Comparative,Study,Strategies,n education A Comparative Study of 2 Strategies namely Concept Mapping &

Translation jobs are undertaken by professional translators who are well versed with at least two languages.Translation can work at two levels: inter-state or regional language translation and inter-national or foreign language translation. Some forms of parent involvement with the school such as communications with school, volunteering, attending school events and parent--parent connections appeared to have little effect on student achievement, especially in high school. Helpi

Bluetooth technology in computers and WAP ( Wireless Applicatio Protocol ) in electronics and human genome in medical science are just a few of the numerous advances that have taken placerecently. These advances indicate that science plays a vitalrole in modern society. Hence it becomes essential for thescience educationist to enhance meaningful learning, as today'sstudents are future architects of modern society. Hence the investigator has adopted Concept Mapping as one of thestrategies to introduce the concepts Semiconductor Heterostructures, IC for which Nobel Prize has been awardedduring the year 2000. Concept MapA Concept Map is a schematic device for representing a set ofconcept meanings embedded in a framework of propositions. In aConcept Map, the more general, more inclusive concepts should beat the apex of the Concept Map, with progressively morespecific, less inclusive concepts arranged below them. Since theconcepts are arranged hierarchically, meaningful learningprecedes more easily as new concepts or concept meanings aresubsumed under broader more inclusive concepts.Present StudyIn the present study the investigator introduced the 2 conceptsnamely Semiconductor Heterostructures, IC through two differentmethods namely Concept Mapping Method and Lecture Method. The XIstandard students of N.K.T.National Girls' Higher SecondarySchool, India (where the investigator is working) studying underState Board syllabus formed the sample. The class was dividedinto two groups of 20 students each and was treated as ControlGroup (CG) and Experimental Group (EG). Two B.Ed. trainees(K.R.Kavitha and N.V.Jaya Bharathi) of N.K.T.National College ofEducation carried the experimental part of the research studydeveloped by the investigator. Ms N.V.Jayabharathi taught thetwo concepts to Control Group through Lecture Method whileMs.K.R.Kavitha taught the same concepts to Experimental Group atthe same time through Concept Mapping Method.Objectives of the Study1.To find the effectiveness of Concept Mapping strategy overLecture Method on achievement in Physics of XI standard students.2.To study the effect of Scientific Attitude on achievement inPhysics of students learning through Lecture Method.3. To study the effect of Scientific Attitude on achievement inPhysics of students learning through Concept Mapping Method.Data CollectionA pre-test was administered for both the groups to assess thestudents' initial knowledge. Then the two concepts wereintroduced by two different methods to respective groups. Finallya post-test was administered to both the groups. TheExperimental Design, which is pre-test- treatment - post-test isshown in Table 1Experimental Design Table 1GroupS.S.pretest T.M.PosttestEG20A.T C.M.M.A.TCG20A.T L.M.A.T where SS means Sample Strength, TM means Teaching Method, AT meansAchievement Test in Physics, C.M.M means Concept Mapping Method,L.M. means Lectire MethodThe two B.Ed. trainees carried the research programmesimultaneously at the same time and were given one hour tocomplete the programme. By simultaneous implementation of theprogramme any error due to fatigue etc is neglected. A ScienceAttitude Scale developed by Dr. Mrs. Avinash Grewal was alsoadministered at the end of the session.The tools used in the study are1.Achievement Test developed by the investigator 2.ScienceAttitude Scale 3.Concept Maps 4.Lesson PlanAchievement TestThe Achievement Test consisting of 25 multiple-choice questionswas developed by the investigator and each question carries onemark. The Achievement Test served as both pre-test andpost-test. The investigator utilized the Scientific AttitudeScale (SAS) developed by Dr. Mrs. Avinash Grewal to determinethe attitudes of XI standard students participating in theresearch programme. The Science Attitude Scale (SAS) consistedof 20 items where 10 positive items (S.No2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20) and 10 negative items (S.No.1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17,19) are present.ScoringEach of the 10 positive items on the scale is assigned a weightranging from 4 (strongly agree ) to 0 (strongly disagree). Inthe case of 10 negative items the scale scoring is reversedranging from 0 (strongly agree) to 4(strongly disagree). Theattitude score of a subject is the sum total of scores in alltwenty items in the scale. Thus a maximum of eighty scores canbe obtained by the subject.Concept MapsSeven Concept Maps pertaining to the 2 concepts underconsideration were developed by the investigator.Lesson PlanA Lesson Plan according to which the concepts were introduced byLecture Method was also developed by the investigator.Data AnalysisThe analysis was performed