SCIENCE TEACHERS’ PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE AND STUDENTS’

CONCEPTION OF SCIENCE ON THEIR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN BASIC

SCIENCE IN YENAGOA METROPOLIS

IGBINOGUN, EMMANUEL OSARODION

UG/13/1361

A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE EDUCATION,

FACULTY OF EDUCATION, IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE EDUCATION (B. Sc. Ed) DEGREE

IN INTEGRATED SCIENCE OF THE NIGER DELTA UNIVERSITY

DECEMBER, 2017.

Certification

We certify that this study on Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Students’

Conception of Science on their Academic Achievement in Integrated Science in Yenagoa

Metropolis was carried out by Igbinogun, Emmanuel Osarodion of the Department of Science

Education, Faculty of Education, in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement for the Award of

Bachelor of Science Education Degree (B.Sc. Ed) in Integrated Science of the Niger Delta

University.

Mr. Aggrey R. Olotu …………………… ……………………

Supervisor Signature Date

Dr. Joy-Telu Hamilton-Ekeke …………………… ……………………

Head of Department Signature Date

Prof. Akpoebi C. Egumu …………………… ……………………

Dean of Faculty Signature Date

…………………… …………………… ……………………

External Examiner Signature Date

Dedication

This work is dedicated to Miracle and Marvellous Igbinogun.

Acknowledgements

I thank God almighty for His divine guidance, provision, love, grace and favour all through my.

Special thanks goes to my wonderful supervisor, Mr. Aggrey R. Olotu for his assistance, support

and patience from the development of the research topic to the completion of the study.

My appreciation goes to my HOD, Dr. Joy-Telu H. Ekeke and to the distinguished lecturers of

the faculty of education, Prof. J.C Buseri, Prof. T. Asuka, Dr. P.C Igbojinwaekwu, Dr. J.B.

Moses, Dr. T.M Frederick- Jonah, Dr. Joy N. Akporehwe, Dr. Offor and others for their time. I

also thank the principals, teachers and students of the selected schools for the cooperation and

support they gave me during the research.

I wholesomely appreciate my parents, Mr. and Mrs. Igbinogun Samuel Osagie for their love, care

and support and also my siblings, Favour Igbinogun, David Igbinogun, Miracle Igbinogun and

Marvellous Igbinogun for their love.

My appreciation also goes to my friends/course-mates, especially Dan Achonwa, Agah Rebecca,

Mr. Raphael Dibagha, Ugorji Victor, Kings Kubu-emi and others. May the Lord Almighty bless

you all, Amen.

Abstract

This study investigated the impact of science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’ conception of science on the academic achievement of basic science students in junior secondary schools in yenagoa metropolis. The effect of gender was also determined on the dependent variable. Two public secondary schools were purposively selected for this study and one class was randomly selected from each school and randomly assigned to science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) and students’ conception of science (SCS) groups. The sample size was 140 students offering basic science at the Junior Secondary School two (JSS2) level of the selected schools. An ex-post-facto experimental design was adopted. Basic Science Achievement Scores (BSAS) was the instrument used in the study. The BSAS was validated by experts in basic science education and a reliability of 0.97 was obtained using Kuder-Richardson Formula 21. Two research questions were formulated to guide the study and were tested using the mean. Two hypotheses guided the study and were tested at 0.05 level of significance. Data analysis was done using t-test. The analysis revealed that the TPCK group had a mean score that was significantly higher than that of the SCS group. It was also observed that there was no significant gender difference in basic science achievement in the TPCK group. It was therefore recommended that, for better academic achievement of students to be realized, teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge should be the yard stick for employing and assigning teachers to certain subjects and classes especially in the science area.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

Over the years, it has been universally discovered that Science has contributed

immensely towards economic development of any nation. Thus, there is a pressing need

to develop students’ knowledge and skills in the science area. This is possible through the

students’ and teachers’ concerted efforts. The application of science and technology is

important in all aspects of human existence such as agriculture, health, warfare,

communication, housing, even politics among others. Shaibu in Isah (2011) points out

that education in science is so fundamental to any meaningful development of a country

that a nation’s effort might come to nought without a strong army of scientists and

science literate citizenry. Expressing a similar view, Bichi in Isah (2011) described

science as the universal vehicle for human progress and that nations should endeavour to

give priority to science education.

In the context of the importance of science and technology education, Nigerian

Government in the National Policy on Education (FRN, 2004) and in National Policy on

Science and Technology (FME, 2004) made provision for science and technology

education in the educational system. These policies are aimed at promoting scientific and

technological development to produce citizens with the needed scientific knowledge,

skills, methods and attitude as well as the capacity to apply them to solve national

problems. These policies have provided guidelines on science and technology education

in Nigeria. In this respect, several science curricula were developed and introduced into

the school system.

One of such science curricula developed was the integrated science curriculum. The Core

Nigerian Integrated Science Project (NISP) was the Series of Science Curriculum Project

Developed by Science Teachers Association of Nigeria (STAN) in 1970. The integrated

science curriculum drew its subject matter, methodology and philosophy from various

aspects of science and related disciplines. It has also made conscious efforts to de-

emphasize the artificial boundaries between different disciplines in the organization and

presentation of instructional materials (Mejeha in Isah, 2011).

The introduction of integrated science programme was unique in that the course

objectives were clearly spelt out in the National Curriculum for Junior Secondary School.

However, after few years, researchers found that the objectives set out in the course were

not being achieved and the main factor identified for this was inadequate for teacher

preparation (Jegede, Bajah, Shaibu, Usman & Dogara in Isah, 2011). In such vein, it was

felt that a specific pre-service training was required for teachers of integrated science for

the Junior Secondary School (JSS) level. This training as envisaged could be provided at

the National Certificate of Education (NCE) level by a double major integrated science

programme. The above development gave rise to Nigerian Integrated Science Teacher

Education Project (NISTEP) after the formal signing of a technical cooperation

agreement between Nigeria and the Government of the United Kingdom in 1989.

The integrated approach to science teaching started in earnest as far back as the early

1960s all over the world as a result of curricula reforms. Integrated Science is defined by

Science Teachers' Association of Nigeria (STAN in Isah, 2011) as a course, which

contains basic elements of the main branches of major concepts of sciences. It is a

programme designed to teach the students the interwoven nature of the different branches

of science and how the concepts of these branches are related to their everyday life. The

aspect of integration in science could not be achieved if pedagogical content knowledge

is not given proper consideration by the teachers (Olorukooba in Isah, 2011).

Subject Content Knowledge (SCK) refers to the science knowledge a teacher should

possess; it is a specific content knowledge that teachers teach students. Grossman in Isah

(2011) defined subject content knowledge as the stuff of a discipline, factual information,

organizing principles and central concepts of the subject. The content knowledge of a

prospective science teacher is developed primarily in science courses taught by science

department. Researches indicate that subject content knowledge influences instructional

practices across subject area (Lee in John, Rosanelia, Amelia & Allen 2016). Without the

essential base of subject content knowledge, teachers are simply unable to produce

effective instruction (Shulman in Isah, 2011).

Subject Content Knowledge however, is the first necessary, condition for effective

instruction (Garnett & Tobin in Zeki, Ozge, Emine, Sinem & Senol 2013). Science and

its language, on the other hand, implies the ways and manner teacher should teach in

order to communicate the scientific concepts so as to cater for the learner’s interest and

for meaningful learning which calls for teachers Pedagogical Knowledge (PK) (Kemeny

in Isah, 2011). Pedagogical knowledge comprises the theories, and principles of teaching

and learning, knowledge of learners, and knowledge of principles and techniques of

classroom behaviour and management (Sanders in Isah, 2011). It is a knowledge that a

teacher uses to deal with everyday task of teaching and relating to students in the

classroom. It is that kind of knowledge which the teacher uses in order to make their

students learning experiences valuable. Darling-Hammond in Isah (2011) teacher’s

qualities are important determinants of students’ achievement. Therefore, there is a need

to focus on teachers’ competence through the development of teachers’ Pedagogical

Content Knowledge.

However, Isah (2011) claimed that the emphasis on teacher subject content knowledge

and pedagogical skills were treated as mutually exclusive domains. To address this

dichotomy, he proposed to consider the necessary relationship between them by

introducing the notion of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). Pedagogical Content

Knowledge, according to Vistro-yu in Isah (2011), is the manner which subject content is

transformed for teaching. This occurs when the teacher interprets the subject content and

finds ways to represent it and makes it accessible to learners. For a science teacher to be

effective in his teaching, he has to combine the subject content knowledge and the

pedagogical skills in the teaching and learning process. Thus, the teacher is expected to

exhibit skills in the use of analogies, illustrations, instructional materials, examples,

explanation and variety of instructional strategies. In fact, the teacher should note the:

• Use of different forms of representation of science ideas in a word.

• Ways of representing and formulating the subject that makes it comprehensible to

students.

• Understanding of what makes learning of specific concepts easy or difficult.

• Preconception that students of different ages and background bring with them to the

learning environment.

• Teaching of science requires science teachers’ knowledge of their students’ abilities,

learning styles, their ages and developmental level, their attitudes, motivations, and

prior knowledge of the concepts to be taught (Udogu, Amaechi & Njelita in Isah

2011).

It is obvious that science curriculum consists of concepts, laws and theories which

science teachers must be acquainted with to enable them transform valid knowledge of

science effectively to their students. Their ability to impart scientific knowledge to

students must go beyond verbalization of the basic terms of science. Hence, Njelita in

Isah (2011) contended that there is a difference between “studying science” and

“understanding science”. It implies that if what is taught in the classroom or laboratory is

to reflect the true nature of science, it becomes obvious that those who teach the subject

should possess its adequate knowledge. Therefore, teachers’ understandings of content

knowledge must tally with the pedagogical skills during classroom practice.

Therefore, there is a need to focus on teachers’ competence through the development of

teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge. It has been recognized that the foundation of

science Pedagogical Content Knowledge is thought to be the amalgam of a teacher’s

pedagogy and understanding of content such that it influences his/her teaching in ways

that will best stimulate students’ learning for understanding (Jang, Guan & Hsieh in John,

et al. 2016). This emphasis on Pedagogical Content Knowledge is justified based on the

assumption that Pedagogical Content Knowledge can make a significant impact on the

quality of instruction that the students receive and thus the quality of learning the students

experience in the classroom (Grossman; Park & Oliver in John et al. 2016). In support of

this idea, pedagogical content knowledge is an essential and critical element in

determining a teacher’s success in handling the teaching and learning process that further

produces effective teaching (Hill, Schilling & Ball in John et al. 2016).

