ASRO JOURNAL OF EDUCATION VOL.

1 (2016) - ISSUE 1: 6-19

www.asrongo.org/doi:3.2016.1.1.6

TEACHING STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPING SCIENTIFIC LITERACY AND

ON STUDENTS ACHIEVEMENT IN BIOLOGY
SALAMA YOUSSEF 1 & CHENNAOUI MOHAMMED2
1 Hassan 1st University, Biology Department, Polydisciplinary Faculty of Khouribga, 25000, Morocco.
2 Regional Centers for the Professions of Education and Training (CRMEF), El Jadida, Morocco email: [email protected] (M.
Chennaoui)
Article Info
Article received May 2015
Accepted November 2015
Published December 2015

Keywords:
Biology,
Student,
Learning,
Teaching strategy

Abstract
All too often biology courses over-emphasize trivial and easy-to-test activities that ask students
only to recall, recognize, describe, or "compare and contrast" information that has been
memorized. I have observed this weakness on the exams of major universities. Alfred
Whitehead noted that "So far as the mere imparting of information is concerned, no university
has had any justification for existence since the popularization of printing in the fifteenth
century." This is no less true today with the availability of the Internet. The introductory course
should incorporate a diversity of learning outcomes, and this diversity should be reflected both
in classroom activities and in student assessment protocols. The proposal will also make a case
for the urgent development of an online student-centered learning environment, including
possible activities that would be included in the course. A combination of multiple teaching
approaches is necessary for changing students learning from surface learning to deep learning,
passive learning to active learning, over-dependent learning to independent learning, and
developing students in the generic skills oaf scientist and the skills for lifelong learning
including problem solving skills, communication skills, and cooperative skill.

1. Introduction
Educational activities should reflect what real people
actually do, as biologically literate citizens or
employees. Little of their time is spent watching
lectures, rather they are involved in application of
information -- decision-making, problem-solving,
investigation, policy analysis, debate, critical
thinking, creative thinking, and information-retrieval.
These are the activities that should be occurring in the
lecture hall, field, and laboratory. Fortuitously, they
are also the kinds of activities that create an
exhilarating learning environment.
Since 2000, study after study has made it clear that
there is an alarming crisis in relation to students
interest in science, either as a possible future career,
or as an intrinsic interest that will continue after
school [1]. In the UK in the late 1960s, the
publication of the Dainton report [2] which examined
the flow of candidates in science and technology into

higher education documented a swing from science in

the school-age population as a whole. The list of
countries experiencing declining interest of students
in science is on the increase particularly among the
developed countries [1]. One factor which has
contributed to low interest in science by students is
the method adopted for teaching and learning science.
Fensham [1] listed four views of students which
contribute directly to low interest in science: (i)
Science teaching is predominantly transmissive, (ii)
The content of school science has an abstractness that
makes it irrelevant, (iii) Learning science is relatively
difficult, for both successful and unsuccessful
students, and (iv) Hence, it is not surprising that many
students in considering the senior secondary years are
saying: Why should I continue studying science
subjects when there are more interactive, interesting
and less difficult ones to study?

Auteur correspondant ; [email protected] (Y. Salama)

DOI: www.asrongo.org/doi:3.2016.1.1.6
This article cited as : Salama Y. & Chennaoui M. (2016) Teaching strategies for developing scientific literacy and on students
achievement in biology, ASRO Journal of Science Education, Vol 1 Issue 1, pages 6-19.

Salama Youssef & Chennaoui Mohammed, 2016

This unhealthy development in the disposition of

students towards science has sparked the search for
and development of alternative methods of science
teaching and learning which can stimulate students
interest and guarantee an educational system that
offers equal opportunities for all sexes. Science
education as a field of study is therefore in dire need
of methods with qualities such as lesson clarity,
promotion of self-activity, promotion of selfdevelopment, stimulation of interest and curiosity and
relying on the psychological process of teaching and
learning to recommend to science teachers. The
methods should encourage science teaching and
learning that is better than it is now.
Many students today are learning science in a passive
way in classrooms where information is organized
and presented to them by their teacher [3]. They noted
that often, the teacher pays little attention to what
students already know about science. In this learning
model, the information transmitted by the teacher and
curriculum materials are assumed to make sense and
seem reasonable to the students. This model views
science from a limited perspective. Science, seen in
this way, has been influenced by the manner in which
it is taught and studied. With this conception, science
is thus viewed as a collection of organized body of
information about the natural world. However,
another view of science is the dynamic interaction of
thought processes, skills and attitudes that help
learners develop a richer understanding of the natural
world and its impact on society. Moyer et al.,[3]
pointed out that science viewed in this way, sees
science as not just a body of knowledge but rather a
process for producing knowledge. This latter view of
science therefore calls for a change from the
transmission method of presenting science to students
to allowing the students to interact with the natural
world to create knowledge.
Arising from the view of science as a process for
generating knowledge, major reform efforts were
carried out in science education in the 1990s and
culminated in the development of the National
Science Education Standards (NSES) [4] in the U.S.
The content standards presented in the National
Standards elaborate what students should understand
and able to do in natural science, and the personal and
social context that should be considered in the design
of science curriculum. Bybee et al.,[5] stated that
these standards emphasize inquiry-oriented
activities, connections between science and
technology, the history and nature of science as
students develop an understanding of fundamental
ideas and abilities in science, and a vision of good
science teaching model. The NSES, although
recommended for the U.S educational system, are
internationally practiced in science education. Bybee
et al.,[5] noted that the standards encourage all

students including members of populations defined

by race, ethnicity, economic status, gender, and
physical and intellectual capacity - to study science
throughout their school years and to pursue career in
science. The NSES emphasize that the learning of
science is an active process. Learning science is
something that students do, not something that is done
for them. They further stated that doing science
requires students to be involved in both physical and
mental processes, collectively known as scientific
inquiry. Scientific inquiry requires both hands-on
activities and minds-on as well.
Knowledge, which is long lasting and available for
use later, is created through the transmission of
experience. The expansion of education, creation of
new fields of discipline and development of different
instructional approaches, calls for detailed
assessment of instructional strategies before they are
selected to use in science classroom. Also with the
increasing emphasis on lesson clarity, promotion of
self-activity, stimulation of interest and curiosity,
teaching methods associated with subject matter
disciplines, instructional variety, retention rates and
life-long learning, there is good reason to explore
other instructional approaches for teaching science
different from the one predominantly used (lecture)
for very long time. This exploration is to determine if
the methods have varying effects on students
achievement when compared with the lifelong
objectives of teaching science. This indeed formed
the rationale for the current study of determining the
effects of concept mapping, cooperative learning,
learning cycle and lecture instructional strategies on
students achievement and retention of biological
knowledge when used for instruction.
Four Theories of Learning
1.1. Transmission Method (Traditional Method)
The transmission view of teaching and learning sees
teachers as passing over their knowledge to their
pupils [5-9]. This view is strongly linked to
expository teaching; teachers standing at the front
telling their pupils about scientific ideas. The
transmission view implies that the pupils role in the
learning process is largely passive, and that a pupils
mind is a tabula rasa- a blank state onto which
knowledge can be written. The lecture or traditional
teaching method has the following advantages:
a) It is easy to create interest in a topic or subject
by the teacher.
b) Students easily acquire knowledge, new
information, and explanation of events or
things.
c) It helps students to clarify and gain better
understanding of a subject, topic, matter or
event.
7

