Traditional Vs Interactive Simulation Effect On Students Education Essay

Chapter 4This chapter describes the ends of the statistical analyses of the informations collected in order to prove the research hypotheses that channelise this survey. It besides contains the treatment sing the results from these analyses and information gathered from the Pre-test and post-test on Electrostatic for manoeuvre sort ( schooling with handed-down fashion ) and data-based assort ( skill with interactional poser and besides questionnaire on learners emplacement towards larning scientific chequer.4.1 Reliability of trial instrumentsThe Cronbach s alpha dependability coefficient was calculated to find the dependability of the trials instruments. delay 4.1 shows that the Cronbach s alpha dependability coefficients argon scope from 0.600 to 0.885. This indicates the trial points are accep dishearten for usage in the survey. carry over 4.1 Cronbach s Alpha Reliability for test on Electrostatic and Questionnaire on Attitude.N of pointsCronbach s Alpha Reliabili tyAttitude towards Science280.885Trial on Electrostatic270.6444.2 tralatitious vs. Interactive Simulation impression on pupils act on ToEThis subdivision describes the publications of analyses to obtain replies for the first research aims To look into the effectivity of two different instructional attacks ( I ) knowledge with traditional room or ( two ) instruction and larning with Interactive disguise on pupils attainment on trial of staticIn order to arouse replies to the research aim, the undermentioned research query and research hypotheses were formulated.Research Question 1Is there essential consequence in pupils accomplishment on Pre and pose trials on electrostatic ( TOE ) for ( one ) maintain group ( acquirement with traditional air ) and ( two ) experimental group ( knowledge and larning with interactional simulation ) ?The void hypotheses are formulated in order to reply research inquiry 1H 1 on that point is no most-valuable disagreement in pupils accomplishment on the pre and station trials on electrostatic for control group ( larn with traditional learning manner ) .H 2 on that point is no all-important(a) leaving in pupils accomplishment on the pre-post trials on electrostatic for experimental group ( learning and larning with interactional simulation ) .mated sample t-test was conducted severally on the average tonss of pre and station trials on electrostatic ( ToE ) for ( one ) control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and ( two ) experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) .Table 4.2 Consequences of Paired sample on Test on Electrostatic ( ToE ) for control ( n = 31 ) and experimental groups ( n=25 )Sample root wordTrial on ElectrostaticMean Score southbound dakotaMean Diff.South dakotaTSig. ( 2-tailed ) number Size ( Eta ) apply sort ( Teaching with traditional manner )Pre view9.1918.062.715.438.874.8410.20*.0000.71data-based Group ( Teaching and larning with synergistic sim ulation )PrePost8.7222.164.334.6813.443.8017.69*.0000.83*p & A lt 0.054.2.1 Consequences of mated sample t-test for meditation 1.A paired-samples t-test was conducted to measure the shock of the intercession on pupils mean tonss on the ToE for control group ( learning with traditional manner ) . It can be seen that from Table 4.2, there was a statistically important addition in the mean mark amongst the Pre and Post on ToE for control group from ( M= 9.19, SD=2.713 ) to ( M=18.06, SD=5.428 ) severally at T ( 30 ) = 10.20 at P & A lt 0.05 point. The consequence size ( .71 ) indicates a big consequence size on pupils accomplishment in front and after. The average mark difference surrounded by Pre and Post ToE is M=8.87. wherefore the void hypothesis 1 is rejected.This indicates that there is important difference in pupils mean mark for control group ( learning with traditional manner ) before and after intercession. It means that the pupil performed significantly better in the post-test compared to their public presentation in the pre-test. This shows that pupils do understand to what the teacher is learning.4.2.2 Consequences of mated sample t-test for Hypothesis 2.Same trial has been conducted to measure the impact of the intercession on pupils mean tonss on the ToE for experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) . Besides from table 4.2, there was a statistically important addition in the mean mark difference between the Pre and Post on ToE for experimental group from ( M = 8.72, SD = 4.326 ) to ( M = 22.16, SD = 4.679 ) at T ( 24 ) = 17.69 at P & A lt 0.025 degree. The consequence size after intercession for experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) is ( .83 ) indicates a really big consequence to pupils accomplishment in ToE. The average mark difference between Pre and Post ToE is ( M = 13.44 ) . With these, the void hypothesis 2 is besides non accepted.This means there is important difference in pupils accomplishment after intercession utilizing synergistic simulation. It means that the pupil besides performed significantly better in the post-test compared to their public presentation in the pre-test after utilizing synergistic simulation in the instruction and learning electrostatic.4.2.3. DecisionFrom the consequences of the tabular straddle above, it can be concluded that after learning either with traditional method or utilizing synergistic simulation, it have significantly consequence on pupils accomplishment in trial on electrostatic. However harmonizing to the findings, it was found out that pupils accomplishment is somewhat higher in experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) compared to pupils accomplishment in control group ( learning with traditional tact ) as the consequence size is 0.83 and 0.71 severally. It shows larning public presentation was better when utilizing simulations in instruction and acquisition c ompared to learning with traditional manner.Research Question 2Is there important difference