Science education to some extent depends on the degree of professional and pedagogical

competence of teachers. Baranovic in John et al. (2016) said that there is really a need

therefore to redefine teachers’ professional development for sustainability. The general

components of teacher competencies were presented by Selvi in John et al. (2016) as

follows: field, research, curriculum, lifelong learning, social-cultural, emotional, and

communication. These aim to bring out systematic and scientific results towards meeting

the needs of individuals and society. Shulman in John et al. (2016) studied the

characteristics of teachers’ knowledge and claimed that professional teachers must

possess certain competencies to be called effective. In science teaching, an effective

teacher must have high regard for scientific competencies rather than simple contents and

topics. Pedagogical Content Knowledge has been qualified as deeply personal, highly

contextualized, and influenced by teaching interaction and experiences (Van Dijk &

Kattmann in John et al. 2016).

Students’ Conception of science in this context has to do with students’ understanding of

basic science concepts as it relates to what they see and experience in the environment

(Driver & Easley in Duit 2007). It is no doubt that some of these conceptions could be

wrong, hence it is the place of the science teacher to know what these conceptions are,

readjust the students’ mind to the correct thing in order to achieve a positive result which

will eventually reflect in the students’ academic achievement.

John, Joseph, Eric, Yusuf and Olubumi (2015) assert that gender is one of the factors that

have considerable effect on student’s academic performance especially in science

subjects.

Okeke in Nnamana and Oyibe (2016) observed that the Nigerian school curriculum is not

gender fair since its contents reflect mainly the concerns of male and also science careers

portray masculine images in the curriculum. In most societies, gender has roles based on

the women folk, preventing the participating in and benefiting from development efforts.

These actions put the girls in a disadvantaged position for achievement in classroom

interaction especially in science related subjects.

In line with this idea, this study aims at examining the effect of science teachers’

pedagogical content knowledge and students’ conception of science on their academic

achievement of basic science in Yenagoa Metropolis. This will be achieved by examining

the pedagogical content knowledge of teachers and students’ conception of science based

on their academic achievement in basic science in some selected secondary schools in

Yenagoa Metropolis.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Basic science is a core-subject taught at the secondary school level. The basic science

philosophy demands that the teaching be relevant to students’ needs and experiences,

stresses fundamental unity of science; it also lays adequate foundation for subsequent

specialist studies; it adds cultural dimension to science education and skill development.

The teaching strategies prescribed for attaining its objectives includes the use of

discovery methods, problem solving activities and open-ended laboratory activities. The

students under basic science education discipline are trained to teach the subject

effectively because they are supposed to have both the subject matter content knowledge

and pedagogical skills to teach the subject content. Literature enunciated supported that

students of integrated science have the difficulties mastering the concepts and principles

outlined in the National core curriculum for Junior Secondary School. These difficulties

may emanate from a number of factors teachers were exposed to during their training in

the discipline. They include, among others, poor teaching; deficient professional training;

weak academic background while a number of them lack required experience. This may

cause difficulties to the implementation of the programme.

The poor performance may be due to lack of integrating the content with specific

effective methods of instruction while the teachers are in training (Abba in Isah,

2011).Various studies carried out in the teaching and learning of integrated science have

been on teaching methods, science process skills, academic achievement and practical

activities effectiveness (Isah, 2011), among others. Studies on comparing the content

knowledge mastery and pedagogical skills of integrated science students are not much.

The integrated science curriculum is geared towards preparing students both for subject

matter content knowledge and pedagogical skills. Therefore, there is the need to

investigate relationship of these variables.

1.3 Purpose of the Study

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of science teachers’

pedagogical content knowledge and students’ conception of science on academic

achievement of basic science students. Specifically, the study sought to:

i. find out the difference in the mean academic achievement score of basic science students

with respect to teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’ conception of

science.

ii. find out the impact of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge on basic science students

in relation to gender.

1.4 Research Questions

Based on the objectives above, the following research questions were formulated to guide

the study;

i. What is the difference in the mean academic achievement score of basic science students

with respect to teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’ conception of

science?

ii. What is the impact of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge on basic science students

in relation to gender?

1.5 Research Hypotheses

H01: There is no significant difference in the mean academic achievement score of basic

science students with respect to teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’

conception of science.

H02: There is no significant difference in the impact of teachers’ pedagogical content

knowledge on basic science students in relation to gender.

1.6 Significance of the Study

This study investigates the impact of science teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge

and students’ conception of science on their academic achievement in Basic Science in

Yenagoa Metropolis, Bayelsa State. It is hoped that the findings from this study would

enable basic science teachers to effectively relate their pedagogical content knowledge to

the teaching and learning of basic science. Secondly, it would enable the students to

identify appropriate teaching methods relevant to content area of basic science as

proposed in the curriculum of basic science. Thirdly, the curriculum planners will also

benefit from this study by making adjustment in teacher education programmes in science

in such a way that both content and pedagogical knowledge should be taught in relevant

educational institutions. Researchers in science education will equally benefit from the

findings of this study by using it as a stepping-stone for further studies in content

knowledge and pedagogical skills and other related areas. It would enable teacher

training programmes to reorient and reorganize their programmes towards a better

preparation for professional development of would-be teachers.

1.7 Scope of the Study

This study is restricted to the impact of science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge

and students’ conception of science on their academic achievement of Basic Science.

The research study covered public secondary schools only and it was focused on Junior

Secondary School two (JSS2). The area covered for this study is Yenegoa Metropolis in

Yenegoa Local Government Area of Bayelsa State. Two public secondary schools were

used for the study.

1.8 Operational Definition of Terms

i. Academic Achievement: It is the students' score from an achievement test.

ii. Content knowledge: It is the knowledge of subject matter.

iii. Gender: it is the range of characteristics pertaining to and differentiating between

masculinity and feminity.

iv. Pedagogical knowledge: This is a teaching strategy or method the teacher employs in

teaching. In other words, Knowledge about teaching.

v. Pedagogical content knowledge: It refers to the ways of representing and formulating

the subject that make it comprehensible to others. PCK is knowing what, when, why, and

how to teach using a reservoir of knowledge of good teaching practice and experience.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter dealt with the review of related literature. The literature review was done under the

following headings and sub-headings:

2.1 Theoretical Framework

2.1.1 The theory of multiple intelligences

2.1.2 Constructivism: Helping Students Build Their Understanding of Science

2.2 Conceptual Review

2.2.1 Who is a science teacher?

2.2.2 Students’ Conception of Science

2.2.3 The Role of Science Teachers in Students’ Conception of Science

2.2.4 Science Teachers Specialization on their Content Knowledge

2.2.5 Science Teachers’ Knowledge and Motivation

2.2.6 Characterizing Teachers’ Knowledge

2.2.7 Teacher’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge

2.2.8 Integrated Science Curriculum

2.2.9 Students’ Conception of Science and their Academic Achievement in Integrated Science

2.3 Relevance of these Concepts to the field of Study

2.4 Empirical Evidence

2.4.1 Pedagogical content knowledge and academic achievement

2.4.2 Students’ conception of science and academic achievement

2.4.3 Gender and academic achievement

2.5 Summary of Literature

2.1 Theoretical Framework

Teaching effectiveness at any level of education is measured in terms of the knowledge

of what to teach, how to teach, and when to teach (Odetoyinbo in Isah, 2011). These are

effectively functioned by Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Pedagogical Content

Knowledge was first proposed by Shulman and Gediss in Philips, De Miranda and Shin

(2015) which they developed into broader perspective model for understanding teaching

and learning. Their studies revealed how prospective teachers acquired new

understandings of their content and how these understandings influenced their teaching.

Isah (2011) described Pedagogical Content Knowledge as the knowledge formed by the

synthesis of three knowledge bases: subject content knowledge, pedagogical skills and

knowledge of context. Pedagogical content knowledge was unique to teachers and

differentiates a science teacher from a scientist or a teacher from content specialist.

Teachers differ from biologists, historians, writers or educational researchers, not

necessarily in the quantity or quality of their subject content knowledge but in how that

knowledge is organized and used. For example, trained teachers’ knowledge of science is

structured from a teaching perspective and is used as a basis for helping students to

understand specific concepts. A scientist’s knowledge on the other hand, is structured

from research perspective and is used as a basis for the construction of new knowledge in

the field (Isah, 2011).

Furthermore, Isah (2011) states that Pedagogical Content Knowledge includes those

special attributes a teacher possesses that help him/her guide a student to understand

content in a manner that was personally meaningful. He wrote that Pedagogical Content

Knowledge included an understanding of how particular topics, problems, or issues are

organized, presented, and adapted to the diverse interest and abilities of the learners, and

presented for instruction. He then concluded that the key to identify the knowledge base

of teaching lies at the intersection of content and pedagogy. That is the capacity of a

teacher to transform the content knowledge he or she possesses into forms that are

pedagogically powerful and adaptive to the variations and background presented by the

students (Isah, 2011).

2.1.1 The theory of multiple intelligences (Howard Gardner, 1983)

The theory of multiple intelligences implies that people learn better through certain

modalities than others, and that the science teacher should design curriculum to address

as many modalities as possible. Intelligence is a property of the mind that includes many

related abilities such as the capacities to reason, plan, solve problems, comprehend

language and ideas, learn new concepts, and think abstractly. Historically,

psychometricians have measured intelligence with a single score (intelligence quotient)

on a standardized test, finding that such scores are predictive of later intellectual

achievement.  Howard Gardner in Katei (2012) asserts that there are multiple

intelligences, and that no single score can accurately reflect a person’s intelligence. 

2.1.2 Constructivism: Helping Students Build Their Understanding of Science

Constructivism is a major learning theory, and is particularly applicable to the teaching

and learning of science. Piaget suggested that through accommodation and assimilation,

individuals construct new knowledge from their experiences.  Constructivism views

learning as a process in which students actively construct or build new ideas and concepts

based upon prior knowledge and new information.   The constructivist teacher is a

facilitator who encourages students to discover principles and construct knowledge

within a given framework or structure.  Seymour Papert, a student of Piaget, asserted that

learning occurs particularly well when people are engaged in constructing a product. 

Papert’s approach, known as constructionism, is facilitated by model building, robotics,

video editing, and similar construction projects. 