d) Students and teachers cover more content

materials within a short period of time.
The major limitation of this method is that there is
relatively little student activity and involvement [1012]. Thus, the students are said to be passive .The
limitation experienced with the transmission
approach led to the development of other views of
science teaching and learning.
1.2. Discovery Method
Discovering learning involves presenting pupils with
information in a form which requires them to discern
relationships within the information and to structure
and make sense of the information and relationship.
This form of self-directed learning could promote
higher forms of thinking with the aid of metacognitive strategies [13]. Discovery learning sees
pupils as having a much more active role in their
learning. Proponents of this approach argue that the
enhanced learning by learners is due to their active
participation in learning process.
The use of discovery approach for teaching and
learning has been associated with science education
for over one hundred years now [5, 14]. Ajaja[15]
noted that the school science curricula like Biological
Science Curriculum Study (BSCS) [16], Chemical
Education Material Study (CEMS) [17] and Chemical
Bond Approach (CBA) [18] which adopted the
discovery approach to teaching emphasized the
presentation of science to pupils as a way in which
they could conduct their own inquiries into the nature
of things. Discovery learning in science places a
strong emphasis on practical work organized in such
a way that pupils make observations, look for
patterns, and come up with possible explanation for
those patterns.
The discovery method, unlike the lecture method, has
the following advantages:
1) It helps the pupil understand the material
better by showing him that the concepts
involved are so reasonable that he can
discover them himself or herself.
2) It helps a learner to remember concepts,
principles and laws better since what is
discovered is by far less likely to be
forgotten.
3) It helps the individual to learn on his own so
that he or she may become increasingly
independent of the teacher.
4) It keeps the teacher in touch with his or her
class so that he or she knows whether the
pupils understand or follow the work.
After a long use of discovery approach for teaching
and learning of science, it became apparent that there
were limitations with the approach. Bennett [6]
reported that questions were asked about the
appropriateness of asking pupils to discover things

for themselves when both teachers and pupils knew

that the answers were already there in the form of
currently accepted scientific theories. There was also
a question over the nature of the understanding pupils
developed when left to their own devices and to what
extent pupils discover the scientifically accepted
explanations of the phenomena they experience.
These identified limitations and criticisms levied
against discovery learning, paved the way for a shift
in research efforts from discovery learning to
constructivism.
1.3. Developmental views of learning
Research work in the field of psychology of education
has examined how childrens abilities to obtain,
process and use information develop as they grow and
mature. Bennett [6] noted that the single most
influential theory of cognitive development in the
twentieth century emerged from the work of Jean
Piaget. His theory describes four stages of intellectual
development through which children pass:
Sensori-motor stage (0-2 years) Children
learn through their senses and physical
experiences.
Pre-operational stage (2-7 years) Children
reason directly from what they perceive and
may not be logical.
Concrete operational stage (7-11 years)
Thinking characterized by logic and does not
require real objectives at hand.
Formal operational stage; (11 years and
above) Children become capable of abstract
thought.

2. Which strategy best suits biology teaching?

Two key processes in learning are central to Piagets
theory. Piaget viewed learning as an active process in
which the learner compares and contrasts modes of
thinking about new experiences with those of prior
experiences. Moyer et al., [3] noted that often the
child realizes that the explanation used for an earlier
experience does not fit with a new experience. This is
resolved by the learner having to modify his/her way
of thinking to come to a conclusion that seems
personally reasonable Piaget called this, process of
thought adjustment equilibration [19]. This
adaptation occurs through the two active thought
processes, assimilation and accommodation.
2.1. Constructivism
Cognitive psychologists and science educators
influenced by the early work of [20-24] are of the
view that useful knowledge is not passed along intact
from one person to another, nor is it discovered in the
external world. The synthesis of the ideas generated
from these theorists gave rise to the constructivist
perspective. The constructivist insists that knowledge
8

Salama Youssef & Chennaoui Mohammed, 2016

is produced by the learner [3, 6, 21, 25]. Underlying

the constructivist perspective is the notion that all
people normally try to make sense of their world.
Through their own constructive processes,
individuals impose order and predictability on
phenomena and events of the world. Bybee et al., [5]
stressed that the constructivists contend that we
cannot directly teach a student the principles of
science.
2.2. Three Instructional Strategies
The notion that learning is influenced by prior
experiences and must be constructed by the learner
led to the development of what has become the
dominant view of learning in science education today
[5, 6, 15, 26, 27].The impact and influence of this
view of learning gave rise to the development of new
strategies of teaching science such as concept
mapping, cooperative learning and learning cycle
where the emphasis is on the active participation of
learners in the learning process.
All three instructional strategies share complimentary
objectives of engaging students in the learning
process and promoting higher thought processes and
more authentic behaviors required for scientific and
technological development. Wise and Okey[28]
stated that effective science classroom appears to be
one in which students are active, kept aware of
instructional objectives and receive feedback on their
progress towards the stated objectives. In classroom
where elements of constructivism are incorporated in
teaching and learning, students get opportunities to
physically interact with instructional materials and
engage in varied kinds of activities. This position
suggests that for effective learning to take place,
students must be actively involved in the learning
process. The three instructional strategies which
employed the principles of constructivism are
discussed below [28, 29].
2.3. Concept Mapping
A concept map is a two-dimensional representation of
the relationship between key ideas. At first glance, a
concept map looks like a flow chart in which key
terms are placed in boxes connected by directional
arrows. When based on educational psychology
theories of how we organize information, concept
maps are hierarchical, with broader, more general
items at the top and more specific topics arranged in
a cascade below them. According to Novak[29], a
standard concept map construction methods include
the following series of steps:
i. define the topic,
ii. list the most important concepts;
iii. arrange concepts hierarchically;
iv. add links to form a preliminary concept map;
v. add linking phrases;

