be measuring the rate of  again.  In t h i s case you w i l l the  r e l a t e ambient temperature to  r a t e of t r a n s p i r a t i o n .  °C and w i l l  Temperature  i s measured i n  be measured using a standard  laboratory  thermometer - + 0.02°C. (degree of e r r o r ) 3)  In view of the d i s c r e p a n c i e s obtained using your p r e v i o u s apparatus, t h i s l a b provides an o p p o r t u n i t y to  'upgrade' your technique, therby i n c r e a s i n g your  experimental B)  validity.  Statement of the Problem How of  does a change  i n ambient temperature a f f e c t  t r a n s p i r a t i o n from a geranium p l a n t ?  the rate  -  The  -  Rate of T r a n s p i r a t i o n and Temperature - Lab 7 The  the  I l l  same apparatus i s s u p p l i e d  f o r t h i s l a b us that f o r  l a s t l a b as t h i s experiment i s e s s e n t i a l l y a c o n t i n u a t i o n  of l a b 6. It  i s hoped that by c o n t i n u i n g  an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the  same phenomena (that of t r a n s p i r a t i o n ) that tudents w i l l  learn  from past e r r o r s and use e i t h e r a m o d i f i c a t i o n of previous technique or a wholly new technique depending on degree o f previous The  error. v a r i a b l e f a c t o r of temperature i s more e a s i l y v a r i e d  than humidity so the students should r e s u l t s occurs i n a s h o r t e r p e r i o d By  find  using p r i o r experience from a previous  increase  obtaining  of time.  ( l a b 6 ) i t i s hoped that students w i l l but  that  piece of work  not only work f a s t e r  the v a l i d i t y of t h e i r r e s u l t s .  - 112 -  APPENDIX F  Raw Scores for T, and T  - 113 SPI RAW  SCORES - PRE TEST  BLOCK B - CONTROL Student Number  Score ( x )  x=x-x  X  2  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Female 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  110 121 111 112 99 103 117 125 95 108 104 92 129 110  1.86 12.86 2.86 3.86 9.14 5.14 8 .86 16.86 13.14 0.14 4.14 16.14 20.86 1.86  3.46 165.38 8.18 14 .9 83.54 26 .42 78.5 284 .26 172.66 0.02 17.14 260 .5 435.14 3.46  15 16 17 18 19 20 21  130 96 112 111 101 80 105  21.86 12.14 3 .86 2.86 7 .14 28 .14 3 .14  477 .86 147.38 14.9 8.18 51.0 791.9 9.9  Male  21 )2270.98 6 = 108.14  21 )3054. 68 = 145 .46  Z x  2  x = ^145.46 = 12.06 (Mean) 6 =  108.14  (Std. Dev. )x = 12 .06 Range  =  80 - 130  - 114 SPI RAW  SCORES - POST TEST  BLOCK B - CONTROL Student Number  Score (x)  x=x-x  X  2  1 2 3 4 5 Female 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  111 121 110 100 109 105 117 126 94 109 109 93 123 111  2.67 12 .67 1.67 8.33 0 .33 3.33 8.67 17.67 14.33 0.67 0.67 15.33 14 .67 2.67  7.13 160 .53 2.79 69.39 0.11 11.09 75.17 312 .23 205.35 0.45 0.45 235.01 215.21 7.13  15 16 17 18 19 20 21  128 97 113 110 103 82 104  19 .67 11.33 4 .67 1.67 5.33 26 .33 4 .33  386 .91 128.37 21.81 2.79 28.41 693.27 18 .75  Male  21 )2275 6 = 108.33  21 )2662. 54 £ x = 126 .79 2  x = 4126 .79 = 11.26 (Mean) 6 =  108 .33  (Std. Dev.)sr= 11.26 Range  =  82 - 128  -  SPI RAW  115 -  SCORES - PRE TEST  BLOCK C - EXPERIMENTAL Student Number 1 2 3 4  Female 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  Male  13 14 15  16  17 18 19 20  Score (x)  x=x-x  X  2  97 110 123 83 134 93 125 95 104 103 125 108  10.5 2.5 15.5 24.5 26.5 14 .5 17.5 12.5 3.5 4.5 17.5 0.5  110.25 6.25 240.25 600.25 702.25 210.25 306.25 156.25 12.25 20 .25 306.25 0.25  82 103 120 100 114 125 100 108  25.5 4.5 12.5 7.5 6.5 16 .5 7.5 0.5  650.25 20 .25 156.25 56 .25 42.25 272.25 56.25 0.25  20 )2150 6 = 107.5  20 )3925.0 E x = 196.25 2  x = n)l96 .25 = 14 .01  (Mean)  6=  107.5  (Std. Dev. )x = 14 .01 Range  =  82 - 134  - 116 SPI RAW BLOCK C -  SCORES - POST TEST  EXPERIMENTAL  Student Number  Score (x)  x=x-x  1 2 3 4 Female 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  105 115 123 89 135 99 127 101 109 107 110 114 86 106  5.45 4.55 12.555 21.45 24 .55 11.45 16 .55 9.45 1. 45 3, 45 0.45 3.55 24 .45 4.45  29.7 20 .7 157.5 460.1 602 131 273 89 2 11 0 12 597.8 19.8  15 16 17 18 19 20  123 109 113 128 106 113  12 .55 1.45 2.55 17 .55 4 .45 2.55  157.5 2.1 6.5 308 .0 19.8 6.5  Male  20 ) 2209 6 = 110.45  •Ex  2  20 ) 2909.8 = 145.49 45 .49  x = /\)145 .49 = 12 (Mean) 6 =  110.45  (Std. Dev.)x= 12.06 Range  =  86 - 135  - 117 RAW SCORES - EXPERIMENTAL GROUP (BLOCK C) Student Number  x (pre score)  y (post  1 2 3 4 5 Female 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  97 110 123 83 134 93 125 95 104 103 125 108  105 115 123 89 135 99 127 101 109 107 110 114  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  82 103 120 100 114 124 100 108  86 106 123 109 113 128 106 113  Male  TABLE Tn  score)  - 118 RAW Student Number  SCORES - EXPERIMENTAL GROUP (BLOCK C) x (pre score)  y (post  1 2 3 4 5 Female 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  110 121 111 112 99 103 117 125 95 108 104 92 129 110  111 121 110 100 109 105 117 126 94 109 109 93 123 111  15 16 17 18 19 20 21  130 96 112 111 101 80 105  128 97 113 110 103 82 104  Male  TABLE T?  score)  - 119 -  APPENDIX G  Standard for  Deviation T]_ a n d  T2  Graphs  - 121 -  - 123 -  -  124  -  APPENDIX H  Data O u t l a y f o r the A n a l y s i s of  Covariance  - 125  -  Table 6 - Data Outlay -  Student Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  Y 105 115 123 89 135 99 127 101 109 107 110 114 86 106 123 109 113 128 106 113  Xl 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  X  X 2  97 110 123 83 134 93 125 95 104 103 125 108 82 103 120 100 114 124 100 108  3 97 110 123 83 134 93 125 95 104 103 125 108 82 103 120 100 114 124 100 108  - 126  -  Table 7 - Data Outlay Student Number  Y  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  111 121 110 100 109 105 117 126 94 109 109 93 123 111 128 97 113 110 103 82 104  *1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1  T  2  x  2  110 121 111 112 99 103 117 125 95 108 104 92 129 110 130 96 112 111 101 80 105  X  3  -110 -121 -111 -112 - 99 -103 -117 -125 - 95 108 -104 - 92 -129 -110 -130 - 96 -112 -111 -101 - 80 -105  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055316/manifest

Comment

Related Items