• : Ms Word Format
  • : 70 Pages
  • : ₦3000
  • : 1-5 Chapters
  • Click to DOWNLOAD Materials



This study examined the Effects of Jigsaw II and Guided discovery strategies on retention and academic performance among junior secondary school students ingeometry, Zaria Metropolis, Nigeria.The study was guided by four research questions and four hypotheses. The quasi experimental research design involving three groups (two experimental and one control) were used. The population of the study comprised of Government JuniorSecondary School (GJSS) two (JSS2) students of the public schools in Zaria Educational Zone of Kaduna State. The sample of students for the study comprised of 194 students from three intact classes selected from three GJSS.Two instruments:Geometry Performance Test (GPT) and Geometry Retention Test (GRT) were used for data collection. The research hypotheses were tested using the t-test, Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Scheffe‟s post hoc test at P ≤ 0.05 level of significance by the aid of the computer software Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS version 23). The results obtained showed significant differences in performance of studentswith those exposed to the Jigsaw II Method of Instruction (J2MI) performing better followed by those taught using the Guided Discovery Method of Instruction (GDMI) while the lecture group was observed to have performed the least. The results also revealed no significant difference in performance of male and female students when exposed to the J2MI. In addition, no significant difference in performance was observed when male and female students were taught geometry usingGDMI. In terms of retention ability, the result revealed a significant difference among students with those exposed to J2MIretaining best, followed by the (GDMI) group. The lecture group was observed to have the least retention level.The study concludes that J2MI and GDMI are effective teaching methods that can be explored as alternatives to the lecture method in the teaching of geometry among JSS students.  Moreover, J2MI and GDMI are both gender friendly teaching method. Based on the findings, it is recommended that Teachers should employ the use of J2MI and GDMI as alternative to lecture method in the teaching of geometry at JSS level to enhance students‟ performance and retention ability.  The strategies also facilitate the learning of much material in limited time which can help the teacher and students cover large portions of the school syllabus. Both methods are also gender friendly hence; they can be used in both single and mixed schools. Workshops and

seminars for mathematics and science based teacher should be organized by the Ministry of Education for Kaduna State on the use of the J2MI and GDMI.




1.1       Introduction

Teaching is a process of using appropriate method, staff and material in order to reach in the most effective manner to the predetermined goals (Tuna & kacar, 2013). Instructional method can be described as the way of achieving learning outcomes. Learning can be enjoyable if teachers use appealing instructional methods. There are so many devices for effective teaching and an effective technique can be ensuring effective learning (Parveen, 2010).

Mathematics education which includes the practice of teaching and learning mathematics has consistently generated interest among scholars over the years. This is because of its importance which affects every facet of human activity such as: politics, economy, science and technology (Kadala, 2014). It is the importance of mathematics that compelled the Federal Government of Nigeria to make mathematics a compulsory subject at the primary and secondary levels of education and consequently a necessary requirement for admission into the Nigerian universities (Aburume, 2008; Matthew & Kenneth, 2013).

Despite these measures,student‟s performance in this subject has remained very low for many years and one area where students were found to perform poorly is geometry. Yakubu

(2014), observed that teacher‟s attitude towards geometry and their understanding of the area was not encouraging. This position was also held by Sani (2015) who asserted that teachers exhibit poor attitude and understanding towards geometry.

These have far reaching effects on the nation‟s goal of attaining Science Technology and

Mathematics Education (STME) by the year 2020 (Kadala, 2014). Nwabugwu (2012) reported that the Federal Government described the poor performance of students in Nigeria as unacceptable and warns that the trend has to be checked if the country has to move forward. Popoola (2013),Ndakotsu (2014), Ahmadu (2014) and Timayi&Otalu (2015), observed that the reasons for failure in mathematics is in the areas of poor students‟ performance, unqualified teachers, poor method of teaching and negative attitudes of students towards learning the subject. Hence Takahashi (2007), Popoola (2002) in Akinsola & Animasahun (2007) observed that an instructional method is crucial to the understanding of mathematical concept. Effective instruction requires the teacher to step outside the realm of personal experience unto the world of the learners (Timayi& Otalu, 2015).For the purpose of the study, three (3) instructional methods were compared these are the lecture method (LM), discovery method (GM) and the Jigsaw II method of instruction (J2MI).