vi. add cross links; and

vii. review map.
The principle of a concept map is that it provides a
visual means of showing connections and
relationships between a hierarchy of ideas ranging
from the very concrete to the abstract [6, 30]. Patrick
[15] noted that concept maps help in understanding
ideas by showing the connections with other ideas.
The benefits of concept mapping are mainly to the
individual making the map. The process of
simplifying concepts and arranging them on a page
forces the learner to think about what is most
important. It helps to clarify ones thought and
understanding and makes learning more meaningful.
A concept map can be a heuristic device that is a
process in which the learner can make discoveries and
uncover meanings through trial and error. It helps in
the development of critical thinking skills which is a
conscious effort to think about thinking.
Patrick [15] stated that the development of concept
mapping as an instructional tool can be traced to the
early work of Ausubel and others in the 1970s.
Continuing, Patrick noted that since its introduction,
concept mapping has become a very useful tool in
teaching and learning and particularly in science
education. Literature on concept mapping indicates
that it has been used for instruction, assessment and
learning [26, 31-34].
Some studies on the effects of concept mapping when
used as an instructional tool for teaching and learning,
indicated its relevance in improving the cognitive and
affective aspects of learning. A study conducted by
Patrick [15] determined the effects of concept
mapping as a study skill on students achievement in
Biology. The major findings of this study indicated a
significant and consistent improvement in Biology
achievement as the period of experience with the use
of the method increased. Also, students who used
concept mapping as a study skill retained biological
knowledge longer than those who used other
methods. All the students interviewed in the concept
mapping classroom agreed that concept maps helped
them not only in the determination of the
relationships among the concepts but also shaped
their understanding of the concepts and increased
their critical thinking. The findings of Hall, Hall et
al.,[35], and Kinchin[36, 37] were similar to these
research findings. Kinchin[36] found a significant
impact of concept mapping on achievement when
used for instructing secondary school biology
students. Kinchin[37] in a study comparing the effect
of the use of concept mapping as a study skill on
students achievement, found a positive effect on
students who used concept maps to revise and
summarize the materials given.
Apart from studies which solely determined the
effects of concept mapping on students' achievement,
9

mapping has been used along with other instructional

strategies and their combined effects on students
achievement determined. Whereas some studies
showed significant improvement on students
achievement when concept mapping was combined
with other instructional strategies, others found no
significant differences. For example, Okebukola[38]
investigated whether concept mapping alone as an
instructional strategy in Biology would enhance
meaningful learning when compared with concept
mapping in cooperative learning groups. The study
found a significantly higher achievement scores in
Biology among students in the concept mapping
group than those in class, taught with concept
mapping and cooperative learning group.
Jegede et al.,[39],comparing the effectiveness of
concept maps as teaching strategy in Nigeria,
andEzeudu[40],examining the effect of concept
mapping on students chemistry achievement in
Enugu and Nsukka educational zones, found that
students taught with concept mapping significantly
performed better on achievement tests than those in
the control group. These findings indicate that
concept mapping facilitates meaningful learning and
understanding of concepts in science. Mensah et
al.,[41], in a similar study in senior secondary schools
in Ghana, found that concept mapping can be used as
a pre-instructional and post-instructional tool in
Biology.
Markwo and Lonning [42] investigated the use of
students constructed maps and the effects the maps
had on students conceptual understanding of
Chemistry experiment that they performed. They
foundthat learning was enhanced and the construction
of the pre and post instruction concept maps did help
students understand the concepts in the experiments
they performed.
Novak [43] and Ezeudu [40] provided two opposing
views on how concept mapping affect students of
different sexes. Ezeudu [40], who studied the
interaction effect between concept mapping and
gender on achievement in Chemistry, found that the
male students significantly out-performed the
females in the achievement test administered. Novak
[43] found that there was no significant difference in
achievement between males and females taught with
concept mapping. This is consistent with the finding
of Patrick [15] as earlier reported.
The major limitation of concept mapping is that it taps
high cognitive ability and a very good mastery of the
subject area. Low ability teachers and learners may
not be able to draw and use concept maps for teaching
and learning. Bennett [6] identified two major
limitations of the use of concept mapping in
instruction. First, concept mapping is not easy to
construct, and respondents require training and
practice in producing maps. Second, there are

difficulties with the interpretation of concept maps in

particular with devising appropriate ways of scoring
to enable valid comparisons to be made. Thus
limitations are found to frustrate low achievers in
mastering the techniques required for the use.
2.4. Cooperative Learning
Cooperative learning is an instructional strategy
which organizes students in small groups so that they
can work together to maximize their own and each
others learning. Specifically, the cooperative
learning approach to instruction is where students are
arranged in pairs or small groups to help each other
learn assigned material [26, 34]. Interaction among
students in cooperative learning groups is intense and
prolonged [13]. In cooperative learning groups,
unlike self-directed inquiry, students gradually take
responsibility for each others learning. Borich[13]
and Trowbridge et al.,[26] identified four basic
elements in cooperative learning models. Small
groups must be structured for positive
interdependence; there should be face-to-face
interactions, individual accountability, and the use of
interpersonal and small group skills.
Cooperative learning has been found to be useful in
several areas such as helping learners acquire the
basic cooperative attitudes and values they need to
think independently inside and outside the classroom
[13, 31]; promoting the communication of pre social
behavior; encouraging higher order thought
processes; and fostering concept understanding and
achievement [13, 26, 31, 34]. Cooperative learning
brings together in adult-like settings which, when
carefully planned and executed can provide
appropriate models of social behavior [44]. Steven
and Slavin[44] noted that if all other benefits of
cooperative learning were not enough, the fact that it
has been linked to increase in the academic
achievement of learners at all ability levels is another
reason for its use. Cooperative learning is known to
actively engage students in the learning process and
seeks to improve the critical thinking, reasoning, and
problem solving skills of the learner [45-47].
A review of studies on the effects of cooperative
learning on students achievement indicated that
cooperative learning gains are not limited to a
particular ability level or sex but to all who engage in
it [45, 48-51]. Stevens and Slavin [44] linked
cooperative learning to increase in academic
achievement of learners at all ability levels. While
studies by Glassman [52] and Johnson et al.,[31]
found cooperative learning to emphasize the status
and respect for all group members, regardless of
gender. Very importantly, the study by Crosby and
Owens [49] found that different cooperative learning
strategies can be employed to help low ability

10

Salama Youssef & Chennaoui Mohammed, 2016

students who had difficulties making success in the

traditional classroom to improve achievement.
A more recent study by Ajaja and Eravwoke[48]
reaffirmed the ability of cooperative learning when
used as an instructional strategy to bring about
significant improvement in students achievement in
school science subjects. The findings of the study
indicated that students in cooperative learning group
outscored those in the lecture group in an
achievement test and a non significant difference in
achievement scores between male and female
students in the cooperative learning group.
The major disadvantages of cooperative learning
include:
i. not all members of a group will participate in
solving the problems they are confronted
with;
ii. some very active members of a group may
overshadow less active ones;
iii. the method is time consuming; and
iv. low ability students who solely depend on the
teacher for all information may not be able to
make any contributions during cooperative
learning.