in pupils accomplishment on Pre and Post Test on Electrostatic ( ToE ) between control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) ?The void hypotheses are formulated in order to reply research inquiry 2H 3There is no important difference in pupils accomplishment on the pre-test on electrostatic between control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) .H 4There is no important difference in pupils accomplishment on the post-test on electrostatic between control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) . sovereign sample trial was conducted on the average tonss of pre and station trials on electrostatic between control group ( learning with traditional manner ) a nd experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) .Table 4.3 Consequences of Independent T-Test on Test on Electrostatic for control and experimental groupsTrial on ElectrostaticGroupMeanSouth dakotaMean Diff.TSig. ( 2-tailed )Effect Size ( Eta )PreControl observational9.198.722.714.33.474.477.636PostControlExperimental18.0622.165.434.684.102.98*.0040.40*p & A lt 0.0254.2.4 Consequences of independent sample t-test for Hypothesis 3In this subdivision, it shows that there is non differ significantly, ( t = .477, DF=38.54, p=.636 ) in pre-test on electrostatic between control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and experimental group ( learning with synergistic simulation ) as ( M = 9.19, SD = 2.71 ) and ( M=8.72, SD=4.33 ) . There is merely a little mean difference between twain groups i.e. ( M=.474 ) . Therefore the void hypotheses 3 can be accepted.This means that the degree of apprehension of the pupils towards electrostatic in both category i.e. control group and experimental group are the same.4.2.5 Consequences of independent sample t-test for Hypothesis 4By looking at table 4.3 under post-tests for both groups, it shows that there is significantly difference between post-test on electrostatic between control group ( learning with traditional manners ) and experimental group ( learning with synergistic simulation ) as T ( 54 ) = 2.98 at P & A lt .025. This is because the average difference is big i.e. ( M = 4.10 ) comparison to the pre-test mean difference. The consequence size is ( =.40 ) which means giving a moderate consequence when the pupils intervene by synergistic simulations. But still, it shows great cash advance in post-test on electrostatic between control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and experimental group ( learning with synergistic simulation ) as ( M = 18.06, SD = 5.43 ) and ( M=22.16, SD=4.68 ) .This shows that with the aid of synergistic simulations, it so effectual in bettering pupils accomplishment in natural philosophies topics. The void hypothesis will non be accepted.4.2.6 DecisionThe consequence from the independent trial analyses, there is no important difference between pre-test of control and experimental group. However, there is extremely important difference between post-test control group and experimental group at P & A lt .05. And the consequence size indicates that learning with synergistic simulation do hold moderate consequence on pupils accomplishment on electrostatic. From the consequences it shows that synergistic simulation can assist in pupils understanding better in natural philosophies constructs compared to learning with traditional manner.4.3 Traditional vs. Interactive Simulation consequence on pupils attitudes towards ScienceThis subdivision describes the consequences of analyses to obtain replies for the 2nd research aims the consequence of on control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and experimental group ( learning and l arning with synergistic simulation ) on pupils accomplishment and attitude towards Science.In order to arouse replies to the research objectives, the undermentioned research inquiry and research hypotheses were formulated.Research Question 3Is there important difference in pupils attitude before and after learning for experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) ?The void hypotheses are formulated in order to reply research inquiry 3H 5There is no important difference in pupils attitude before and after learning for experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) .H 6There is no important difference in pupils attitude before and after learning for experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) for different sphere.Paired sample t-test was besides performed on the average difference of pupils attitude toward scientific discipline before and after learning for both experimental group ( learning and larnin g with synergistic simulation ) and for different sphere ( involvement, pertinence, continuity and motive ) at P & A lt .05.Table 4.4 Consequences of Paired sample on Survey on pupils attitude towards larning Science for control and experimental groupsSample GroupSurveyNitrogenMeanMarkSouth dakotaMean Diff.South dakotaTSig. ( 2-tailed )Effect Size ( Eta )Control GroupPrePost31313.74.483Experimental GroupPrePost25253.503.97.326.440.467.6133.81.0010.524.3.1 Consequences of mated sample t-test for Hypothesis 5.Table 4.4 reveals that the difference between the pre-survey and post-survey for experimental group is statistically important at T ( 24 ) = 3.81 at P & A lt 0.01 degree. As the mean of pupils attitude towards scientific discipline was increased from ( M= 3.50, SD=.440 to ( M=3.97, SD=.326 ) with the average difference of ( M=.467 ) . It indicates that the pupils attitude towards scientific discipline is going more positive after macrocosm introduced to interactive simula tion and the consequence size Tells with synergistic simulation, it does give great impact on attitude of pupils. As during the lessons, for experimental groups they interact with the pedagogue slice the instructor explains the electrostatic by utilizing the synergistic simulation. This shows that pupil truly interested to cognize what happens.4.3.2 Consequences of mated sample t-test