by teaching the two concepts to twogroups namely Control Group (CG) and Experimental Group (EG)through Lecture Method and Concept Mapping Method. Beforecommencing the lesson the pre-test was given and after thelesson was taught the post-test was again administered.The Gain Score of Lecture Method is given by GL = LPO - LPRwhere GL is gain score of Lecture Method LPO is post-test scoreof Lecture Method LPR is pre-test score of Lecture MethodThe Gain Score of Concept Mapping Method is given by GC = CPO - CPRwhere GC is gain score of Concept Mapping Method CPO ispost-test score of Concept Mapping Method CPR is pre-test scoreof Concept Mapping MethodAnalysis of Critical RatiosCritical Ratios were calculated to test the significance ofdifference between the pre-test and post-test scores in LectureMethod and Concept Mapping Method. Critical Ratio between thepre-test and post-test scores in Lecture MethodThe Critical Ratio calculated in respect of pre-test andpost-test scores of Control Group taught by Lecture Method isgiven in Table 2. Table 2Test MeanS.D.?t? value L.S.Pretest 8.151.27610.49 P<0.01Posttest 14.952.519 Where L.S stand for Level of Significance.The results of Table 2 indicate that there is significantdifference between the post-test and pre-test scores of studentsof Control Group taught by Lecture Method. Since the post-testscore is greater than the pre-test score we can conclude thatthe performance of students is significantly higher than theirperformance in pre-test.Critical Ratio between the pre-test and post-test scores inConcept Mapping MethodThe Critical Ratio calculated in respect of pre-test scores ofExperimental Group taught by Concept Mapping Method is given inTable 3.Table 3TestMeanS.D.?t? value L.SPretest9.40.8 19.60 P<0.01Posttest 19.72.147 The results of Table 3 indicate that there is significantdifference between the post-test and pre-test scores of studentsof Experimental Group taught by Concept Mapping Method. Sincethe post-test score is greater than the pre-test score, we canconclude that the performance of students in post-test issignificantly higher than their performance in pre-test.Analysis of Gain ScoresThe Critical Ratio calculated in respect of Gain Scores of twogroups subjected to two different methods of teaching ispresented in Table 4 Table 4GroupsMeanS.D.?t? value L.SL.M6.81.3646.675P<0.01C.M.M.10.31.792 where L.M. stand for Lecture Method C.M.M. stand for ConceptMapping MethodThe results indicate that there is significant differencebetween the gain scores of two groups namely Lecture Method andConcept Mapping Method. Since the gain score of Concept MappingMethod is significantly greater than the gain score of LectureMethod it may be concluded that teaching through Concept Mappingstrategy has helped students in the Experimental Group toachieve high scores in the test.Coefficient of Correlation 'r' between the gain scores ofLecture Method and Science Attitude ScaleThe product moment coefficient of correlation 'r' calculated inrespect of gain scores of Lecture Method and Science AttitudeScale (SAS) scores is given in Table 5. Table 5Scores MeanS.D. r G.S.L.M.6.81.3640.9181SAS Score5.85.598 where G.S.L.M. stand for Gain Score of Lecture MethodThe high value of positive correlation indicate that ScienceAttitude and performance of students are positively correlated.That is, students with better attitude in science score bettermarks in science. Coefficient of correlation r between the gain scores of ConceptMapping Method and Science Attitude ScaleThe product moment coefficient of correlation r calculated inrespect of gain scores of Concept Mapping Method and ScienceAttitude Scale is given in Table 6 Table 6Scores Mean S.D. rC.M.M. 10.3 1.7920.8049SASScore 66.4 3.904 whereC.M.M. stand for Concept Mapping MethodThe high value of r indicate that Science Attitude andperformance of students are positively correlated. That isstudents with better attitude in science score better marks inscience.The findings of the study1.The gain scores of students taught through Concept MappingMethod is significantly higher than the gain score of studentstaught through Lecture Method.2.The students with better attitudes in Science have scoredbetter marks in their Achievement Test in Control Group taughtby Lecture Method3.The students with better attitudes in Science have scoredbetter marks in their Achievement Test in Experimental Grouptaught by Concept Mapping Method4.It was observed that the time factor involved in teaching /learning through Concept Mapping Method was less than the timetaken for Lecture Method. Hence considerable time could be savedapart from enhancing teaching / learning through Concept MappingMethod.ReferencesBooksGarrett. Henry E & R.S. Woodworth, (1979). Statistics inPsychology and Education. Hyderabad : International Book BureauNovak, Joseph D & D.Bob Gowin (1984) Learning How to Learn.England : Cambridge University Press.Semiconductor Heterostructures, IC Win Nobel. Press release ofthe Hindu, Oct 19, 2000Websiteshttp://www.nobel.se/announcement/2000/phyinfoen.html Article Tags: Namely Concept Mapping, Concept Mapping Method, Namely Concept, Concept Mapping, Lecture Method, Nobel Prize, Mapping Method, Experimental Group, Control Group, Gain Score