3. Learning Cycle
The learning cycle is a generic term used to describe
any model of scientific inquiry that encourages
students to develop their own understanding of a
scientific concept, explore and deepen that
understanding and then apply the concept to new
situations [53]. The learning cycle is an established
planning method in science education and is
consistent with contemporary theories about how
individuals learn [22]. It is useful in creating
opportunities to learn science. There are different
models of the learning cycle; popular among these
models are the three-phase model, four-phase model
and the five-phase model.
Moyer et al.,[3] stated that the learning cycle model
of learning and teaching evolved for the past 40 years.
The emergence of this model was influenced by the
work of Jean Piaget and its application by Atkin and
Karplus[54], who applied cognitive development
theory and discovery learning to instructional
strategies in elementary science. Karplus and Myron
Atkin with the support of the National Science
Foundation developed a three phase learning cycle
that served as the central teaching/learning strategy in
the
newly
introduced
science
curriculum
improvement study (SCIS) program[54].
The first three phase model of the learning cycle
consisted of: Exploration, Invention and Discovery
and were first used in the SCIS program [3, 34].
Continuing, they noted that these terms were
modified to Exploration, Concept Introduction and
Concept Application by Karplus. Moyer et al.,[3]

reported the observation of Barman and Kofar[55]

and Hackett and Moyer [56] that the cycle evolved
through modification to include additional phases
such as engage, explore, explain, elaborate, extend
and apply and are used to frame single guided
discovery lesson as well as extend experiences such
as chapters and units. They noted that a fifth phase,
evaluate, was incorporated into an elementary science
program developed by the Biological Science
Curriculum Study [57]. These series of modifications
gave birth to the model called 5E learning cycle the
model used for this study.
Studies by Nuholu and Yaln[58] and Ajaja[30]
showed that learning cycle enhanced the retention of
science knowledge. Nuholu and Yaln[58]
specifically emphasized that learning cycle make
knowledge long lasting and that students become
more capable of applying their knowledge in other
areas outside the original context. There appears to be
scarcity of literature on the effect of learning cycle on
retention when separated from achievement as a
whole.

4. Successful learning
The problem of successful learning is at the heart of
many contemporary studies that are concerned with
the development of abilities [59], observing the
dimensions of learning [60], developing seven
intelligences [61], and teaching with the five
dimensions of learning. According to Marzano et
al.,[62]five types of thinking, called the five
dimensions of learning, are essential for successful
learning. That is what is essential for differentiating
the learning process from its results and seeing the
close connection between them.
Learning as a process means students making
conscious efforts to achieve their personal
educational needs, interests and goals in accordance
with social conditions for effective adaptation and
integration in social life, and in accordance with the
current state of science and culture. It involves
"processes of acquiring knowledge and skills through
practice, teaching or information. Learning by doing
is recommended nowadays and is defined as "the
process of acquiring understanding, knowledge, skills
and attitudes through practical and applied activities."
It is the process of becoming competent.
Learning as a result is represented with the expected
results, obtained by the student, which can be the
basis and means for further learning. "Knowledge
changes knowledge. Knowledge should be used with
the meaning of decision making, problem solving,
goals, experimental testing, investigation and
analysis of the system. Effective learning is assessed
by its results in relation to the objectives.
Education in the modern world is not limited to a
certain period of human life but is a lifelong process.
11

It is "the beating heart of society," a bridge between

past, present and future and its meaning becomes
deeper and deeper with time. People need to return to
learning so as to cope with new situations arising in
their personal and working life. This need is very
obvious and is becoming increasingly stronger. The
only means to achieve this that everyone learns how
to learn. For this purpose, it is necessary to stick to
the four pillars: learning to live together, learning for
knowledge, learning for actinag, and learning to be"
[63].
For the life in the twenty-first century, new personal
characteristics are needed - memory, physical
abilities, aesthetic feelings, communication skills,
and charisma of the leader. Knowledge is dynamic
and constantly changing from one state into another,
which is what has to be acquired, restored and used in
life.
Today's world of expanding information technology
and collaborative scientific research demands that
students be able to communicate across disciplines
and cultures. As instructors, we need to help our
students learn how to apply the scientific process, and
weave it into a useable fabric with other disciplinary
approaches.

5. What should we do in the future?

We have been introduced to a number of theories of
learning and ways in which we can teach science to
encourage the development of deep learning
strategies in our students. Contemporary teaching
approaches in the sciences currently focus on studentcentred activities, and how we can encourage students
to develop lifelong learning skills. This is especially
important in science with the current information
explosion.
The purpose of teaching is not to import content
knowledge only, but to encourage the development of
generic skills of a student (e.g. scientific writing,
communication, computing, problem solving and
experimental design, data handling skills and lifelong
learning skills). Teachers need to reconsider what
they will teach and must also understand how
students learn. Encouraging a student-centred
learning approach.

6. Combination of multiple teaching strategies

For teaching our course, I do not believe there is a
single teaching method suitable. The methods will
depend on the characteristics and content of the
course. We should combine multiple methods of
teaching together, using them appropriately
according to the actual situation. At present, we
should retain the traditional teaching form the
lecture. Probably the most useful teaching and
learning strategies that could be introduced into the
lecture would be the use of case study scenarios and

concept mapping. Activities such as teamwork,

including poster preparation and presentation, are
better introduced into the practical classes.
6.1. Applications of team work
It is well known that having students work in small
peer groups, is one of the better ways to teach science
[47, 64] and this includes teaching science via case
studies! The use of peer group learning scenarios
helps to overcome any initial student reticence,
fosters the development of good communication
skills, and promotes positive social interactions
within the peer group Cooperative learning may occur
in or out of class. In-class exercises may involve
answering or generating questions, explaining
observations, working through derivations, solving
problems,
summarizing
lecture
material,
troubleshooting, and brainstorming. Out-of-class
activities include carrying out experiments or
research studies, completing problem sets or design
projects, writing reports, and preparing class
presentations [65].
6.2. Discussions in large classes
Large group discussions can be an excellent learning
tool, but how can we use them in a classroom? Most
science teachers do not have the experience to run
these types of classes. Preparation and control are the
key ingredients. Teachers should use appropriate
questions, body language, blackboard planning, and
summarization to make it all work. This is method to
give students a question during his lecture, and allow
them to discuss amongst themselves for 10 minutes
and then he lets students give their answers whilst he
writes those he thinks are correct or relevant on to an
overhead. He gives positive feedback and praise to
the students and then finally gives a conclusion about
the question.
6.3. Poster
Poster work is another useful team activity for
students. It is usually an out-of-class activity for a
small peer group. Such activities help students to
develop a deeper understanding of what they are
learning, through cooperation with one another. In
addition it helps them develop design skills and
presentation skills. There are other forms of
teamwork like the peer group activity, e.g. by using
interesting games to motivate students and generate
active participation in learning and helping them to
understand and consolidate what they have learned.
6.4. Use of concept mapping
Concept mapping is an activity with numerous uses
in the biology classroom. Its value in planning,
teaching, revision, and assessment, and the attitudes
of students and teachers towards its use, are