2.2 Conceptual Review

2.2.1 Who is a science teacher?

Inspiring students with science is one of the rewarding aspects of a career in science

education. Science teachers play a key role in developing future leaders in science and

technology by fueling the curiosity of students and encouraging further exploration into

topics of interest (Tytler, 2002). A science teacher can be certified to teach elementary

school, middle school, or high school. At higher grade levels and in colleges, classes

typically focus on specific areas such as biology, earth science, animal science,

chemistry, or physics. Novak and Gowin in Novak (2010), teaching science requires

hands-on experiments and investigations and provides students with opportunities to

learn science concepts through multimedia materials, field trips, and non-conventional

teaching approaches. It is the teacher’s job to implement appropriate curricula and foster

an active learning environment that encourages student participation.

Duit and Treagust (2009), science education should begin with an introduction to basic

science-related concepts early in a child’s education. Elementary teachers can instill an

appreciation for how and why things work the way they do by creating hands-on learning

centers where students use the senses to observe, investigate, and discover. Middle school

science is a crucial time for capturing a child’s love for the subject. Earth and life science

are the key classroom topics at these grade levels as students are typically introduced to

laboratory settings during both group and individual experiences.

A science teacher provides instruction and guidance to help students explore and

understand important concepts in science. Science teachers create lesson plans, present

science demonstrations, and grade tests and assignments (Driver in Borko, 2004). They

identify students who need additional help and assist them with overcoming challenges.

They also communicate with parents and school administration on student progress.

Science teachers are responsible for preparing class lesson plans based on school

guidelines and grade levels. This includes daily instruction outlines, classroom

assignments, special projects, homework, and tests (Goodrum, Hackling & Rennie in

Isaac, Conner & Winter, 2015). A teacher must maintain student records to show

attendance, grades, and conduct in accordance to school, district, and state policies. A

teacher also needs to observe and evaluate each student’s performance.

2.2.2 Students’ Conception of Science

Determining students’ existing ideas and conceptions has been recognized as an

important variable in science teaching and a necessary part of teaching strategies

developed (Ausubel; Osborne & Wittrock; Scott, Asoko & Driver; Carr, Barker, Bell,

Biddulph, Jones, Kirkwood, Pearson & Symington; Little dyke; Tytler in Cimer, 2007).

Hipkins, Bolstad, Baker, Jones, Bell, Coll, Cooper, Forret, France, Haigh, Harlow and

Taylor in Cimer (2007) argue that teaching science is effective when students’ existing

ideas, values and beliefs, which they bring to a lesson, are elicited, addressed and linked

to their classroom experiences at the beginning of a teaching programme.

The effect of the students’ pre-conceived ideas on the quality of subsequent learning is

well documented. There is a common belief that students do not arrive in the classroom

as empty vessels into which new ideas can be poured by teachers (Carr et al.; Leach &

Scott; Vosniadou; Tytler in Cimer, 2007). They can have prior ideas and conceptions

about the events and phenomena in the world around them, which might well be different

from those intended by the teacher and scientific community. Meaningful learning occurs

as students consciously and explicitly link their new knowledge to existing knowledge

structure (Ausubel; Wittrock; Mintzes, Wandersee & Novak in Cimer, 2007). This

implies that effective instructional approaches have to be based on what is already known

by the learner. Therefore, the diagnosis of learners’ pre-existing knowledge is important

for teachers in order to plan subsequent teaching activities and help students link the new

material to what they already know.

Determining students’ existing ideas and conceptions in science may increase students’

awareness of them, which is necessary for meaningful learning (Ausubel; Mintzes,

Wandersee & Novak; Jarvala & Niemivitra; Goodrum, Hackling & Rennie in Cimer,

2007). This is why Cimer (2007) posits that, students do not appear to know that their

explanations of physical phenomena are hypotheses that can be subjected to

experimentation and falsification. Their explanations remain implicit and tacit. When

students become aware of their previously ‘tacit’ ideas, they have a chance to compare

them with scientific ones and change if necessary.

In addition, determining students’ pre-existing ideas and conceptions also helps teachers

confront any alternative ideas or misconceptions students may have at an early stage in

the learning process so that these do not hinder students’ learning (Cimer, 2007).

Through determining students’ existing conceptions, teachers can develop appropriate

instructional strategies that move these unscientific ideas and conceptions towards

scientific ones (Jarvala & Niemivitra in Cimer, 2007). However, it is not worthy that

there is research evidence that students’ alternative conceptions are difficult to shift, and

can offer a serious barrier to effective teaching (Glynn & Duit in Cimer, 2007). I will

discuss this issue later in this section in more detail.

Finally, Cimer (2007) indicate that when teachers take into account and build on

students’ existing ideas, experiences, and values, science education can become more

inclusive for students from diverse cultures, girls and boys, students with special needs

and special abilities.

2.2.3 The Role of Science Teachers in Students’ Conception of Science

Science teachers have a lot of roles to play in students’ conception of science. Students

do not change their ideas or conceptions easily but they change them only if they see that

the more scientifically valid ideas make sense to them and are more fruitful than their

own in explaining a phenomenon and making predictions (Posner, Strike, Hewson &

Gertzog; Hewson & Hewson; Carr et al.; Lee & Brophy in Cimer, 2007). Therefore, in

order for change to occur students must become dissatisfied with their existing

knowledge and be aware of that there may be inconsistencies in their way of viewing the

world (Cimer, 2007). This requires a direct contrast between their existing ideas and

intended scientific views (Wittrock in Cimer, 2007). They need to test and develop their

models and thought processes in familiar contexts, which they believe are real,

representative of everyday experience and under their control. Once they can see that

current ideas or conceptions are no longer relevant to solve problems then new learning

occurs.

Various strategies are suggested for teachers to use to challenge students’ existing ideas.

For example, peer interactions can be a valuable strategy (Cimer, 2007) by creating

productive discussions. In such instances, students experience dissatisfaction with their

existing concepts, develop plausible new concepts and see the relevance of new

knowledge in different contexts (Abrams in Cimer, 2007).

Furthermore, conducting investigations or inquiry can also strongly challenge students’

existing ideas. They can apply their own ideas, observe the process, make predictions

about the results and record the results of the experiment. When they achieve unexpected

results or find that others disagree with their interpretations or see that their current ideas

will not solve the new problem, their existing conceptions are challenged (Cimer, 2007).

As a result, they come to the understanding that they should either modify or discard

these old ideas and construct new ones (Cimer, 2007).

Similarly, simulations in combination with practical work can be effective in helping

students change their non-scientific conceptions (Harlen; Peat & Fernandez in Cimer,

2007). For example, viewing the animations as a class facilitates discussion and may

bring to light students’ misconceptions, which can then be dealt with at class level.

After determining students’ existing ideas and conceptions and making students aware of

them, teachers need to introduce scientific concepts to help them construct new

knowledge. For this purpose, teachers can use short lessons or presentations, watch video

or film, read passages from the textbook or reference books (Evans & Boy; Trowbridge,

Bybee & Powell; Glenn in Cimer, 2007). In addition, Rosenshine in Cimer (2007)

suggests that this explanation phase should be clear and short, and allow time for students

to process new information and restructure their understanding.

As learners’ working memory, where they process information, is small, it takes at least

five seconds to organise a ‘chunk’ of new information and to transfer it to long-term

memory. Since the flow of the material during a class is typically much faster, the

student’s short-term memory is quickly overloaded and learning stops until a space is

available in the short-term memory. As a result, students cannot always process the new

information rapidly enough because they might lose attention and thus, start day

dreaming or not paying attention in the lessons (Anderson; Bligh in Cimer, 2007). This is

evidenced by research that indicates that, students retain 70 percent of the information

during the first ten minutes of a lecture, but only 20 percent of the last 10 minutes

(McKeachie in Cimer, 2007). Cimer (2007) suggests that the limit to students' effective

attention is 25-30 minutes. All these, therefore, suggest that teachers should give short

breaks or provide examples for students to process new information in their working

memory (Svinicki in Cimer, 2007). When there is no new information coming, students

can digest what is being said more readily.

However, teachers should not rely on lectures too much for introducing new knowledge

and skills because, as a traditional teaching method, lecturing can make students passive

in the lessons, leaving too little time for them to process the new information (Parkinson

in Cimer, 2007). In addition, particularly in biology, it can lead to a view of biology as a

‘fact mountain’ (Griffiths & Moon in Cimer, 2007). A strictly lecture-based presentation

of facts and concepts may lead students to believe that everything has been figured out

already and in order to pass their examination they must memorize facts and concepts

instead of trying to understand them.

In explaining new concepts or ideas, there are two important conditions that teachers

should consider: creating attention in students and providing examples and opportunities

for students to practice their ideas.

2.2.4 Science Teachers Specialization on their Content Knowledge

Shulman in Shepherd (2013) distinguishes between four broad kinds of knowledge that

an effective teacher should possess: general pedagogical knowledge; content knowledge

(CK); pedagogical content knowledge (PCK); and curricular knowledge. Pedagogical

knowledge is generally obtained formally through pre- and in-service training and

informally through trial-and-error in their own classrooms and through observing their

peers (Carnoy et al. in Shepherd, 2013). Content Knowledge is principally obtained

through a teacher’s former pre-service training, and may be further subdivided into

common or specialized Content Knowledge. Pedagogical Content Knowledge refers to

the manner in which Content Knowledge is applied for teaching others and is obtained

through practice or highly skilled training programs. The notion of Pedagogical Content

Knowledge has gained wide appeal as it links content knowledge and the practice of

teaching (Ball et al. in Shepherd, 2013). A natural question to ask would be “which is

most important?” It can be argued that pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) is likely to

have the greatest ties to effective teaching as well as to directly influence a teacher’s

ability to develop curriculum. Shepherd (2011) notes that someone who assumes the role

of teacher must first demonstrate knowledge of their subject matter before being able to

help learners to learn with understanding.

2.2.5 Science Teachers’ Knowledge and Motivation

In combining teacher knowledge and motivation as conjoint predictors of student

outcomes, Badad’s in Schieb and Karabenick (2011) study contributes to previous

research in which these two teacher prerequisites are rarely investigated together. Hence

and within the present study, it can be carved out unique effects of teacher knowledge on

student achievement when controlling for teacher motivation. Conversely, unique effects

of teacher motivation on student interest can be determined when controlling for teacher

knowledge. From findings, teacher knowledge contributes solely to students’

achievement, and teacher motivation contributes solely to students’ motivation.