The lecture method which is also called the traditional method allows a teacher to deliver a large amount of information in a short period of time preparation is done by an individual and can be repeated on a routine basis for each new group of learners. It is used to introduce students to a new subject and valuable method of summarizing ideas, showing relationship between theory and practice and re-emphasizing the main point. The instructor is required to read necessary illustration or demonstration may be given as a complement to the information in the lecture note. It involves verbal presentation of facts ideas and concepts (Popoola, 2013). However, the lecture method does not stimulate student‟s innovation intuition and scientific attitudes and cause learners to become bored and easily distracted (Ndakotsu, 2014). This is because the teacher dominates classroom talk and students talk only when called upon to answer questions or when they are permitted to ask questions (Tanner, 2009; Odundu &Gunga, 2013). It is teacher centered Adeyemi (2008) notes that lecture method encourages students to cram facts which are easily forgotten. Mc Dowel (2001) notes that instructional methods that encourage memorization and reproduction are short of knowledge that can be used to solve problems in new situations (Tella, Indoshi&Othuon, 2010).

Discovery method is ateaching approach where students find out a piece of knowledge, information or truth by themselves through observation, demonstrating etc. here teachers use two distinct approaches namely inductive (Guided discovery) and deductive approach.In deductive approach, we ask deductive reasoning when applying a general role to a particular case, i.e. from generalization to particular. Students make use of knowledge that they have acquired previously to acquire a new knowledge.Induction means to offer a general truth by showing, that if it is true for a particular case. It is true for all such cases. It is psychological in nature and a method that develops curiosity within the individual which is need of the day.  Inductive approach is based on the process of induction in teaching learning process. In the world of mathematics it is a method of constructing a formula with the help of a sufficient number of concrete, actual and real examples. By using this method of teaching mathematics the students follow the content with great interest and understanding at various levels especially at elementary level. Inductive method is more useful in algebra, geometry, trigonometry and arithmetic teaching and learning. Inductive method proceeds from particular examples to general rules of formulae, concrete illustration to abstract rules, known to unknown and simple to complex (Atta, Ayaz & Nawaz, 2015).

Guided discovery method according to Matthew et al (2013) is a teaching method that enables students to move step-by-step from the identification of a problem, defining the problem, formulation of hypothesis, collection of data, verification of results and generation to the drawing of conclusion. Guided discovery method of instruction (GDMI) is an aspect of transformational teaching which has been spurred by the development of several learning principles and methods of instruction, including, active learning, student-centered learning, and problem based learning (Rosebrough & Leverett, 2011). It is a student-centered method whereby students interact actively, question assumption and provide their view points on any area of subject matter (Peters, 2000; Matthew & Kenneth 2003; Olibie & Ezeoba (2013). As described by Olibie and Ezeoba (2013) in this approach to instruction, the teacher facilitates and prompts students to conduct investigations and construct their own meaning and phenomenon that occur naturally. It is through such levels of ability that learning takes place

(Riasat, Hukamdad, Aqila & Anwar, 2010). GDMI also emphasizes higher-level thinking skills and collecting analyzing and synthesizing information and data from multiple source and viewpoints (Cummins, 2007; Wilson, Taylor & Kowalski, 2010). Otiende, Barchok and

Abura (2013) observed that failure in discovery learning is seen as a positive circumstance. Thomas Edison tried 1,200 designs for lights bulbs before finding one that works. He never got discourage because he felt that he had learned thousands of designs that do not work. Therefore, learning also occurs through failure. Psychologists showed that failure is central to learning. They argued that if a student does not fail while learning, the students probably has not learnt something new GDMI also exposes students to circumstances of failure hence learning through mistakes.

This underscore the need for discovery method however GDMI wastes time, cannot be used for every mathematics concept and it can be boring to slow learners. It requires a lot of materials to be used and its time consuming because it demand that the teacher prepare his lesson very well (Stephen, 2007).Co-operative learning is a teaching strategy in which small teams, teach with students of different levels of ability using a verity of learning activities to improve their understanding of a subject (Suleiman, 2014; Yaji, 2014).