for Hypothesis 6.From table 4.5, there are statistically important for all the spheres as for involvement T ( 24 ) = 6.162, pertinence T ( 24 ) = 2.552, and motive T ( 24 ) = 2.751 at P & A lt .025 excepting continuity T ( 24 ) = 2.367 shown non important at P & A lt .025. Out of the four dimension, involvement in larning scientific discipline has the highest average difference ( M =.726 ) followed by pertinence ( M =.400 ) and so motive ( M =.360 ) . The tabular array farther Tells that after the pupils being taught utilizing synergistic simulation, it gave great impact on pupils involvement tow ards larning scientific discipline as the consequence size is ( .67 ) i.e. large consequence. Along with pertinence and motive as both gave moderate consequence ( .40 ) every bit good as continuity ( .32 ) . Therefore the void hypotheses is rejected for 3 spheres i.e. motive, involvement and pertinence except for continuity, there is no important difference therefore, void hypothesis is accepted.Table 4.5 Consequences of Paired sample on Survey on pupils attitude towards larning Science for different sphere for experimental groups force fieldSurveyMeanSouth dakotaMean Diff.South dakotaTSig. ( 2 tailed )Effect Size ( Eta )InterestPrePost3.294.02.441.370.726.5896.16*.0000.67ApplicabilityPrePost3.563.96.516.416.400.7842.55*.0170.40 doggednessPrePost3.694.05.561.470.360.7612.37.0260.32MotivationPrePost3.473.86.521.404.383.6962.75*.0110.404.3.3 DecisionsFrom the information analyses above, this proved that pupils attitude towards scientific discipline shows more positive after been exp osed to new learning manner i.e. learning with synergistic simulation. Therefore both hypotheses 5 and 6 are rejected as there are important differences in pupils average attitude towards Science. This means synergistic simulations able to hold on pupils attending and hike their involvement and motive to larn Science.Research Question 4Is there important difference in pupils attitude after learning between control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) ?The void hypotheses are formulated in order to reply last research inquiry 4Hypotheses 7There is no important difference in pupils attitude towards scientific discipline after learning between control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) .Hypotheses 8There is no important difference in pupils attitude towards scientific discipline after learning between control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) for different sphere ( involvement, pertinence, continuity and motive )Independent sample trial was conducted on the average difference of pupils attitude toward scientific discipline before and after learning for experimental group ( learning and larning with synergistic simulation ) and for different sphere ( involvement, pertinence, continuity and motive ) at P & A lt .05.4.3.4 Consequences of independent sample t-test for Hypothesis 7Under this subdivision, the average study points is at P & A lt 0.05 which indicates that pupils attitude towards larning Science do differ significantly after learning i.e. comparing between learning with traditional manner and synergistic simulation.Table 4.6Independents sample Test on pupils attitude towards scientific discipline after learning between Control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and Experimental group ( lea rning with synergistic simulation )SurveyGroupNitrogenMeanSouth dakotaMean Diff.TSig. ( 2-tailed )Effect Size ( Eta )PostControlExperimental25313.744.02.483.327.2872.64.0110.34This indicates learning with synergistic simulation make assist student better engage in the lesson taught. And be more synergistic with the instructor as compared to traditional instruction manner.4.3.5 Consequences of independent sample t-test for Hypothesis 8Table 4.7 Independent T-test on pupils attitude towards scientific discipline after learning between Control group ( learning with traditional manner ) and Experimental group ( learning with synergistic simulation ) in different sphereSphereGroupNitrogenMeanSouth dakotaMean Diff.TSig. ( 2 tailed )Effect Size ( Eta )InterestExperimental Group254.10.414.4924.06*.0000.50Control Group313.61.478ApplicabilityExperimental Group253.98.409.2181.74.0870.22Control Group313.77.505ContinuityExperimental Group254.10.447.1801.26.2140.20Control Group313.91.621Motivati onExperimental Group253.97.396.2992.32*.0240.30Control Group313.67.535As seen from the tabular array when comparing the station study of control and experimental groups merely two of the dimension differ significantly i.e. involvement and motive towards scientific discipline. Whereas, pertinence and continuity towards scientific discipline remain the same for both groups, this indicates there is no important difference. There were large consequence size for involvement sphere ( =.50 ) and moderate consequence size ( =.30 ) . Whereas consequence size for pertinence and continuity indicates little consequence size ( =.22 ) and ( =.20 ) severally.4.3.6 DecisionThe independent trial for this subdivisions conclude that learning with synergistic simulation do give little consequence on pupils attitude towards scientific discipline. But for the sphere, pupils involvement towards scientific discipline shows consequence as P & A lt .05. On the other manus, pupils pertinence towards scie ntific discipline does non demo any important difference as P & A gt .05.4.4 Students InterviewThe followers was the extract of pupils interview on what do they believe between larning traditionally and larning with the aid of synergistic simulation.Teacher Which manner of learning would you preferred?StudentsTeacher Is the teacher manner of learning easier to understand?StudentsTeacher In your sentiment, what do you foretell the instructor to make, to do the lesson interesting?StudentsTeacher Do you believe with the aid of ICT can do the lesson interesting and assist you understand better/ for case what the instructor did in the schoolroomStudents