12

Salama Youssef & Chennaoui Mohammed, 2016

discussed.Comments made are illustrated with

excerpts from interviews with teachers and students
who were involved in classroom concept mapping
exercises. The use of expert maps for scoring is
described, and some of the pitfalls are considered.
Finally, the value of concept mapping as an aid to
reflective practice is discussed.
Visual construction tools
There are various visual construction devices or
'graphic organizers available for use in the
classroom. Such tools help students to visualise how
major ideas are related to their own prior knowledge,
subordinate ideas, and associated ideas from other
topic areas.
With specific reference to science education, the
range of graphic organizers has been reviewed by
Hamer et al.[66].Each of these devices has its own
strengths and weaknesses, but it is concept mapping,
as developed by Novak [67], about which the research
literature has been so consistently positive. This
technique is explicitly grounded in David Ausubel's
assimilation theory of learning, of which the central
idea is that of meaningful learning (described in
Novak, [68]). In this the student required to make a
conscious effort to identify the key concepts in new
knowledge and relate them to concepts in his/her
existing knowledge structure.
Concept mapping is a highly flexible tool that can be
adapted for use by almost any group of learners. The
standard presentation (described in this article) can be
modified to include: colour-coding of different
concept types; grouping of concept types, or using
variously shaped concept boxes, to guide students
with special needs to an appropriate answer (e.g.
Adamczyket al.,[69]); creating three-dimensional
map structures as mobiles or cones to facilitate
discussions or the creation of concept mapping games
(e.g. Kinchin, [70]).
An example of a traditional concept map format is
given in Figure 1. The concepts are written in boxes
and linked bylabelled arrows. The most inclusive
concepts appear towards the top of the map, with
more subordinate concepts towards the bottom.
Where possible, these are anchored with specific
examples. Whilst each concept can only appear in one
place on the map, it may be linked to any number of
others. The map in Figure 1 has been drawn in a way
that emphasises the hierarchical nature of the ideas
described.
One of the questions that students and teachers often
ask is 'how many concept boxes should be included?'.
There is no right answer to this, but mappers should
be discouraged from using so many that it becomes
unmanageable or unclear, as maps are only really
useful if they portray a clear representation of the
author's thoughts. I have found that maps with more

than about 20 concept boxes become rather unwieldy,

and might be better if they were 'pruned' or drawn as
two separate maps.
In general, the research literature demonstrates
reluctance to highlight any problems associated with
concept mapping.
Hodson [71] notes that some students may wish to
conceal some aspects of their understanding and so
their maps would not provide 'total insight' to the
student's perspective. In addition, it is clear from
observations of changes in students' maps (even over
a short period of time), that such structures are in a
continual state of flux in an active learner. Therefore,
a map that is to be used as the basis for further
instruction has a 'limited shelf life', after which it is
simply an historical record. The active use of concept
maps could be applied to any of four stages of the
teaching/learning process: Planning and preparation;
Formative
learning;
Revision/summarizing;
Assessment.
Planning and preparation
It has been shown that the planning of instructional
sequences can be helped by the process of concept
mapping to provide a coherent structure to teaching
materials and making essential links explicit (e.g.
Martin [72]). This may be particularly helpful in cases
where 'non-specialists' (i.e. chemists or physicists) are
teaching biology, as they may appreciate the support
offered by a biologist colleague's map. Martin gave
the following advantages to be gained by this
approach to lesson preparation:
- Increased meaning of the material for the
teacher.
- Ownership of the material by the teachers.
- Increased concept integration.
- Decreased likelihood of omitting key
material.
- Increased capacity to meet student needs
through recognizing students perceptions of
the material.
- Increased likelihood that teachers will see
multiple ways of constructing meaning.
Following from this, Martin viewed concept mapping
to be a viable agent for curriculum change. This
would put teachers in the position of being 'active
innovators rather than the passive receivers of
innovation' that has been the implicit assumption of
so many recent educational reforms.
Formative learning
Previous studies have suggested that the use of
concept mapping in classes can help students to gain
a more unified understanding of a topic, organise their
knowledge for more effective problem solving, and
13

Fig. 1: A concept map giving one perspective on 'animals'

understand how they learn (i.e. become more

metacognitively aware).It has been suggested that the
promotion of meaningful learning resulting from
concept mapping can act to reduce subject-based
anxiety and overcome differential gender-related
performance with respect to learning and
achievement in science.
Concept mapping can also be used as a cognitive
approach to compensate when a learner exhibits a
one-sided learning strategy (Huai [73]). For 'holists',
who have a 'global approach', concept mapping can
help the learner to focus on critical details, whereas,
'serialists' can be stimulated to take a wider
perspective.
Students who gain most from concept mapping may
be those identified by Silverman [74] as 'visualspatial learners', who excel when provided with visual
representations. Such students reject rote
memorisation and have a need to see of the isolated
ideas typically presented in lessons. This suggests
that for teachers to optimise the benefits of concept
mapping for their students, they first need to be
familiar with their students' current learning
strategies.
In describing the value of concept mapping, Schmid
and Telaro[75] have commented that: 'Biology is so
difficult to learn because it consists of a myriad of
unfamiliar concepts involving complex relations. The
schools' favored approach to teaching unfamiliar
material is rote learning. Rote learning predictably
fails in the face of multilevel, complex interactions
involved in biology. Concept mapping ... stresses

meaningful learning, and appears to be ideally suited

to address biological content.'

7. Are the learning outcomes relevant?

Learning outcomes are descriptions of what students
should be able to know and do following a particular
course or program. Learning outcomes are useful in
that they identify a set of goals for instructors to use
in their teaching. These learning outcomes provide an
essential set of building blocks for the assessment of
students performance. Most universities and
professional
organizations
recommend
that
instructors identify a set of objectives for each course
and assess the extent to students meet these
objectives.
Rigorously examine the learning needs of
your students as future technicians, scientists,
and citizens, and compose a list of learning
outcomes that reflects those needs.
Students will become good decision-makers
only if they have practiced weighing
information and making decisions. They do
not greatly benefit from simply being asked
to recall information.
For example, a learning outcome claiming
that students will be able to "describe"
biogeochemical cycling is of less ultimate
benefit to the students as future citizens than
is an outcome claiming students also will be
able
to interpret data, forecast pollution
impacts, and evaluate arguments regarding
pollution risks.
A learning outcome claiming that students
will be able to "discuss" or "understand" the
14

Salama Youssef & Chennaoui Mohammed, 2016

evidence for evolution is of less use than an

outcome claiming that the students also will
be able to critique arguments pertaining to
evolutionary
evidence
and rank novel
evidence or investigative designs in order of
inferential power.
A course outcome claiming that the students
will be able to "explain" or "describe" acidbase homeostasis incorporates a less diverse
skill repertoire than an outcome claiming that
the students also will be able to solve
problems in acid-base physiology by
applying the Henderson equation to case
history information.
An outcome claiming students will be able to
describe an ecological footprint is of less
value than an outcome claiming that the
students also will be able to evaluate the
environmental impact of their personal
reproductive decisions in view of the
birth/death surplus in North America.
Try ranking the course outcomes in order
of importance rather than in order of subject
matter. Try listing them in categories such as
occupational, personal, civic, national, and
global. Try classifying learning outcome
utility targets as one-year, ten-year, and lifelong.
Don't underestimate the needs of non-majors.
Many, after leaving college, will become
involved in civic debates, in nongovernmental organizations, and in politics.
They can benefit from skills in informationretrieval, they can benefit from an ability to
read a meta-analysis, and from a proficiency
in asking incisive research questions.
Learning outcome targets should be
sufficiently flexible to maximize the
individual potential of each student. A rigid
curriculum may fail to cultivate unique
talents, backgrounds, and interests of
individual students.
You may be surprised at how your lists of
learning outcomes differ from a traditional
syllabus. When you have a prioritized list of
outcomes, apportion class time accordingly.
And needless to say, test questions must
actually measure these higher-level learning
outcomes.
Design classroom activities utilizing case
problems that develop skills in self-directed
learning, information retrieval, analytical
behavior, creative and critical thinking. For
example, if the students are to study cellular
respiration, begin that section of the course
with a captivating case of a person (or pet or