In this instructional method, students take a participative role by leading discussions and teachers become facilitators. In this regard, teachers facilitate student‟s discussion and interject only when necessary allowing students to put the language to use and explore aesthetics of learning materials (Eken, 2000; Ahmad & Aziz, 2009; Odundu & Gunga 2013). Jigsaw, a model of cooperative learning was originally developed by Eliot Aronson (1978). It emphasizes conceptual learning and development of social skills as learners work together in small heterogeneous group according to the principle of positive interdependence, individual accountability, face to face promotive interaction and group processing (Olarewaju, Awofala, Fatade&Olaoluwa, 2012).However, co-operative learning is associated with a number of shorting comings such as consuming time and sometimes it‟s difficult for the teacher to plan the lesson, if the group are ability wise, the less fortunate ones may be discouraged, it is too demanding on the part of the teacher and hinders teachers from knowing individual‟s views and problems (Stephen, 2007).

Process that take place during the application of jigsaw are as follows; from groups of 4 or 5 students, there may be 3-7 groups depending on the number of students. The learning materials are distributed to the groups, each group has different learning task and will learn their task very well to the extent that each member of the group master the topic given to them in the class, each group will come out and teach the whole class what they had learnt (Suleiman, 2014).

Poopola (2010) defined academic performance as an expression used to present students scholastic standing and which is a function of various factors such as method of teaching, teacher qualification, child‟s home background, school background, school environment, attitude and interest among others. Therefore, for the purpose of the study academic performance refers to the marks obtained in a test prepared by the researcher on selected topic. (Matthew& Kenneth, 2013).

Manko (2015) define mathematics retention as having the ability of reproducing mathematics concept or part of it after some period of time.  For the purpose of this study, retention is defined as the ability to recall the knowledge of geometry leant when required

Gender refer to the social meaning associated with being a male or a female, including the construction of identities, expectation, behaviours and power relationships that derive from social interaction (Ambeuva, Iwuckukwu and Jibril 2008)

1.2       Statement of the Problem

The poor performance of secondary school students in mathematics has been a concern to both government and parents (Ahmadu, 2014). In an attempt to improve students‟ performance some parents arrange and pay for extra-tuition for their children, so that may understand mathematical concept better and cover all topics within the syllabus. These concepts taught at the secondary school level in Nigeria was categorized into seven major areas namely; number and numeration, Algebra, Mensuration, Geometry, Trigonometry, Statistics and probability. Geometry the world over has been a hated branch of mathematics to many students (Inekwe, 2002). Ahmadu (2014) is of the same view and further submitted that the concept is difficult to many students and difficult for teachers to teach.

Statistics published by West African Examination council and senior secondary school certificate examination revealed that for the past seven years (2008-2014) less than 40% of Nigerian students obtained credit passes each of the years in their senior secondary school examination. Also, the nation was alarmed by the results released by (NECO) national examination council in 2010 which indicates that over 92.8% of students who took the secondary school certificate examination could not obtain a minimum qualification for entry into the tertiary institution one major cause for this unfortunate situation was the poor performance in General mathematics and geometry in particular over the years. WAEC chief examiners report (2008-2012) clearly lamented on the poor performance of the candidates in geometrical aspect of the questions, worse still only few candidates attempted questions on geometry, chief examiner report that students‟ performance in mathematics examination especially geometry, both internal and external has not been encouraging (WAEC, 2005), which is also applicable to the Junior secondary certificate examination (JSCE). Chief examiners report on the students‟ areas of deficiency in JSCE shows that students least understood geometry as shown by their performances, they avoid geometry questions or haphazardly attempted them (JSCE 2011-2012).Thus, for many years now the different teaching methodologies employed in teaching mathematics (Geometry) in secondary schools have not improved students‟performance in the subject to an appreciable level. Moreover, research in many areas of education has shown that the methods of teaching utilized by the teacher is an important factor in students’ learning and subsequent performance in examinations (Obeka, 2014; Manko, 2015). Hence there is the need to try out other method to salvage the situation. The instructional approach employed by teachers in the teaching of geometry is ineffective and hence students perform poorly due to inadequate knowledge acquired from these methods. Based on these problems, this study investigated the effects of two instructional methods (guided discovery and Jigsaw II method of instruction) on students‟ academic performance in geometry among junior secondary schools in Zaria educational zone.