Further, the underlying instructional mechanisms facilitating the respective effects of

teacher knowledge and motivation are very different. Teachers’ Pedagogical Content

Knowledge manifests itself in the complexity of teachers’ task and questions as a rather

content specific feature of instruction, allowing students to build upon and connect their

previous knowledge and understanding of subject matter. Conversely, teacher motivation

manifests itself in enthusiastic teaching behaviors. Enthusiastic teaching can be assessed

on a high-inferential level allowing no conclusions as to the concrete behaviors, yet

previous research allows for concluding that nonverbal expressiveness may play a

dominant role in enthusiastic teaching (Babad in Schieb & Karabenick, 2011).

Enthusiastic teaching and cognitive activation, evidencing no substantial correlation, are

thus two different aspects of instruction facilitating the effects of teacher characteristics

on student outcomes. Taken together, it can be concluded that teacher knowledge and

motivation are equally important prerequisites on the teachers’ side. They are

independent of each other, evidenced by no substantial correlation between teacher

Pedagogical Content Knowledge and motivation. Further, the ways these two

prerequisites manifest themselves in instruction and teacher behavior, are very different,

thus resulting in no substantial cross-effects on students’ outcomes within the

investigation.

2.2.6 Characterizing Teachers' Knowledge

Some studies show that, understanding of science required for quality education is a

specific professional knowledge that can be acquired in university training and developed

through reflections on teaching practices (Fennema; Romberg; Grossman; Morris;

Hiebert; Spitzer in Olfos, Goldrine & Estrella, 2014).

The past 25 years have shown an international and growing focus on the command of

content required for successful teaching (Ma; Schmidt, William in Olfos R. et al., 2014).

These findings have inspired the attempt to characterize an effective teacher's knowledge,

noting that the scholarly literature on the subject repeatedly argues that the knowledge

base of expert teachers is not only broader than that of inexperienced teachers, but that it

is also more connected and integrated (Fennema; Franke; Darling-Hammond; Krauss,

Stefan, Baumert, Jurgen, Blum & Werner in Olfos R. et al., 2014).

Beyond the relevance of strong content knowledge, several authors have argued that

being successful science teachers also requires a solid foundation in pedagogical content

knowledge: that is, a type of professional knowledge that is used to teach the content of a

particular branch of knowledge (Wilson; Shulman; Richer; Wilson; Floden; Ferrini-

Mundy in Olfos R. et al., 2014).

The content knowledge (CK) and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) are strongly

related but distinct entities (Turnuklu; Yesildere; Buschang in Olfos R. et al., 2014). Ball,

Lubienski, and Mewborn in Olfos R. et al. (2014), the development and selection of

tasks, the election of representations and explanations, the facilitation of productive

classroom discussions, the interpretation of student responses, the emphasis on student

comprehension and the quick and appropriate analysis of student mistakes and difficulties

are all underlying elements of Pedagogical Content Knowledge.

An, Kulm, and Wu in Olfos R. et al. (2014) assert that between content, curriculum, and

teaching, “teaching knowledge” is the basic component of pedagogical content

knowledge. Park and Oliver in Olfos R. et al. (2014) state that researchers do not agree

on the characterisation of the relationship between the various sub domains of teachers'

knowledge, although four points are repeatedly and consistently referenced: Pedagogical

Content, Content Knowledge, Pedagogical Content Knowledge, and context knowledge.

Park and Oliver concluded that Pedagogical Content Knowledge is modified by the

teacher's reflections on teaching as a whole and that the teacher's understanding of

students' misconceptions is the main factor that influences planning, conducting and

evaluating teaching in Pedagogical Content Knowledge.

Olfos R. et al. (2014) identified three dimensions of Pedagogical Content Knowledge that

are important in teaching science: teacher's knowledge of subject assignments, teacher's

knowledge of students' prior knowledge (difficulties and misconceptions) and teacher's

knowledge of representations, analogies, illustrations or useful examples of the subject

content to be taught.

In their contribution to clarify the knowledge required to teach science, they propose

three Pedagogical Content Knowledge categories: knowledge of content and students

(KCS), knowledge of content and teaching (KCT), and knowledge of curriculum. KCS

refers to the teacher's familiarity with the students' science conception, especially with

common mistakes they present. Concerning students' learning, these authors make the

following distinctions: students’ common mistakes and explanations of those mistakes;

understanding of students’ knowledge and when a student's performance indicates

increased appropriation of knowledge; student development sequences (types of

problems by age, who learns first, and students' capacities); and common student

reasoning. Within the KCS framework, the teacher recognizes students’ common errors

in specific areas, acknowledging that students find certain topics difficult and that some

representations may be more or less appropriate for them. KCS has proven to be a robust

construct, despite requiring further development, once the conceptualization of the

domain and its measurements remain weak. (Olfos R. et al., 2014)

They acknowledge that there is little large-scale data on Pedagogical Content Knowledge

and that the significance of this type of knowledge has to be determined yet. The few

empirical studies that venture to discuss the components of teachers’ knowledge have

been proven prolific in the prediction of students’ results (Fennema, Elizabeth, Thomas &

Romberg in Olfos R. et al., 2014). As asserted by Ball, Thames and Phelps in Olfos R. et

al. (2014), Pedagogical Content Knowledge construct certainly requires greater

theoretical development, as well as greater analytical clarification and empirical support.

Their studies have led to a detailed characterization of the science knowledge required to

teach sciences and have established that the teacher's pedagogical content knowledge is a

significant predictor of students' achievement in science learning.

2.2.7 Teacher’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge

Pedagogical Content Knowledge can be seen as a specific category of knowledge “which

goes beyond knowledge of subject matter per se to the dimension of subject matter

knowledge for teaching” (Shulman, 1986). The key elements in Shulman’s conception of

Pedagogical Content Knowledge are knowledge of representations of subject matter on

the one hand and understanding of specific learning difficulties and student conceptions

on the other. Obviously, these elements are intertwined and should be used in a flexible

manner: The more representations teachers have at their disposal and the better they

recognize learning difficulties, the more effectively they can deploy their Pedagogical

Content Knowledge.

In a later article, Shulman included Pedagogical Content Knowledge in what he called

“the knowledge base for teaching”. This knowledge base consists of seven categories,

three of which are content related (i.e., content knowledge, Pedagogical Content

Knowledge, and curriculum knowledge). The other four categories refer to general

pedagogy, learners and their characteristics, educational contexts, and educational

purposes (Shulman, 1987). Whereas Shulman’s knowledge base encompasses every

category of knowledge which may be relevant for teaching, Verloop and de Vos in

Ayoubi, El Takach and Rawas (2017) see Pedagogical Content Knowledge as a specific

form of craft knowledge. Their definition is explained as follows. Pedagogical Content

Knowledge implies a transformation of subject matter knowledge, so that it can be used

effectively and flexibly in the communication process between teachers and learners

during classroom practice. Thus, teachers may derive Pedagogical Content Knowledge

from their own teaching practice (e.g., analyzing specific learning difficulties) as well as

from schooling activities (e.g., an in-service course on student conceptions). More

important, when dealing with subject matter, teachers’ actions will be determined to a

large extent by their Pedagogical Content Knowledge, making Pedagogical Content

Knowledge an essential component of craft knowledge.

Elaborating on Shulman’s work, other scholars have adopted the two key elements of

Pedagogical Content Knowledge mentioned above (i.e., knowledge of comprehensible

representations of subject matter and understanding of content-related learning

difficulties). Moreover, each of them has extended the concept by including in

Pedagogical Content Knowledge some of the categories of knowledge distinct in

Shulman’s knowledge base for teaching. For example, Ayoubi et al. (2017) perceived

Pedagogical Content Knowledge as consisting of knowledge of strategies and

representations for teaching particular topics and knowledge of students’ understanding,

conceptions, and misconceptions of these topics (i.e., Shulman’s two key elements). In

addition, Pedagogical Content Knowledge is composed of knowledge and beliefs about

the purposes for teaching particular topics and knowledge of curriculum materials

available for teaching. In Grossman’s model of teacher knowledge, Pedagogical Content

Knowledge is at the heart surrounded by three related categories: namely, knowledge of

subject matter, general pedagogical knowledge and contextual knowledge. Grossman

identified the following sources from which Pedagogical Content Knowledge is

generated and developed: (a) observation of classes, both as a student and as a student

teacher, often leading to tacit and conservative Pedagogical Content Knowledge; (b)

disciplinary education, which may lead to personal preferences for specific purposes or

topics; (c) specific courses during teacher education, of which the impact is normally

unknown; and (d) classroom teaching experience.

Ayoubi et al. (2017) also broadened Shulman’s model by including in Pedagogical

Content Knowledge of subject matter per se as well as knowledge of media for

instruction. In a discussion of sources of Pedagogical Content Knowledge, however,

Marks perceived the development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge as an integrative

process revolving around the interpretation of subject-matter knowledge and the

specification of general pedagogical knowledge, thereby focusing on Shulman’s two key

elements. Marks also discussed some ambiguities in Pedagogical Content Knowledge by

presenting examples in which it is impossible to distinguish Pedagogical Content

Knowledge from either subject-matter knowledge or general pedagogical knowledge.

Based on an explicit constructivist view of teaching, Cochran, DeRuiter, and King in

Ayoubi et al. (2017) renamed Pedagogical Content Knowledge as pedagogical content

knowing (PCKg) to acknowledge the dynamic nature of knowledge development. In their

model, Pedagogical Content Knowing is conceptualized much broader than in Shulman’s

view. Pedagogical Content Knowing is defined as “a teacher’s integrated understanding

of four components of pedagogy, subject matter content, student characteristics, and the

environmental context of, learning” (Ayoubi et al., 2017). Ideally, Pedagogical Content

Knowing is generated as a synthesis from the simultaneous development of these four

components.

The idea of integration of knowledge components is also central in the conceptualization

of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (Fernandez-Balboa & Stiehl in Ayoubi et al., 2017).