wild animal) with signs of a possible

metabolic
pathology
(e.g.,
phosphofructokinase deficiency) telling the
students that eventually they will have to
suggest a cause and possible treatment of the
disorder. After some instruction in cellular
respiration, have the students work in small
groups to brainstorm solutions to this case.
They will acquire a thorough grasp of the
biology, and in addition will develop skills of
disciplined analysis, reflective thinking, and
problem-solving. In determining what further
information they require, the students will
learn to ask sagacious questions, a key skill
for scientists and citizens alike.
Involve the entire class in critically assessing
a real community project, proposed project,
or policy, over a period of a semester or two.
This might involve the biological
implications of a land-use proposal, utility
upgrade, utility corridor, communicable
disease control plan, community health
program, climate action plan, fishery,
forestry, park or wildlife management plan,
drug-abuse treatment program, or whatever is
available. Student groups may be assigned to
investigate various aspects of the project and
perhaps collect field data, and once per week
the project could be discussed in class. The
expectation that students will make evidencebased recommendations guarantees an
authentic learning experience and creates an
appetite for learning on a need-to-know basis.
Design
writing
assignments
that
are authentic, such as constructing a web
page or writing a position paper that must be
sent to a politician, government department,
or other organization.
Design laboratory activities involving
meaningful
open-ended
investigative
projects that develop individual student
potential and that contribute to the preemployment resume of the student.
Construct exams that present realistic case
problems requiring students to engage in
reflective thinking, problem-solving, and
decision-making. This can, if necessary, be
accomplished with imaginative multiplechoice questions.
Consider the use of open-book exams,
emulating the workplace, or allow students to
bring to the exam a 4 x 6 inch file card that
can be filled with information. This forces
you to design test questions that emphasize
creative thinking, analysis, interpretation,

15

and application of core concepts to novel

data.

8. Are the teaching methods effective?

Short-term effectiveness is measured by exam results,
but biology education should also confer lifelong
benefits. Research shows that student achievement
can be enhanced by use of (a) case examples
meaningful to the learner, (b) active learning rather
than passive listening (experience is always the
greatest teacher), (c) concrete application of core
concepts in many contexts, (d) practice and repetition,
(e) feedback, and (f) emotional content.
Teach principles of biology using case
examples and assignments that are
meaningful to students, e.g., human
pathologies, local pollution, local industry,
natural disasters, cancer, genetically
modified foods, sports medicine, drug abuse,
fad diets, sexually-transmitted diseases,
overpopulation, climate and environmental
issues, evolution political controversies,
alternative medicine and health fraud, bioterrorism, influenza pandemics, or whatever
is current. If there are biological concepts that
cannot be presented in the context of
interesting case examples, the instructor must
seriously question whether or not those
concepts are worth presenting.
Emphasize generic process skills such as
information-retrieval, investigation, analysis,
and self-directed learning, which have many
opportunities for repetition, and which have
wide application beyond school. These skills
are likely to be remembered and are likely to
serve students well in future.
Focus teaching on fluency with core
concepts, stripped of trivial details. Less is
more. Students can fill in details themselves
when reading, studying, and problem-solving
if they have a strong grasp of key concepts
and can apply them in a variety of contexts.
Avoid trivia-cluttering of key concepts to the
point where the students are overwhelmed by
details.
Employ learning activities that have
emotional content, such as student groupwork that demands some interpersonal skills
and conflict-resolution skills. Incorporation
of bio-ethical issues into case problems can
facilitate this.
Develop extramural assignments that require
students to interact with other people and that
create emotional content and social
application. For example, ask students to
investigate via interviews the health history

of a volunteer such as a senior citizen. A

written report by the student can include an
interpretive
pathophysiology.
Similar
assignments might include critical biological
analysis of a local industry, business, or
utility. Students might focus on some aspect
of community drinking water protection,
sewage treatment, power plant impacts,
milling, fishery, foresty, forest health issues,
woodlot
management,
horticultural
pathology,
farm
habitat
protection,
alternative medicine practice, etc. The
opportunities are endless.
Lecture for a maximum of 20 minutes, then
employ practice -- active learning in the
classroom -- small group work on an assigned
problem requiring discussion and choices to
be debated among the students in each group.
This requires students to critique the
understanding of others in the group and to
explain concepts to each other (peertutoring), creating a stimulus-rich learning
field. Liberate class time for these activities
by preparing manuals and hand-outs for
students, thus minimizing note-taking.
Use dialogue and diagnostic questioning
when assisting an individual student. Answer
a question with a question. If a student asks
"Please explain PCR to me," first ask the
student "What do you think PCR means?"
"What is DNA?" You may well be shocked
by the answers, but you will have revealed
the learning pathways required to aid the
student. When teaching an individual, don't
give a mini-lecture, rather employ dialogue
and diagnostic questioning until you are
satisfied that the student has improved.
Allow students to learn from feedback -provide sample tests with model answers for
self-practice, provide writing assignment
exemplars, and allow extra credit for revision
of work critiqued by the instructor.
Arrange intervention for students who
perform poorly. They should be referred to a
learning assistance center for diagnostic
testing. The Whimbey Analytical Skillls
Inventory is a powerful predictor of success
in biology.

9. Problems, challenges and possible solutions

Educational activities should reflect what real people
actually do, as biologically literate citizens or
employees. Little of their time is spent watching
lectures, rather they are involved in application of
information -- decision-making, problem-solving,
investigation, policy analysis, debate, critical

16

Salama Youssef & Chennaoui Mohammed, 2016

thinking, creative thinking, and information-retrieval.