1.3       Objectives of the Research

The main objective of this study is to investigate the effects of guided discovery and Jigsaw

II method of instruction on students‟ academic performance in geometry among junior secondary schools. Specifically, the objectives of the research are as to:

  1. determine the performance of students taught geometry using Jigsaw IIMethod of instruction (J2MI) and Guided Discovery Method of instruction (GDMI).
  2. investigate the performance of male and female students taught geometry using

Jigsaw II Method of instruction (J2MI).

  1. determine the performance of male and female students taught geometry using

Guided Discovery Method of instruction (GDMI).

  1. investigate the retention level of students taught geometry using the JigsawII Methodof instruction (J2MI) and the Guided Discovery Method of instruction


1.4       Research Questions

The following questions were asked as guide to the study:

  1. What is difference among the performance of students taught geometry using

J2MI, GDMI and those taught using the lecture method (LM)?

  1. What is difference between the performance of male and female students taught geometry using J2MI?
  2. Is there any difference between the performance of male and female students taught geometry using GDMI?
  3. What is difference among the retention level of students taught geometry using

J2MI, GDMI and those taught using the lecture method (LM)?

1.5       Null Hypotheses

Based on the research questions, the following null hypotheses were tested at P≤ 0.05 level of significance:

Ho1: There is no significantamong the performance of students taught geometry using J2MI, GDMI and those taught using the LM?
Ho2: There is no significance between the performance of male and female students taught geometry J2MI.
Ho3: There is no significance between the performance of male and female students taught geometry using GDMI.
Ho4: There is no significance among the retention level of students taught geometry using J2MI, GDMI and those taught using LM.
1.6 Significance of the Study

This study will hopefully be beneficial to students, teachers, the government and other researchers in the following ways:Students will be motivated to develop interest in mathematics (Geometry) learn and understand it. Also, the use of effective method will remedy poor performance and poor attitude of students toward the subject. Learning will be permanent in students because they discover things themselves. Relationship among learners can be enhanced; which brings about self-esteem and this in turn will improve academic performance in the subject. This will build a stronger foundation to mathematical skills for lifelong learning.

Teachers can adapt and employ GIM and J2MI as a guide and method for the teaching of geometry in our junior secondary schools. It enlightens and encourages teachers to see monitoring of students‟ progress to the learners as an opportunity to get close to the learners, identify their learning challenges and co-operate improve learning, quality teaching, effectiveness and accountability to students. Hopefully, the findings of the study with regard to retention will foster good retentive memory among students of concepts learnt and in turn facilitate better performance in mathematics in general.

The finding of the study and subsequent recommendation can bring about mathematical revolution that Nigeria seeks in vision 20:20 agenda sought by other countries to be among the industrialized nation of the world. To make the method popular, curriculum planners and text book writers can also include these children centered methods as effective for teaching and learning of geometrical concepts. Other researchers can use this study in their own thereby exploring and discovering newer grounds.

In totality, the findings of this study is expected to bring about reduction in poor performance in mathematics among junior secondary schools, and enhance mathematical skills in them. It is also hoped that science and research based organization like Teachers Association of

Nigeria (MAN), National Education Research and Department Council (NERDC), National Mathematical Centre (NMC) and others will find this study useful.

1.7       Basic Assumptions

The following assumptions were made for this study:

  1. All JSS teachers have a copy of the National Mathematics Curriculum.
  2. JSS two students have covered the JSS one mathematics syllabus.

1.8       Scope of theStudy

This research was delimited to investigating the effects of instructional methods on students‟ academic performance in geometry among junior secondary school students, Kaduna State.  The study is restricted to Junior Secondary two (JSII) students of the public schools in Zaria Educational Zone of Kaduna State. The following topics in geometry namely: definition and properties of parallelogram, rhombuses and kites, connections and relationship between quadrilaterals and the environment. Others are angles between lines and angle in a triangle and angles in a quadrilaterals and angle in a polygon.

Two instruments were used for the study namely the Geometry Performance Test (GPT) and Geometry Retention Test (GRT). GPT and GRT are both a forty (40) multiple-choice items developed by the researcher from past question papers of JSCE and the New General

Mathematics (NGM) for JSS2 covering questions and units of geometry.



Sharing is caring!

Leave a Reply