These authors identified five knowledge components of PCK: subject matter, the

students, instructional strategies, the teaching context, and one’s teaching purposes. The

preceding discussion was not meant to be exhaustive. Instead, it was meant to

demonstrate that there is no universally accepted conceptualization of Pedagogical

Content Knowledge. Between scholars, differences occur with respect to the elements

they include or integrate in Pedagogical Content Knowledge, and to specific labels or

descriptions of these elements. Yet, it can be suggested that all scholars agree on

Shulman’s two key elements; knowledge of representations of subject matter and

understanding of specific learning difficulties and student conceptions. In addition, there

appears to be agreement on the nature of Pedagogical Content Knowledge. First, as

Pedagogical Content Knowledge refers to particular topics, it is to be discerned from

knowledge of pedagogy, of educational purposes, and of learner characteristics in a

general sense. Second, because Pedagogical Content Knowledge concerns the teaching of

particular topics, it may turn out to differ considerably from subject-matter knowledge

per se. Finally, all scholars suggest that Pedagogical Content Knowledge is developed

through an integrative process rooted in classroom practice, implying that prospective or

beginning teachers usually have little or no Pedagogical Content Knowledge at their

disposal.

2.2.8 Integrated Science Curriculum

The term curriculum has been defined by many people in many places. One cannot talk

precisely of right or wrong definitions. Curriculum is a vehicle through which education

is attained (Offorma in Oludipe, 2011). This Offorma’s definition is a narrow view of

curriculum. What examiners require the teachers to emphasize in their teaching, like that

of WASSCE (West African Secondary School Certificate Examinations)/ JAMB Joint

Admission and Matriculation Board) syllabus, is an example of narrow definition of

curriculum. The broad definition of curriculum sees it as a process that is the package and

the continuous work involved in bringing the package into being, the thinking behind the

package, and the continuous efforts of making curriculum serve the needs of society

(Obayan in Oludipe, 2011). The totality of the syllabuses of activities carried out under

aegis of a school, in response to societal demands is an example of the broad definition of

curriculum.

Integrated science provides students sound basis for further science education study,

hence a child that is not well grounded in integrated science at this level would not show

interest in offering core science subjects (biology, chemistry and physics) at the SSS

(Senior Secondary School) level which are the prerequisites for studying science-oriented

courses at the Nation’s tertiary Institutions. They also found that lack of qualified

teachers, lack of equipment and facilities for teaching, lack of practical works,

insufficient allotment of time for integrated science on the school time-table and poor

methods of teaching are the major factors militating against the successive

implementation of the core curriculum in integrated science (Afuwape & Olatoye in

Oludipe, 2011).

The aforementioned problems of teaching integrated science did not include non-

sequential arrangement of some of the integrated science concepts in the curriculum. It is

believed that if integrated science concepts are not taught from known to unknown and

from simple to complex, it is likely that students might find it difficult to understand the

concepts taught. This has led to the development of negative attitude towards the subject

by the students, which has led to many of them not showing interest in offering core

science subjects at the senior secondary school level and science-oriented courses at the

Nation’s tertiary institutions because of their dismal performance in integrated science

examination at the JSSCE (Junior Secondary School Certificate Examination).

2.2.9 Students’ Conception of Science and their Academic Achievement in Integrated

Science

It is no doubt that students’ conception of science will always reflect in the academic

achievements. And so, effective teaching requires teachers to check continuously the

development of students’ understanding and give detailed positive feedback in order to

make sure that students correctly integrate new knowledge into the existing knowledge

structure (Cimer, 2007). In addition, in order to identify and correct students’ mistakes at

an early stage before they become too deeply embedded, teachers need to continuously

monitor and evaluate students’ understanding (Cimer, 2007).

The process of evaluating students’ work or performance and using the information

obtained from these practices to modify teachers’ and students’ work in order to make

teaching and learning more effective is known as formative assessment (Gipps; Black;

Black & William in Cimer, 2007). Research has shown that it has great potential for

improving the quality of teaching and learning (Cimer, 2007). Cimer (2007) show that it

is the essential feature in good teaching as well as in efficient learning: ‘We focus on one

aspect of teaching: formative assessment. But we will show that this feature is at the

heart of effective teaching.’

Furthermore, they note that a focus by teachers on 'assessment for learning', as opposed

to ‘assessment of learning’, produced a substantial increase in students’ achievement. In

addition, if assessment occurs early in the teaching-learning sequence, it can reveal

information about students, which can be used to guide the planning of teaching so that it

takes account of students’ existing conceptions. Cimer (2007) argue that the more

teachers learn about students’ learning the more they realize the powerful influences that

existing conceptions have on students’ construction of meaning and their learning from

classroom activities. Therefore, assessment strategies that reveal students’ existing

conceptions early in the instructional sequence have been included in a number of

constructivist teaching models (Cimer, 2007).

Furthermore, the emphasis of formative assessment on providing students with

continuous feedback on their performance aims to engage students in self-assessment of

their learning, and hence, it can be argued that formative assessment can increase student

participation in the learning process (Cimer, 2007).Students engaging in self-assessment

have more control over their learning and use the feedback to modify their learning

behaviours (Cimer, 2007).The effectiveness of formative assessment is strongly related to

the quality of the feedback given to students (Cimer, 2007) and action taken by students

based on the feedback (Sadler in Cimer, 2007). Feedback is an integral part of learning

and teaching. Providing detailed and ongoing feedback is necessary for effective learning

as students need information about their accomplishments in order to grow and progress

(Brookhart in Cimer, 2007). Cross in Cimer (2007) emphasises the importance of

feedback for students by saying: ‘One of the basic principles of learning is that learners

need feedback. They need to know what they are trying to accomplish, and then they need

to know how close they are coming to the goal.’ Cross also provides a vivid and

evocative metaphor for learning without feedback where it is likened to learning archery

in a darkened room. Feedback helps students find out how well they understand the new

material, what they have done correctly and what their errors are (Joyce, Weil & Calhoun

in Cimer, 2007).Therefore, educators report that effective teachers frequently provide

feedback specific to the subject matter being covered and if necessary, take remedial

action, such as providing further explanation or repeating the key ideas and concepts

(Cimer, 2007). Taking such remedial action can improve students’ learning (Yates &

Yates; Black & William in Cimer, 2007).The important point in giving feedback to

students is to help them discover their own mistakes, rather than simply telling them what

they have done wrong or the pieces they are missing (Stepanek in Cimer, 2007).

Correcting students’ mistakes by telling them the right answer does not make for

effective strategies. ‘Judgments’ and ‘being wrong’ might cause students not to reveal

and discuss their ideas in the classroom. Besides, such a practice encourages passive

learning and teacher-dependency.

Furthermore, Cimer (2007) indicates that the feedback should provide students with

adequate information about their performances and should guide students about what to

do next to improve. For example, simply saying ‘excellent’, ‘not as good as it could be’,

‘you must do better next time’, and ‘unsatisfactory’ or ‘try harder’ might not be helpful

for students to improve themselves.

In formative assessment, students’ questions and ideas might be very helpful for teachers

to uncover their knowledge structure and understand their thinking and understanding

(McCombs & Whisler; Dori & Herscovitz in Cimer, 2007). For example, Watts, Gould

and Alsop in Cimer (2007) state ‘… the teacher can appreciate where the pupil is at

through the quality of the questions the child asks.’ While asking questions, students

shape and expose their thoughts and understanding, which might also reveal their

incomprehension and routes through which they are seeking understanding.

The quality of teachers’ questions is also important. In checking students’ understanding,

teachers should ask open-ended questions that allow students to express their own

understanding and conceptions, and put less emphasis on recalling facts that reduce

opportunities for students to be creative and critical in their thinking (Harlen; Amos; She

& Fisher in Cimer, 2007). Cimer (2007) argues that such questions require students to

apply, analyse, synthesise, and evaluate information, which were considered as ‘high

order thinking skills’ in Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Bloom in Cimer,

2007). In addition, Cimer (2007) suggest that questions should help students interpret

their observations, link new learning to what students already know, and stimulate their

thinking.

Although test-based questions might target students’ higher order thinking skills,

according to Clements and Ellerton in Cimer (2007), a correct answer on a multiple

choice test may not necessarily indicate that the student has a correct and complete

understanding of the underlying concept. For example, the student may have recalled an

answer previously worked out, copied without understanding, guessed, meant something

different and so on (Rowntree in Cimer, 2007). Such an assessment may not give teachers

correct information about students’ understanding and thinking and thus, may not help

students’ progress. Therefore, the essential way to assess how students organize

information is to ask them to provide explanations of these processes (Pallrand in Cimer,

2007).Student explanations can open a window, for teachers, to the students’ knowledge

structure that tests cannot provide. Indeed, Osborne in Cimer (2007) argues that it is only

when students are required to explain a concept to somebody else that they really start to

understand it. Therefore, Cimer (2007) states that through examining student

explanations, teachers can gain insights into many aspects of the ways students seek and

analyze information as well as the weak areas in their knowledge structure and

misunderstandings.

In short, continuous assessment and providing detailed performance feedback is

necessary for students to improve their understanding and learning.

2.3 Relevance of These Concepts to the field of Study

The concepts discussed in this study can help the researcher to know the basic sensitive

areas to make investigations on so as to arrive at tangible results that will show that

teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’ conception of science have a lot

to play in students’ academic achievements. Know who a science teacher is, goes a long

way to helping one know that there exists a difference between one who is trained to be a

teacher from one who is not. Science teachers create lesson plans, present science

demonstrations, and grade tests and assignments (Driver in Cimer, 2007). This is so

because, a graduate with Bachelor of Education qualification finds it very easy to create

lesson plan compared to a graduate with Bachelor of Science. The difference is that, the

former was trained on how to impart knowledge on others while the latter was not.

Students’ conception of science has revealed the need for teachers to determine students’

pre-existing ideas and conceptions so as to confront any alternative ideas or

misconceptions students may have at an early stage in the learning process so that these

do not hinder students’ learning (Littledyke in Cimer, 2007).

The role of science teachers in students’ conception of science helped to reveal some

strategies teachers must use to correct students’ pre-existing ideas to what is obtainable in

science learning (Cimer, 2007). It was also discovered that, the combining effect teacher

knowledge and motivation goes a long way to predicting students’ performances.

Pedagogical Content Knowledge has been seen as a specific category of knowledge

“which goes beyond knowledge of subject matter per se to the dimension of subject

matter knowledge for teaching” (Shulman, 1986).

Putting everything together, it can be perceived that, teachers’ pedagogical content

knowledge in combination with students’ conception of science can determine the

academic achievements of students, hence the need for this investigation.