These are the activities that should be occurring in the
lecture hall, field, and laboratory. Fortuitously, they
are also the kinds of activities that create an
exhilarating learning environment.
All too often biology courses over-emphasize trivial
and easy-to-test activities that ask students only to
recall, recognize, describe, or "compare and contrast"
information that has been memorized. This is no less
true today with the availability of the Internet. The
introductory course should incorporate a diversity of
learning outcomes, and this diversity should be
reflected both in classroom activities and in student
assessment protocols.
Problem-based learning (PBL) is an exciting way to
learn biology and is readily incorporated into large
classes in a lecture hall environment. PBL engages
students in solving authentic biological case
problems, stimulating discussion among students and
reinforcing learning. A problem-based learning
environment emulates the workplace and develops
self-directed learners. This is preferable to a mimetic
learning environment in which students only watch,
memorize, and repeat what they have been told.
Effective problem-solving requires an orderly
approach. Problem-solving skills do not magically
appear in students as a result of instructors simply
throwing problems at them.
Our students use the following heuristic: "How to
make a DENT in a problem: Define, Explore,
Narrow, Test."
Define the Problem Carefully
What exactly are you trying to determine? Does the
problem have several components? If several, state
them separately. Does everyone in the group agree
with the way the problem has been framed? Ask
group members to "think out loud," as that slows
down their reasoning and enables people to check for
errors of understanding.
Explore Possible Solutions
Brainstorm ideas that may contribute to a solution.
Justify your ideas to group members. Clarify for them
the biology involved. Have them paraphrase your
ideas. Listen carefully to the ideas of other group
members and give positive feedback. Make a list of
learning issues. What do we know? What don't we
know? Is this problem analagous to any past
problem? What core biological concepts may apply to
this problem? Assign research tasks within the group.
Narrow Your Choices
After developing a list of hypotheses, sort them, weed
them, and rank them. List the type of data required to
test each hypothesis. Give priority to the simplest,

least costly tests. It is easier to get information on the

diet of a subject than it is to do sophisticated
biochemical tests.
Test Your Solution
Seek from your instructor the data that you need to
test your ideas. If all your possible solutions are
eliminated, begin the cycle again: define, explore,
narrow, test. When you encounter data that confirm
one of your hypotheses you may be asked to write a
biological explanation of your solution and justify it
using the available evidence.

CONCLUSION
Preparing students for their future requires active
classrooms and labs and successful learning, shaping
of their personalities that are difficult to change later.
Their integration into society later greatly depends on
their personal qualities and skills that are largely the
product of well-organized and well-completed
education, including a warm atmosphere of mutual
understanding and experience during their studies.
Trying to implement this idea we have been faced
with several problems: How should the world
educational process be organized in this rapid
development so that students can learn successfully
throughout their lives? What are the psychological,
pedagogical and social factors that influence
successful learning? How successful learning should
be assessed? These questions build the foundation of
a successful society of tomorrow. These challenges
have motivated us to try and find some solutions that
further stimulate other research.

References
[1] P. Fensham, (2008) Science education policy-making, Paris:
UNESCO, pp. 47
[2] P. Summerfield, E.J. Evans, (1990) Technical Education and
the State Since 1850: Historical and Contemporary
Perspectives, Manchester University Press, pp. 223
[3] R. Moyer, J.K. Hackett, S.A. Everett, (2007) Teaching
science as investigations: Modeling inquiry through learning
cycle lessons, Prentice Hall, pp. 360
[4] NRC, (1996) (National Research Council). National science
education standards, National Academy Press, pp. 262
[5] R.W. Bybee, J. Carlson-Powell, L.W. Trowbridge, (2008)
Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing
scientific literacy, Pearson, pp. 433
[6] J. Bennett, (2003) Teaching and learning science, Continuum,
London pp. 194
[7] E. Perrott, (2014) Effective Teaching: A Practical Guide to
Improving Your Teaching, Taylor & Francis, pp. 208
[8] K. Mohanna, R. Chambers, D. Wall, (2008) Your Teaching
Style: A Practical Guide to Understanding, Developing, and
Improving, Radcliffe Publishing, pp. 124

17

[9] R. Brooks, M. Aris, I. Perry, (2014) The Effective Teaching

of History, Taylor & Francis, pp. 224
[10] K. McKinney, (2013) The Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning in and Across Disciplines, Indiana University Press,
pp. 268

[29] J.D. Novak, (2015) Concept Maps: An Ausubelian

Perspective, in: R. Gunstone (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Science
Education, Springer Netherlands, pp. 202-209.
[30] O. Ajaja, (2007) Teaching methods across disciplines,
Agbor: All-well Publishers.

[11] G. Payne, M. Williams, (2011) Teaching Quantitative

Methods: Getting the Basics Right, SAGE Publications, pp.
200

[31] G.B. Johnson, P.H. Raven, R. Holt, H. Brace, (2001)

Biology: Principles & Explorations, Holt, Rinehart and
Winston New York, pp.

[12] B. Chandramohan, S. Fallows, (2008) Interdisciplinary

Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Theory and
Practice, Taylor & Francis, pp. 184

[32] J.D. Novak, D. Musonda, (1991) A twelve-year longitudinal

study of science concept learning, American Educational
Research Journal, 28 (1) 117-153.

[13] G.D. Borich, (2004) Effective Teaching Methods, Pearson;

Merrill Prentice Hall, pp. 592

[33] D.T. Powers, (1990) The effects of hands-on science

instruction on students' cognitive structures as measured by
concept maps, Kansas State University, pp. 380

[14] J.J. Gallagher, (2007) Teaching science for understanding: A

practical guide for middle and high school teachers, Prentice
Hall, pp. 144
[15] A.O. Patrick, (2011) Concept mapping as a study skill:
Effects on students achievement in biology, International
Journal of Educational Sciences, 3 (1) 49-57.
[16] R. Moore, (2013) Biological Sciences Curriculum Study,
Reports of the National Center for Science Education, 33 (1)
3.
[17] J.A. Campbell, (1961) The chemical education material
study, Journal of Chemical Education, 38 (1) 2.
[18] T.L. Nahum, R. MamlokNaaman, A. Hofstein, J. Krajcik,
(2007) Developing a new teaching approach for the chemical
bonding concept aligned with current scientific and
pedagogical knowledge, Science Education, 91 (4) 579-603.
[19] J. Piaget, B. Inhelder, (2013) The growth of logical thinking
from childhood to adolescence: An essay on the construction
of formal operational structures, Routledge, pp. 380
[20] P. Kendeou, P. Broek, A. Helder, J. Karlsson, (2014) A
cognitive view of reading comprehension: implications for
reading difficulties, Learning Disabilities Research &
Practice, 29 (1) 10-16.
[21] U. Neisser, (2014) Cognitive Psychology: Classic Edition,
Psychology Press, pp. 348
[22] D. Martin, (2011) Elementary science methods: A
constructivist approach, Cengage Learning, pp. 632
[23] V. Burr, N. King, T. Butt, (2014) Personal construct
psychology methods for qualitative research, International
Journal of Social Research Methodology, 17 (4) 341-355.
[24] L.S. Vygotsky, (1980) Mind in society: The development of
higher psychological processes, Harvard university press, pp.
159

[34] L.W. Trowbridge, R.W. Bybee, J. Carlson-Powell, (2009)

Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing
scientific literacy, Merrill Prentice Hall, pp. 433
[35] R.H. Hall, D.F. Dansereau, L.P. Skaggs, (1992) Knowledge
maps and the presentation of related information domains,
The Journal of Experimental Education, 61 (1) 5-18.
[36] I.M. Kinchin, (2000a) Using Concept Maps To Reveal
Understanding: A Two-Tier Analysis, School Science
Review, 81 (296) 41-46.
[37] I.M. Kinchin, (2000b) Concept mapping in biology, Journal
of biological education, 34 61-68.
[38] P.A. Okebukola, (1992) Concept mapping with a cooperative
learning flavor, The American Biology Teacher, 54 (4) 218221.
[39] O.J. Jegede, F.F. Alaiyemola, P.A.O. Okebukola, (1990)
The effect of concept mapping on students' anxiety and
achievement in biology, Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 27 (10) 951-960.
[40] F. Ezeudu, (1995) Effects of Concepts Maps on Students
Achievement, Interest and Retention in Selected Units of
Organic Chemistry, Review of Education, 15 (1) 181 190.
[41] J.A. Mensah, J. Otuka, N.W. Ernest, (1995) Concept
mapping: A Ghanaian secondary school students experience,
Science Education International, 6 (4) 24 28.
[42] P.G. Markow, R.A. Lonning, (1998) Usefulness of concept
maps in college chemistry laboratories: Students' perceptions
and effects on achievement, Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 35 (9) 1015-1029.
[43] J.D. Novak, (1990) Concept mapping: A useful tool for
science education, Journal of research in science teaching, 27
(10) 937-949.