2.4 Empirical Evidence

2.4.1 Studies on Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Academic Achievement

Pedagogical Content Knowledge has been found to aid students, improve the academic

achievement of students. John et al. (2016) in their research on pedagogical content

knowledge-guided lesson study: effects on teacher competence and students’ academic

achievement in chemistry with a sample drawn from four (4) chemistry teacher

respondents and their respective students from two (2) different regular high schools in

Region IVA showed a significant increase on mean scores in terms of conceptual

understanding and problem-solving skills. The research found out that PCK has

substantial effect on academic performance of students. A research carried out by

Mourat, Lawrence and James (2008) on Teacher Knowledge and Student Achievement:

Revealing Pattern using the mixed-methods design with a sample size of 22 in-service

teachers, it was concluded that teacher knowledge is not significant to students’

achievement. Olfos R. et al. (2014) carried out a research on teachers’ pedagogical

content knowledge and its relation with students’ understanding with a sample size 53

teachers and 1532 students using exploratory study approach which showed a significant

association with student learning, although it is less significant than the association with

the teachers’ experience. Lange, Kleickmann and Moller (2012) on elementary teachers’

pedagogical content knowledge and student achievement in science education with a

sample of 60 fourth-grade classrooms and their science teachers. Teachers’ PCK and

student achievement concerning the mentioned scientific topic were directly assessed

with tests. Multilevel regression analyses were conducted to analyze the significance of

teachers’ PCK for students’ progress in elementary science classrooms and results

showed that teachers’ PCK was significantly related to student achievement in

elementary science after controlling for key student- and teacher-level covariates.

Also, Gess-Newsome, Carlson, Gardner and Taylor (2010) on impact of educative

materials and professional development on teachers’ professional knowledge, practice

and student achievement with a sample of 35 secondary biology teachers and research

design of exploratory study find out that there is substantial portion of student

achievement.

2.4.2 Studies on Students’ Conception of Science and Academic Achievement

Agboghoroma and Oyovwi (2015) in their research on evaluating effects of students’

academic achievement o identified difficult concepts in senior secondary school biology

in delta state. The study was quasi-experimental and the design was a 2X2 factorial non-

randomized pretest-posttest control group design. The sample was drawn from intact

classes from four coeducational schools located in urban and rural centres in Delta

Central Senatorial District. A total of 160 male and female students were used in the

study. The sample were got using purposive sampling technique. The instrument for the

study was designed by the researchers and tagged Biology Achievement Test (BAT).

This was validated by experts and Kuder- Richardson formula 21 was used for the

reliability estimate and this yielded 0.71 alpha. This was tested at 0.05 significant level.

The method used for evaluating the students was Concept-mapping and the Regular

Teaching Methods, as experimental and control groups respectively. The results showed

that students perceived some topics like Hereditary, Genetics, Ecology as difficult while

it was found out that gender (male and female sex) and school location (urban and rural)

had no effect on difficult concepts in Biology. Afuwape (2011) on his research titled

students’ self-concept and their achievement in basic science with a sample of 200. The

study investigated the relationship between students’ self-concept and their academic

performance in Basic Science. It further examines gender difference in students’

performance. The study adopted ex-post factor research design and made use of 300

students all from Public Schools. The adapted Version of Adolescent Personal Data

Inventory (APDI) and Students Achievement Test in Basic showed Science (SATBS)

were employed as instruments for the study. The result showed that there was no

significant relationship between the secondary school student’s self-concept and their

academic performance in Basic Science. It also showed that there was no significant

difference between the self-concept of male and female students in Basic Science as well

as their performances. Olatoye (2009) on his research titled study habit, self-concept and

science achievement of public and private junior secondary school students in Ogun state,

Nigeria. Twelve secondary schools were randomly selected from Egba and Ijebu

divisions of the state. A sample of three hundred and sixty (360) students participated in

the study. Three research instruments were used to collect data. There was no significant

difference in study habit and self-concept of students in public and private schools.

However, private school students performed significantly better than their public school

counterparts in integrated science (t = 3.400, p<0.05). In both public and private schools

student study habit and self-concept combined together and singularly predicted science

achievement. John, Abdul-Jaleel and Emma (2014) on their research which investigated

the influence of student’s self-concept on their academic performance, a total of 297

randomly selected junior high school students in the Elmina Township, Ghana completed

the questionnaire, comprising 40 close-ended items related to student’s self-concept

constructs derived from the literature. The average scores of the second term test-scores

of students in Mathematics, Integrated Science, English Language and Social Studies

were used to measure pupils’ academic performance. The questionnaire used for the

study was a five-point scale questionnaire. The Cronbach’s alpha was used to test for the

reliability of the questionnaire. The reliability coefficient was 0.86. Both descriptive and

inferential statistics were used to analyse the data. It was found out that students self-

concept is perceived positively by students; however, this self concept does not directly

predict students’ academic performance. It does so only when students are able to exert

some level of effort in learning what they have been taught during their private studies. It

is therefore recommended that teachers, parents, and indeed all stakeholders should see it

as a duty to consider this self-concept of students since they influence the development of

positive self-concept among students when dealing or interacting with them. Also, they

must help, monitor and supervise students to have private time table for learning and to

guide them in their day-to-day learning since such effort boost students’ academic

performance significantly. If students’ effort in learning goes pari passu with their

physical, social, esteem, religion, economic and educational orientation self-concepts,

then students will perform better academically which will in turn increase their general

academic performance significantly. Isaac (2015) on his research work titled relationship

between self-concept and mathematics achievement of senior secondary students in Port

Harcourt, which explored the extent to which the self-concept of students in Port

Harcourt relates to their Mathematics, and General Academic Achievement. The

population consisted of 6,478 senior secondary 3 (SS3) students from 13 state financed

senior secondary schools in Port Harcourt. Stratified random sampling was conducted to

select 3schools (one school each from 2 mixed schools, 5 boys’ schools and 6 girls’

schools). The sample for study was 300 SS3 students from the 3 randomly selected

schools. The instrument used for data collection was the Self- Description Questionnaire

111 (SDQ 111) developed by Marsh (1992) which contains 13 self-concept facets out of

which 2 facets (Mathematics, and General Academic) where adopted for this study. The

subjects were tested in Mathematics and scores obtained. The general average scores of

the students on their promotion examination from SS2 to SS3 were extracted from their

school records. The Person’s Product Moment Correlation analysis was used to answer

the research questions, while the transformed t- test was used to test all the 3 hypotheses

formulated for this study. The results of the tests indicated that Mathematics Self-concept

is significantly related to Mathematics Achievement, General Academic Achievement

and General Academic Self-concept. The main implication of the findings of this study is

that self-concept and Mathematics, and General Academic achievement of students are so

strongly related that a change in self-concept facilitates a change in achievement.

Alamdarloo, Moradi and Dehshiri (2013) on their research titled the relationship between

students’ conception of learning and their academic achievement, investigates the

relationship between pre-university students’ conceptions of learning with their academic

achievement. The sample consisted of 309 students (165 males and 144 females) in

Tehran city. Among them, 104 individuals were in Mathematics, 110 in Experimental

Science, and 95 in Literature (Humanities). The participants were selected through

multistage cluster sampling. To assess their conceptions of learning, Purdie and Hattie’s

(2002) questionnaire was used, and to measure their academic achievement, the total

mean of high school diploma was considered. The results showed a significant

relationship between students’ conceptions of learning and their academic achievement.

There is also a meaningful relationship between students’ number of conceptions of

learning and their academic achievement.

2.4.3 Studies on Gender and Academic Achievement

John et al. (2015) assert that gender is one of the factors that have considerable effect on

student’s academic performance. Igbojinwaekwu (2016) in his research on the

comparative effect of guided and unguided multiple choice objective questions on

students mathematics academic achievement according to gender with a sample size of

640 students (351 boys and 289 girls) in senior secondary (SS2) tested his hypothesis at

0.05 level of significance on a 2-tailed test using z-test statistic arrived at a conclusion

that there are no significant difference between the high mean academic achievement of

male and female SS2 students exposed to guided multiple choice objective question test.

Peter (2014) carried a research on the effect of gender on students’ academic

achievement in secondary school social studies. The study adopted a quasi-experimental

design (2x2 non-randomized pre-test, post-test control group) comprising six groups

made up of four experimental groups and two control groups. Six schools and one

hundred and eighty (180) Upper basic 2 students in Delta and Edo States made up the

sample for the study. Six intact classes were randomly selected and assigned to

experimental and control groups. The instrument used in this study is the achievement

instrument tagged “Social Studies Achievement Test” (SSAT). The validity and

reliability of these instruments were established. The reliability of the instruments was

established using Pearson product moment correlation coefficient (r). And the reliability

coefficients obtained was 0.79. Means, Standard Deviation, Analysis of covariance

(ANCOVA) Result revealed that: gender (male/female) had no significant effect on

students’ achievement in Social Studies and finally, result showed that there was

significant interaction effect of treatment and gender on students academic performance

in Social Studies. John et al. (2015) on their research titled effect of gender on students’

academic performance in computer studies in secondary schools in New Bussa, Borgu

LGA, Niger State. Questionnaire which consist of 30 multiple-choice items drawn from

Senior School Certificate Examination past questions as set by the West Africa

Examination Council in 2014 multiple choice past question was used as the research

instrument consist. The questionnaire was administered to 275 students from both private

and public schools in the study area. The students’ responses were marked and scored,

afterward analysed using independent t-test. The results of the study showed that even

though the male students had slightly better performance compared to the female

students, it was not significant. Nnamani and Oyibe (2016) on their research titled gender

and academic achievement of secondary school students in social studies in Abakaliki

Urban of Ebonyi State. Their study focused on gender and academic achievement of

secondary school students in Social Studies. Two research questions such as; what is the

effect of gender on students’ mean achievement, and effect of teachers’ gender on the

mean achievement of male and female students and null hypotheses were tested at 0.05

level of significance. The population of this study comprised of three thousand four

hundred seventy-nine (3,479) Junior Secondary School II (JSS II) students selected from

all the secondary schools in Abakaliki urban of Ebonyi State. The instrument used for

data collection was Social Studies Achievement Test (SOSAT), data were analyzed using

mean and standard deviation for all research questions, and analysis of co-variance

(ANCOVA) was used to test the null hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance. The

findings of the study revealed that the mean achievement score of female secondary

school students was higher than the mean achievement scores of male students. The

findings of the study also revealed that: male and female secondary school students

taught Social Studies by male teachers obtained higher mean scores than male and female

students taught Social studies by female teachers and female students taught Social

studies by male teacher performed better than masculine students taught Social Studies

by male teacher and vice versa. The study also reviewed that there are significant

different in the mean achievement of secondary school students in Social Studies based

on gender.

2.5 Summary of Literature

The literature touched three basic areas; conceptual, theoretical and empirical review.

The theoretical review had to do with basic theories and postulations made by specialist

from where this study draws strength from. In the conceptual review various concepts in

relation to study were discussed extensively based on the various views of authors and

scholars. From empirical evidence, it can be seen that teachers’ pedagogical content

knowledge and students’ conception of science improve academic achievement.

However, not much have been done on the effect of science teachers’ pedagogical

content knowledge and students’ conception of science on the academic achievement of

Basic Science students in Yenagoa Metropolis and also issues on gender and academic

achievement have been inconclusive. This study is therefore carried out to bridge the gap.

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter dealt with the research design, population of the study, sample and sampling

techniques, instrumentation, validity of the instrument, reliability of the instrument,

administration of the instrument and method of data analysis.

3.1 Research Design

Research design refers to the overall strategy used in integrating the different components

of the study in a coherent and logical way, thereby, ensuring that the research problem

has been addressed effectively. It involves the guidelines for the collection, measurement,

and analysis of data (De Vaus & Trochim; William, in Olfos R. et al., 2014). They also

said that the type of the research design to be used in a study is determined by the nature

of the research problem. This study employs Ex-post facto research design where

teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’ conception of science as well as

their academic achievement were assessed through past results.

3.2 Population of the Study

The population of this study comprises 571 (282 males and 289 females) junior

secondary school two (JSS2) students offering Basic Science in two selected secondary

schools in Yenagoa Local Government Area.

3.3 Sample and Sampling Technique

Purposive sampling technique was employed for this study, both in the selection of

schools and the class where the investigation was to be made. Two schools were selected

and JSS2 class was also selected for the study. The sample size was 140 (68 males and 72

females). The schools were Community Secondary School, (CSS) Kpansia and Epie

National High School, Kpansia.

3.4 Research Instrument

The research instrument used for data collection was the Students’ past result of

2016/2017 session particularly second term which was called Basic Science Achievement

Scores (BSAS)

3.5 Validity of the Instrument

The validity of the research instrument was determined by the research supervisor and

two experts from the discipline.

3.6 Reliability of the Instrument

The Kuder-Richardson 21 technique was used to establish the reliability of the instrument

and this yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.97.

3.7 Method of Data Collection

Data for the study was collected through this procedure:

The researcher obtained a letter of introduction from the department of science education,

Niger Delta University, to the head principals of the selected schools to obtain the past

results of the students.

3.8 Method of Data Analysis

The researcher used the t-test statistical tool in testing the research hypothesis while the

research questions were tested using the mean. The hypothesis was tested at 0.05 level of

significance.

CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS OF DATA AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

This chapter dealt with the presentation of data, data analysis, answering the research

questions, testing of hypothesis and discussion of findings.

4.1 Analysis of Demographic Variables

Table 4.1: Gender distribution of Respondents

Source: Field Survey, 2018.

Table 4.1 shows the gender distribution of students that were involved in the study in

both schools. The total numbers of students were 140, 48.6% were males while 51.4%

were females.

Gender Frequency Percentage (100%)

Male 68 48.6

Female 72 51.4

Total 140 100

Table 4.2: Gender distribution for teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK)

Source: field survey, 2018.

Table 4.2 shows the gender distribution of students that were involved in teachers’

pedagogical content knowledge. The total numbers of students were 70, 44.3% were

males while 55.7% were females.

Table 4.3: Gender distribution for students’ conception of science (SCS)

Source: field survey, 2018.

Table 4.3 shows the gender distribution of students that were involved in students’

conception of science. The total numbers of students were 70, 52.9% were males while

47.1% were females.

Gender Frequency Percentage (100%)

Male 31 44.3

Female 39 55.7

Total 70 100

Gender Frequency Percentage (100%)

Male 37 52.9

Female 33 47.1

Total 70 100

4.2 Analysis of Research Questions

Research Question 1

What is the difference in the mean academic achievement score of basic science students

with respect to teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’ conception of

science?

Table 4.4. The mean and standard deviations of achievement scores of basic science

students with respect to teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’

conception of science.

Groups N X SD

TPCK

SCS

Difference in mean

70

70

65

42.40

22.60

18.42

16.53

Source: field survey, 2018.

From the analysis of table 4.4 above, it shows that mean academic achievement of

students in TPCK is 65 with a standard deviation of 18.42 while that of SCS is 42.40 with

a standard deviation of 16.53. The difference between their mean is 22.60. The analysis

showed that TPCK outperformed SCS.

Research Question 2

What is the impact of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge on basic science students

in relation to gender?

Table 4.5. The mean and standard deviation of males and females in TPCK.

Group N X SD

Male

Female

Difference in mean

31

39

63.20

66.54

3.34

18.32

18.37

Source: field survey, 2018.

The table 4.5 above shows that males scored 63.20 as their mean and 18.32 as their

standard deviation, whereas females got 66.54 as their mean and 18.37 as standard

deviation. The difference in their mean score was 3.34. Therefore, there is no influence of

gender on the academic achievement of students in TPCK.

4.3 Test of Research Hypotheses

This section deals with the testing of the hypotheses that have been stated for this study.

4.3.1 Research Hypothesis 1 (H01)

There is no significant difference in the mean academic achievement score of basic

science students with respect to teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and students’

conception of science.

Table 4.6. Summary of t-test analysis of the scores for the TPCK and SCS.

Groups N Mean SD Df t-cal t-crit Test P

TPCK 70 65 18.42 138 7.64 1.98 two tailed 0.05

SCS 70 42.4 16.53

Source: field survey, 2018.

From table 4.6 above, the values of 65 and 42.4 are the calculated means for TPCK and

SCS respectively. Standard deviations of 18.42 and 16.53 were also obtained for the

TPCK and SCS respectively. The calculated t-value was 7.64 while the critical t-value

was 1.98. The calculated t-value 7.64 was observed to be higher than the critical t-value

1.98 at 138 degree of freedom at 0.05 level of significance. From the results obtained,

hypothesis (H01) is rejected. Therefore, there is significant difference in the mean

academic achievement score of basic science students with respect to teachers’

pedagogical content knowledge and students’ conception of science. .

4.3.2 Hypothesis 2 (H02)

There is no significant difference in the impact of teachers’ pedagogical content

knowledge on basic science students in relation to gender.

Table 4.7. Summary of the t-test analysis of the achievement scores for male and female

students for TPCK.

Groups N Mean SD Df t-cal t-crit Test P

Male 31 63.2 18.32 68 -0.76 2.00 two tailed 0.05

Female 39 66.54 18.37

Source: field survey, 2018.

From table 4.7 above, the values of 63.2 and 66.54 are the calculated mean for the male

and female respectively. Standard deviations of 18.32 and 18.37 were also obtained from

the teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. The calculated t-value was -0.76 while the

critical t-value was 2.00. The calculated value was observed to be less than the critical t-

value at 68 degree of freedom at 0.05 level of significance. From the result obtained,

hypothesis (H02) is accepted. Therefore, there is no significant difference in the impact of

teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge on basic science students in relation to gender.

4.4 Discussion of Findings

The study focused on the impact of science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge and

student's conception of science on the academic achievement of basic science students by

comparing the basic science achievement of students with respect to teachers'

pedagogical content knowledge and the basic science achievement of those with respect

to student's conception of science. The study also focused on determining the effect of

science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge on the academic achievement of basic

science students in relation to gender. These focuses brought about some findings.

Science teachers' pedagogical knowledge significantly increased the achievement of

students in basic science. This is indicated in the higher mean scores of the TPCK group

compared to the SCS group (see table 4.6). The findings revealed that science teachers'

pedagogical knowledge recorded a higher increase in basic science than the students’

conception of science. The finding agrees with the findings of John et al. (2016),

Kleickmann & Moller (2012) and Gess-Newsome et al. (2010) which hold that science

teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge has significant and substantial influene on

students’ performances. Mourat et al. (2008) however disagrees with this finding by

saying that the achievement of students is not related to science teachers’ pedagogical

content knowledge.

The findings of this study also revealed that there is no significant influence of gender on

the academic achievement of basic science students with science teachers pedagogical

knowledge (see table 4.7). It was observed from the findings that female students

performed as well as their male counterparts. This finding agrees with those of

Igbojinwaekwu (2016) and Peter (2014) which hold that the gender gap is disappearing

that is, there is no significant difference in male and female students. It however

disagrees with the finding of John et al. (2016) which hold that males slightly performed

better than females. It also disagrees with the findings of Nnamani and Oyibe (2016)

which hold that females outperform their male counterparts.

These findings point to the fact developing teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and

students’ conception of science in terms of personal development and studies has a very

high possibility of enhancing the performance of students. Teachers Pedagogical Content

Knowledge usually has positive effect on students' academic achievement.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary

The purpose of the study was to find out the effect of science teachers’ pedagogical

content knowledge and students’ conception of science on the academic achievement of

basic science student. The study also sought to determine the influence of gender on the

academic achievement of students taught with science teacher's pedagogical content

knowledge. The study adopted an expost-facto experimental design.

The findings of this study indicated these highlights;

1. Science teacher's pedagogical content knowledge has greater possibility of enhancing

students’ achievement in basic science.

2. There was no significant influence of gender on the academic achievement of students

taught with pedagogical content knowledge.

3. It was also discovered that students’ conception of science and teachers’ pedagogical

content knowledge have individual and joint effects on the academic achievement of

students in basic science.

5.2 Conclusion

Pedagogical content knowledge is suitable for enhancing students' achievement in basic

science. If it is adopted in the teaching of basic science by teachers, the subject will be

better understood and more importantly, their academic achievement will be improved.

Furthermore, it is important for the students to develop the right conception of science

which also improve the academic achievement of students through personal study and

development. In addition, there is need to pay attention to these two factors if academic

excellence must be achieved in our society. Also, there is no significant influence of

gender on the students’ academic achievement taught with pedagogical content

knowledge.

5.3 Educational Implications of the Study

This study has positive, significant and relevant implications for education which will be

considered. Educators can obtain significant benefits from their implications.