[25] R.W. Bybee, J. Carlson-Powell, L.W. Trowbridge, (2008)

Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing
scientific literacy, Pearson, pp. 384

[44] R.J. Stevens, R.E. Slavin, (1995) The cooperative

elementary school: Effects on students achievement,
attitudes, and social relations, American educational research
journal, 32 (2) 321-351.

[26] L.W. Trowbridge, R.W. Bybee, J.C. Powell, (2000)

Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing
scientific literacy, Prentice Hall, pp. 384

[45] R.K. Bramlett, (1994) Implementing cooperative learning: A

field study evaluating issues for school-based consultants,
Journal of School Psychology, 32 (1) 67-84.

[27] C. Hardy, M. Mawer, (2012) Learning and Teaching in

Physical Education, Routledge, pp. 248

[46] J.K. Megnin, (1995) Combining Memory and Creativity in

Teaching Math, Teaching Prek-8, 25 (6) 48-49.

[28] K.C. Wise, J.R. Okey, (1983) A metaanalysis of the effects

of various science teaching strategies on achievement,
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20 (5) 419-435.

[47] N.M. Webb, J.D. Troper, R. Fall, (1995) Constructive

activity and learning in collaborative small groups, Journal of
educational psychology, 87 (3) 406.

18

Salama Youssef & Chennaoui Mohammed, 2016

[48] O.P. Ajaja, O.U. Eravwoke, (2011) Effects of cooperative

learning strategy on junior secondary school students
achievement in integrated science, Electronic Journal of
Science Education, 14 (1).
[49] M.S. Crosby, E.M. Owens, (1993) The Disadvantages of
Tracking and Ability Grouping: A Look at Cooperative
Learning as an Alternative, National Dropout Prevention
Center Bulletin: Solutions and Strategies, 5 1-8.
[50] S. Freeman, S.L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M.K. Smith, N.
Okoroafor, H. Jordt, M.P. Wenderoth, (2014) Active learning
increases student performance in science, engineering, and
mathematics, Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 111 (23) 8410-8415.

[62] R.J. Marzano, D. Pickering, J.E. Pollock, (2001) Classroom

Instruction that Works: Research-based Strategies for
Increasing Student Achievement, ASCD, pp. 178
[63] J. Delors, (1996) Learning, the Treasure Within: Report to
UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for
the Twenty-First Century, UNESCo, pp. 12
[64] M. Hue, W. Li, (2008) Classroom Management: Creating a
Positive Learning Environment, Hong Kong University
Press, pp. 220
[65] B. Millis, J. Rhem, (2012) Cooperative Learning in Higher
Education: Across the Disciplines, Across the Academy,
Stylus Publishing, LLC, pp. 256

[51] A.F. AbuSeileek, (2012) The effect of computer-assisted

cooperative learning methods and group size on the EFL
learners achievement in communication skills, Computers &
Education, 58 (1) 231-239.

[66] P. Hamer, B. Allmark, J. Chapman, J. Jackson, (1998)

Mapping concepts in science. In ASE guide to secondary
science education, Ed. M. Ratcliffe, U.K. Cheltenham:
Stanley Thornes (Publishers) Ltd, pp 74-83.

[52] P. Glassman, (1989) A Study of Cooperative Learning in

Mathematics, Writing, and Reading in the Intermediate
Grades: Focus Upon Achievement, Attitudes and Self-esteem
by Gender, Race and Ability Group, pp.

[67] J.D. Novak, (1998) Learning, creating and using knowledge:

Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and
corporations, Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, pp. 396.

[53] A. Lawson, R. Karplus, (2002) The Learning Cycle, in: R.

Fuller (Ed.) A Love of Discovery, Springer Netherlands, pp.
51-76.

[68] J.D. Novak, (1981a) Applying learning psychology and

philosophy of science to biology teaching, American Biology
Teacher, 43 (1) 12-20.

[54] J.M. Atkin, R. Karplus, (2013) Discovery or invention, in:

A Love of Discovery: Science Education The Second
Career of Robert Karplus, Springer Science & Business
Media, pp. 83-89.

[69] P. Adamczyk, M. Willson, D. Williams, (1994) Concept

mapping: a multi-level and multipurpose tool, School Science
Review, 76 (275) 116-124.

[55] C.R. Barman, M. Kotar, (1989) Teaching Teachers: The

Learning Cycle, Science and Children, 26 (7) 30-32.
[56] J.K. Hackett, R. Moyer, (1991) Science in Your World:
Teacher edition, Macmillan/McGraw-Hill School Publishing
Company, pp. 398
[57] R.W. Bybee, N.M. Landes, (1990) Science for life & living:
An elementary school science program from Biological
Sciences Curriculum Study, University of California Press,
52 (2) 92-98.
[58] H. Nuholu, N. Yaln, (2006) The effectiveness of the
learning cycle model to increase students achievement in the
physics laboratory, Journal of Turkish Science Education, 3
(2) 28-30.
[59] A. Bandura, D.H. Schunk, (1981) Cultivating competence,
self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal selfmotivation, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41
(3) 586.

[70] I.M. Kinchin, (1999) Concept cones, Journal of Biological

Education, 80 (2) 61-68.
[71] D. Hodson, (1998) Teaching and learning science: Towards
a personalized approach, Buckingham, UK: Open University
Press, pp. 200.
[72] D.J. Martin, (1994) Concept mapping as an aid to lesson
planning: a longitudinal study, Journal of Elementary Science
Education, 6 (2) 11-30.
[73] H. Huai, (1997) Concept mapping in learning biology:
theoretical review on cognitive and learning styles, Journal of
Interactive Learning Research, 8 (3) 325-340.
[74] L.K. Silverman, (1989) The visual-spatial learner.
Preventing School Failure, 34 (1) 15-20.
[75] R.F. Schmid, G. Telaro, (1990) Concept mapping as an
instructional strategy for high school biology, Journal of
Educational Research, 84 (2) 78-85.

[60] G. Brown, (1995) Dimensions of difficulty in listening

comprehension, A guide for the teaching of second language
listening, 59-73.
[61] H. Gardner, (1987) The theory of multiple intelligences,
Annals of Dyslexia, 37 (1) 19-35.

19