This study reveals that pedagogical content knowldege increases students' achievement in

basic science significantly more students’ conception of science does. This implies that

for basic science educators’ seeking to improve students’ achievement in basic science in

secondary schools, teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge must be developed.

Secondly, it implies that in basic science education in secondary schools, misconception

of science leads to poor students' achievement in basic science. It is therefore on the part

of the parents and teachers to inculcate the right attitude of science in the child/student.

Furthermore, another finding of this study is that there is no significant gender difference

in students' achievement when taught with competency and pedagogical content

knowledge. In conclusion, the implications are meaningful and beneficial to education

revealing the importance of this study.

5.4 Recommendations

Base on the result of findings, the following recommendation were made:

i. Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge should be the criterion for employing

and assigning teachers to certain subjects in schools.

ii. Students’ conception of subject should be the first thing a teacher should look for

before introducing any topic to students so as to make sure the students gain better

understanding of the topic introduced.

iii. Training and assessment on teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge should be

organized for teachers from time to time in order to ensure that our future leaders

are in capable hands.

5.5 Limitations of the Study

This study has some limitations which include the following:

The study was carried out in only two schools in Yenagoa Metropolis which made the

scope to be fairly narrow.

Financial and time factor coupled with other academic activities.

5.6 Suggestions for Further Research

The study was carried out in Yenagoa Metropolis in Bayelsa State. However, it is the

view of the researcher that it has become absolutely necessary to make the following

suggestions that:

There is the need to conduct similar research in other localities and states in Nigeria to

see if the result would be same or different.

There is the need to conduct similar studies in other science related courses to see

whether pedagogical content knowledge is actually an interplay between content and

pedagogy.

There is the need to evaluate graduating students in education discipline to see their level

of pedagogical content knowledge.

References

Afuwape, M.O (2011). Students’ Self-Concept and their Achievement in Basic Science. An International Multidisciplinary Journal, Ethiopia, 5(4), 191-200. Retrieved 28th January, 2018 from http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/afrrev.v5i4.69276

Agboghoroma T.E. & Oyovwi E.O (2015). Evaluating Effect of Students’ Academic Achievement on Identified Difficult Concepts in Senior Secondary Biology in Delta State. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(30), 117-125. Retrieved December 20th 2017 from www.iiste.org

Alamdarloo G.H., Moradi, S. & Deshiri G.R (2013). The Relationship between Students’ Conceptions of Learning and their Academic Achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 4(1), 44 – 49. Retrieved December 20th 2017 from http://dx.dio.org/10.4236/psych.2013.41006

Ayoubi, Z., El Takach, S. & Rawas, M. (2017). Improving the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) among cycle 3 in-service chemistry teachers attending the training program at the faculty of education, Lebanese University. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health (JESEH), 3(2), 196-212. DOI:10.2189/jeseh.326753. Retrieved December 13th 2017 from www.jeseh.net

Ball, D.L., Thames, M.H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407. Retrieved 29th December, 2017 from www.math.ksu.edu

Borko, H. (2004). Professional Development and Teacher Learning: Mapping the Terrain. SAGE Journals.

Cimer, A. (2007). Effective Teaching in Science: A Review of Literature. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4(1), 21-34. Retrieved December 20th 2017 from http://www.tused.org

Duit, R. (2007). Science Education Research Internationally: Conceptions, Research Methods, Domains of Research. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(1), 3-15.

Duit, R. & Treagust, D.F (2009). Teaching Science for Conceptual Change Theory and Practice.

Federal Ministry of Education. Science and Technology (2000). National Curriculum for Junior Secondary Schools Ibadan: Heinemann Education Books (Nigeria) Limited.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004). National Policy on Education 4th Edition Lagos: National Educational Research Development Council (NERDC) Press.

Gess-Newsome, J., Carlson, J., Gardner, A. & Taylor, J. (2010). Impact of Educative Materials and Professional Development on Teachers’ Professional Knowledge, Practice and Student Achievement. Retrieved from http://bscs.org/primepapers

Igbojinwaekwu, P.C (2016). Comparative Effects of Guided and Unguided Multiple Choice Objective Questions Tests on Students’ Mathematics Academic Achievement according to Gender. Journal of Educational and Social Sciences. 6(2)

Isaac, B., Conner, L., & Winter, D. (2015). The Lack of Physics Teachers: “Like a Bath with the Plug out and the Tap half on”. American Journal of Educational Research, 3(6), 721-730. Retrieved 29th December, 2017 from www.doi.10.12691/education-3-6-9

Isaac, E.O (2015). Relationship between Self-Concept and Mathematics Achievement of Senior Secondary Student in Port-Harcourt. Proceedings of the 1st International Technology, Education and Environment Conference, Africa Society for Scientific Research (ASSR). Retrieved from January 15th 2018 from www.hrmars.com/admin/pics/304.pdf

Isah, M.F.J (2011). Relationship between Subject Content Knowledge and Pedagogical Skills of NCE Integrated Science Students in Niger State. An unpublished Master Thesis, Science Education Section Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria.

John, L.S.L., Rosanelia, T.Y., Amelia, E.P & Allen, A.E (2016). Pedagogical Content Knowledge-Guided Lesson Study: Effects on Teacher Competence and Students’ Achievement in Chemistry. Education Research International, 16(16), 1-9. Retrieved December 20th 2017 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/6068930

John, O., Joseph, A., Eric, I., Yusuf, S. & Olubunmi, A. (2015). Effect of Gender on Students’ Academic Performance in Computer Studies in Secondary Schools in New Bussa, Borgu Local Government of Niger State. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(33), 1-7. Retrieved December 8th 2017 from www.iiste.org

Katie, D. (2012). The theory of Multiple Intelligence, Harvard University.

Lange, K., Kleickmann, T. & Moller, K. (2012). Elementary Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Student Achievement in Science Education. Proceedings of the Ninth ESERA-Conference.

Laryea, J.E., Saani A. & Dawson-Brew E. (2014). Influence of Students Self-Concept on their Academic Performance in the Elmina Township. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Educational Sciences, 2(4), 1-10. Retrieved January 8th 2018 from www.semanticscholar.org

Mourat, T., Lawrence M.L. & James S. (2008). Teacher Knowledge and Student Achievement: Revealing Patterns. NCSM Journal, pp. 39-49.

Nnamani, S.C & Oyibe, O.A (2016). Gender and Academic Achievement of Secondary School Students in Social Studies in Abakaliki Urban of Ebonyi State. British Journal of Education, 4(8), 72-83. Retrieved December 20th 2017 from www.eajournals.org

Novak, J.D (2010). Learning, Creating and Using Knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 6(3), 21-30.

Olatoye R.A. (2009). Study Habit, Self-Concept and Science Achievement of Public and Private Junior Secondary School Students in Ogun State, Nigeria. African Research Review, 3(4), 492-506. Retrieved January 8th 2018 from www.afrrevjo.com

Olfos, R., Goldrine, T., & Estrella, S. (2014). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and its relation with students’ understanding. Revista Brasileira de Educacao, 19(59), 915-944. Retrieved December 13th 2017 from www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-24782014000900006

Oludipe, D.I (2011). Developing Nigerian Integrated Science Curriculum. Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management, 2(8), 134-145. Retrieved 23rd January, 2018 from www.academicjournals.org/article/article1379586209_Oludipe.pdf

Peter, O.D (2014). Effect of Gender on Students’ Academic Achievement in Secondary School Social Studies. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(21). Retrieved December 28th 2017 from www.iiste.org

Philips, K.R., De-Miranda, M.A & Shin J.T (2015). Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Industrial Design Education. The Journal of Technology Studies, 47-55. Retrieved December 20th 2017 from https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals//JOTS/v35/v35n2/pdf/philips.pdf

Schieb, L.J., & Karabenick, S.A (2011). Teacher Motivation and Professional Development: A Guide to Resources. Math and Science Partnership- Motivation Assessment Program, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Shepherd, D.L (2013). The impact of teacher subject knowledge on learner performance in South Africa: A within-pupil across-subject approach. Retrieved 30th January, 2018 from www.iwaee.org/papers sito 2013/Shepherd.pdf

Tytler, R. (2002). Teaching for understanding in science: constructivist/conceptual change teaching approaches. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 48(4), 30-35. Retrieved 30th

December, 2017 from www.dro.deakin.edu.au/view/DU:30001802

Zeki, B., Ozge, O.O., Emine, E., Sinem, D.O., & Senol, S. (2013). Effect of inquiry based learning method on students’ motivation. 4th International Conference on New Horizons in Education. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106(13), 988-996. Retrieved 22nd January, 2018 from https://ac.els-cdn.com

APPENDIX A1

Department of Science Education,Faculty of Education,Niger Delta University,Wilberforce Island,Bayelsa State.22nd March, 2018.

The Principal,Community Secondary School, Kpansia,Yenagoa.

Sir,

APPLICATION FOR ASSISTANCE

I, Dr. Joy-Telu Hamilton Ekeke, the Head of Department of the afore-mentioned department

humbly seek your assistance for one of my student whose name is Igbinogun, Emmanuel

Osarodion who is currently working on her research titled “Science Teachers’ Pedagogical

Content Knowledge and Students’ Conception of Science on their Academic Achievement in

Basic Science in Yenagoa Metropolis”.

As regards this exercise, he would be needing the result of Junior Secondary School class two

(JSS 2) on Basic Science subject to analyse student’s performance.

Thanks.

Yours faithfully,

Dr. Joy-Telu H. EkekeHOD Science Education07062332916

APPENDIX A2

Department of Science Education,Faculty of Education,Niger Delta University,Wilberforce Island,Bayelsa State.22nd March, 2018.

The Principal,Epie National High School, Kpansia,Yenagoa.

Sir,

APPLICATION FOR ASSISTANCE

I, Dr. Joy-Telu Hamilton Ekeke, the Head of Department of the afore-mentioned department

humbly seek your assistance for one of my student whose name is Igbinogun, Emmanuel

Osarodion who is currently working on his research titled “Science Teachers’ Pedagogical

Content Knowledge and Students’ Conception of Science on their Academic Achievement in

Basic Science in Yenagoa Metropolis”.

As regards this exercise, he would be needing the result of Junior Secondary School class two

(JSS 2) on Basic Science subject to analyse student’s performance.

Thanks.

Yours faithfully,

Dr. Joy-Telu H. EkekeHOD Science Education07062332916